2017 LTPP Forensic Evaluation Packet A - wsdot.wa.gov · Cell: 512-496-4465 Email: [email protected] Contents ... same key staff involved in NCHRP Project 01-49, which led to

amecfw.com

Statement of Qualifications – Packet A LTPP Forensic Evaluation

To: Attn: [email protected] Washington State Department of Transportation 310 Maple Park Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7323

Date: June 13, 2017

From: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 1105 Lakewood Parkway, Suite 300 Alpharetta, GA 30009

Environment & Infrastructure / June 13, 2017 / PROP15PCSL056 amecfw.com Page 1

Statement of Qualification – Packet A

LTPP Forensic Evaluation Submitted via email: [email protected] Manager, Consultant Services Office Washington State Department of Transportation 310 Maple Park Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7233 Submitted by: Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 1105 Lakewood Parkway, Suite 300 Alpharetta, GA 30009 Contact Name: Gonzalo R. Rada, Ph.D., P.E. Cell: 512-496-4465 Email: [email protected]

Contents SCORING CRITERIA 1. QUALIFICATIONS/EXPERTISE OF FIRMS ON TEAM ........... 2

SCORING CRITERIA 2. QUALIFICATIONS OF PROPOSED MANAGER ................... 13

SCORING CRITERIA 3. KEY TEAM QUALIFICATIONS (PRIME CONSULTANT AND SUB-CONSULTANTS) .................................................................................................. 16

SCORING CRITERIA 4. FIRM’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PRIME CONSULTANT ONLY) .................................................................................................. 20

SCORING CRITERIA 5. PROJECT DELIVERY APPROACH ...................................... 25

Amec Foster Wheeler Washington State Department of Transporation Statement of Qualifications – Packet A LTPP Forensic Evaluation


SCORING CRITERIA 1. QUALIFICATIONS/EXPERTISE OF FIRMS ON TEAM

A. Firms, Expertise, Proposed Team (including Organization Chart)

Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc., is an environmental consulting, engineering and design, and construction company operating more than 3,300 professionals in about 90 locations across the U.S. With annual revenues of around $880M, Amec Foster Wheeler serves the transportation, clean energy, federal, industrial, pharmaceutical, mining, oil & gas, and water sectors, and we provide services to both public and private clients. We have specialists in more than fifty engineering and scientific disciplines offering a full range of design and project management services from preliminary planning, investigation and design through construction completion. Specific to the project at hand, Amec Foster Wheeler has been a leading firm in the field of pavement engineering, management and research for over 30 years. Our pavement consulting group has an unmatched history of participation in the field of pavement performance and forensic investigations on behalf of federal and State transportation agencies. In addition, we have been via multiple contracts, the Technical Support Services Contractor (TSSC) for the Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) program dating back to the planning of the program in 1985. Of particular significance to the solicitation is the work the Amec Foster Wheeler team, led by our proposed Project Manager (PM) Dr. Gonzalo Rada, has done in the fields of LTPP and pavement forensic investigations. Highlights of Dr. Rada’s work include: ► Principal Investigator (PI) for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program

(NCHRP) Project 01-49 Guide for Conducting Forensic Investigations of Highway Pavements, which led to the NCHRP Report 747 protocols required by the solicitation in question.

► PI and PM for LTPP TSSC from 1992 to 2008 and co-PI from 1989 to 1992. During this time, he was lead author on the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) “Framework for LTPP Forensic Investigations,” April 2004.

► Throughout his career, he has been involved in pavement evaluations for thousands of miles of roads and numerous airports and ports. He has also served as expert consultant and witness on numerous projects including:

► In 2002, the law firm of Charles F. Mertz & Associates, PLLC retained him as an expert witness to assess and to provide testimony on the matter of "Reliable Mechanical, Inc. vs. Materials Testing, Inc., Case No. 99-CI-02800, Jefferson Circuit Court, Louisville, Kentucky" concerning pavement failures at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, U.S.

► In 1998, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) retained his services as an independent consultant to assess and to provide expert opinions related to pavement failures on the "La Cuchilla-Sonsonate-Acajutla" and "Acajutla-La Libertad" roadway rehabilitation projects, which are the primary links between San Salvador and Acajutla and La Libertad in El Salvador.

► Between 1985 and 1986, Dr. Rada was part of the team that was retained by the law firm of Kirkland-Ellis in Chicago, Illinois on behalf of the AMOCO Oil Company



to provide expert testimony relating to road damages associated with AMOCO-Cadiz oil spill off the coast of Normandy, France.

Our proposed team also includes the University of California’s Pavement Research Center (UCPRC) and Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd. (NCE). UCPRC focuses on pavement-related research, and supporting implementation of research findings, for federal, state, and local agencies. The primary initiatives at present cover the development and implementation of a new pavement management system, pavement recycling and the use of recycled materials in pavement, sustainability, mechanistic pavement design, performance based specifications, and pavement preservation. Comprehensive projects are designed to answer specific questions and typically involve laboratory testing, field testing and field assessments, accelerated wheel-load testing, modeling, and preparation of guidance and/or specification language to assist implementation of the findings. Forensic investigations are an integral part of the assessment phase of most projects, both on test tracks and field projects, to determine why a specific test section performed well or why it failed. Many of the studies also include long-term field performance assessments on pilot projects; examples of current projects include in-place recycling (since 2005) and warm-mix asphalt (since 2007). NCE is a high-technology consulting engineering firm with broad capabilities in the field of transportation engineering with special emphasis on roadways and pavements. Since its inception in 1990, the firm has developed an excellent reputation for its dedication, integrity, productivity, enthusiasm, and overall quality of work. The NCE staff, consisting of 95 employees, operates in state-of-the-art facilities that permit optimum working conditions. The NCE staff proposed for this study are well qualified and equipped to complete all necessary work. NCE has a long history of pavement assessment services for government and industry clients, and the team members have demonstrated expertise in all of the elements necessary to successfully complete this project. As the Western Regional Support Contractor (WRSC) for the LTPP program since 1990, NCE has enjoyed excellent working relationships federal and state agencies (including Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)) while gaining vast experience in field technology and data management. Together, the Amec Foster Wheeler team not only possesses the resources (people and equipment), capabilities, experience and vision to ensure the successful outcome of the LTPP Forensic Evaluation project, but it has also clearly demonstrated that it can work together to produce quality outcomes. Working together, the proposed team developed the NCHRP Report 747 protocols required by the solicitation. Moreover, the same key staff involved in NCHRP Project 01-49, which led to the referenced report, are key staff members of the proposed project team – besides Dr. Rada, it includes Dr. David Jones of UCPRC and Mr. Kevin Senn of NCE. In addition, the team is supported by staff intimately familiar with the LTPP program and database (e.g., Mr. Gary Elkins and Dr. Amy Simpson of Amec Foster Wheeler), which is critical to the project, as well as staff who have performed numerous forensic investigations and/or who are intimately familiar with the WSDOT operations (e.g., Dr. John Harvey of UCPRC and Mr. Newt Jackson and Dr. Linda Pierce of NCE), which is also critical to the project.



A.1 Provide a listing of all firms on your proposed team

The following table provides the list of firms on the Amec Foster Wheeler team along with the appropriate contact information for each firm.

Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. (Amec Foster Wheeler)

Address: 12000 Indian Creek Court, Suite F, Beltsville, MD 20705

Contact Name: Gonzalo R. Rada, Ph.D., P.E.

Office No.: 301-210-5105 Cell No.: 512-496-4465 Email: [email protected]

University of California Pavement Research Center (UCPRC)

Address: 2001 Ghausi Hall, Davis, California 95616

Contact Name: David Jones, Ph.D.


Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd (NCE)

Address: 1885 S Arlington Avenue, Suite 111, Reno, NV 89509

Contact Name: Kevin Senn, P.E.


A.2 List the type(s) of expertise that each firm on your team can provide

The following table summarizes the types of expertise provided by each firm on the Amec Foster Wheeler team in support of the project.

Area of Expertise Amec Foster

Wheeler UCPRC NCE

1. Forensic investigations & NCHRP Report 747

2. Field testing

3. Materials laboratory testing

4. Data analysis& report preparation

5. LTPP program & database

6. Agency communications & coordination

7. Familiarity with WSDOT procedures

= significant level of expertise = some level of expertise As shown in the above table, the Amec Foster Wheeler team members complement and supplement each other. Each of the areas of expertise listed in the table are critical to the success of the project, but perhaps more so areas ‘1. Forensic investigations &



NCHRP Report 747’ and ‘5. LTPP program & database,’ which are at the heart of the project – LTPP Forensic Evaluation.

A.3 How long has each firm on your team provided these type(s) of expertise?

Amec Foster Wheeler has been providing all of the services detailed in the previous section, including forensic evaluation, for over 30 years to State DOTs and local governments. UCPRC has been providing the expertise detailed in the previous section to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and other federal, state, and local agencies since 1948 (nearly 70 years), which is when the pavement research center was first established at the University of California at Berkeley. Management of the UCPRC moved to UC Davis in 2003. NCE has been performing forensic investigations for the past 25 years, working on the LTPP program as well as the remaining services listed in the previous section for the past 27 years. Please note that the lengths of service provided here are for the firms and not the individual team members (separately or combined).

A.4 For each firm on your proposed team, provide the number of employees within the state of Washington (including the Greater Portland Metropolitan Area). Also, provide the number of employees that each firm on your proposed team has nationwide

As a leading multi-disciplinary engineering services firm, Amec Foster Wheeler has over 3,300 employees and approximately 90 offices nationwide with four offices and 71 engineers, scientist and support personnel in the State of Washington, including the Greater Portland Metropolitan Area. NCE has eight offices throughout the country, which house 95 employees. There are three NCE employees in the State of Washington, including the Greater Portland Metropolitan Area. UCPRC has staff at the University of California Davis and at the University of California Berkeley, with a total of 26 full time employees, 10 graduate students and up to 40 part time employees. Although UCPRC staff work on projects nationwide and internationally, it does not maintain offices outside these two locations.

A.5 Provide organization chart of your proposed team and include the respective roles that each firm will provide for the team.

The Amec Foster Wheeler team recognizes that successful accomplishment of the stated solicitation objective will require a combination of the right resources (i.e., personnel with relevant experience and capabilities and supporting field and laboratory testing equipment), a clear understanding of the required services and the correct technical approach to the project. Our goal is to provide WSDOT with a seamless, integrated team capable of managing, coordinating, administering, and delivering quality work products to WSDOT and other pooled-fund stakeholders in a timely and cost-effective manner. As shown in the following organizational chart, our team is designed around two principles: (1) centralized control and accountability embodied in our PM (Dr. Rada), and (2) work execution authority delegated to project team members. Dr. Rada will be the single point of contact and accountable for the Amec Foster Wheeler team. He has the authority to negotiate scope, budget, and to schedule and commit the company’s resources. His extensive leadership and technical experience and seasoned



understanding of forensic investigations and the LTPP program makes him the right candidate to support WSDOT in this role. He performs this function for multiple nationally significant projects including FHWA and NCHRP. He has 30+ years of direct and relevant technical and leadership experience, totaling close to $50 million in research fees.

In addition to Dr. Rada, other key staff include Dr. David Jones (UCPRC), who will be the forensic investigation team lead and Mr. Kevin Senn (NCE), who will be the agency coordination lead. Dr. Jones has been involved in numerous forensic investigations on highway and airfield pavements over the past 25 years, both in the US and abroad. Detailed forensic investigations are also an integral part of Dr. Jones’ research projects and he typically conducts more than 10 every year to understand good and poor performance of experimental test sections, either on accelerated wheel-load studies or on pilot studies on highways. He also assists Caltrans and local agencies with forensic investigations on highway failures. Mr. Senn, as Project Manager for the LTPP WRSC, routinely coordinates with all 14 State and Provincial highway agencies in the region, including the State of Washington. Mr. Senn served as the LTPP Western Region’s Agency Coordinator with WSDOT for over 17 years, and is currently serving as the Project Manager on the Pooled Fund Study (Washington is the Lead State) “Development of SPS-2 Pavement Preservation Experiment.”



Besides the small key staff core, the Amec Foster Wheeler team is also fortunate to have a forensic investigation team pool with unmatched experience and capabilities. They include: ► Mr. Gary Elkins and Dr. Amy Simpson (Amec Foster Wheeler), the LTPP database

manager and one of the preeminent LTPP data analysts, respectively, who are intimately familiar with the LTPP database and the information contained in the database for each LTPP test section, including those that will undergo forensic investigations.

► Dr. John Harvey (UCPRC), like Dr. Jones, has extensive experience in undertaking forensic investigations on research projects as well as assisting state and local agencies with failure investigations.

► Mr. Newt Jackson and Dr. Linda Pierce (NCE), who each spent significant portions of their careers (30 years and 20 years, respectively) at WSDOT, and each of whom served as the WSDOT State Pavement Engineer. Mr. Jackson and Dr. Pierce excel in the conduct of pavement investigations and have been involved in LTPP activities both while at WSDOT and since joining NCE.

The Amec Foster Wheeler team will also have at its disposal the full range of Amec Foster Wheeler, UCPRC and NCE resources for use in the project, with access to dozens of pavement and forensic engineering specialists located throughout North America. Of those, a significant number possess a combination of professional engineering licensure, Master’s or Ph.D. degrees, and many have over 25 years of experience in the pavements and forensic investigation profession. Last, but certainly not least, the Amec Foster Wheeler team has at its disposal a full range of field and laboratory testing equipment that could be required in the LTPP forensic evaluations as well as other support (travel, literature searches, contracting, etc.). Altogether, the Amec Foster Wheeler team has the equipment used most often in forensic investigations, including coring, boring and trenching equipment for materials sampling and testing; ground penetrating radar (GPR), distress survey (manual and automated), falling weight deflectometers (FWD), profile and texture surveys/testing; noise testing, and more than 20 full-service AASHTO resource-accredited pavement materials testing laboratories. Clearly, the Amec Foster Wheeler team not only has the resources required to accomplish the project objective, but if necessary it can perform multiple forensic investigations at the same time, which could be required for a variety of reasons – e.g., LTPP test sections being taken out of program or completion of forensic investigations in the northern States prior to the onset of winter.

B. State of Washington Offices, Number of Employees and Types of Expertise:

The table that follows provides Amec Foster Wheeler’s team office locations, personnel count, and expertise available at each office.



Amec Foster Wheeler

4020 Lake Washington Blvd NE, Suite 200 Kirkland, WA 98033 No. of Employees: 32

The Kirkland, WA office has 32 professional engineers, environmental scientists and planners, landscape architects, technicians and support personnel. This office has provided geotechnical engineering, geosciences, and environmental services to clients since inception. This office also provides specialized capabilities for value-added solutions to project challenges for state and federal transportation agencies. One Union Square, 600 University Street, Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98101 No. of Employees: 29 The Seattle, WA office has staff of 29 engineers, scientists, and support personnel specializing largely in soil, groundwater, and sediment contamination assessment and remediation. The office provides comprehensive support through all phases of assessment and remediation, from preliminary screening through remedial investigation, feasibility study, remedial design, and construction oversight. The scientists and engineers enjoy excellent working relationships with federal, state, and local regulatory officials, and work closely with regulatory agencies and clients to achieve remediation goals.

3500 188th ST SW, Suite 601 Lynnwood, WA 98037 No. of Employees: 8 The Lynnwood, WA office has 8 scientists and provides expertise in sediment management, ecological and human health risk assessment, biological assessment, habitat enhancement, natural resource damage mitigation design, wetlands delineation, water quality, and fisheries. The senior staff average more than 30 years of experience in the study of watersheds and marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems. The scientists are experts in natural resources issues and the complex array of federal, state, and local regulations. 115 S 8th St Tacoma, WA 98402 No. of Employees: 6

The Tacoma, WA office consists of a staff of 6 professionals providing services in geotechnical engineering, engineering geology, environmental sciences, hydrogeology, construction inspection, and materials testing. Projects range from residential investigations for compliance with local and state codes to large-scale commercial or industrial projects. The office contains a full-service construction materials testing laboratory and soil testing laboratory that supports both the geotechnical and construction inspection staff.

Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd. (NCE)

12808 S. Austin Road Spokane, WA 99224 No. of Employees: 1

The Spokane, WA office consists of one professional staff member providing services in pavement evaluation, pavement management, pavement performance prediction and modeling, pavement design, pavement rehabilitation and maintenance, pavement type selection, and life-cycle cost analysis



2714 Hibiscus Ct. SE Olympia, WA 98513 No. of Employees: 1 The Olympia, WA office has one professional staff member providing services in pavement evaluation, pavement management, pavement design, pavement rehabilitation and maintenance, pavement type selection, and pavement materials.

UCPRC does not have offices in the State of Washington and, as a result, they are not included in the above table.

C. Previous Joint Prime & Subs Project Work:

As stated in the introduction to Packet A, the Amec Foster Wheeler team firms and proposed key staff members were the developers of the forensic investigation protocols contained in NCHRP Report 747 ‘Guide for Conducting Forensic Investigations of Highway Pavements.’ This work was done under NCHRP Project 01-49 ‘Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements,’ with Dr. Gonzalo Rada of Amec Foster Wheeler as Principal Investigator and Drs. David Jones and John Harvey of UCPRC and Mr. Kevin Senn of NCE as Senior Engineers. The project was completed on time and under budget, and the success of the project has been more than amply demonstrated through the reference to NCHRP Report 747 on numerous forensic investigation solicitations. Amec Foster Wheeler’s role in NCHRP Project 01-49 was to lead all technical and administrative matters as well as to participate in all technical activities via the Principal Investigator, Dr. Rada. UCPRC’s and NCE’s role included participation in all technical and coordination activities, including conduct of agency internet survey questionnaire, development of the guidelines and subsequent revisions, coordination and conduct of forensic investigations to test and revise the guidelines (included as case studies in Appendix B of NCHRP Report 747), and preparation for and participation in the LTPP-sponsored workshop that was held at the end of the project to present the guidelines and to promote their implementation. The project was completed in 2013, one year outside the three-year limit stipulated by WSDOT, but it is included here because of its significance to the WSDOT’s LTPP Forensic Evaluation project. In addition, Amec Foster Wheeler (in the role of TSSC to FHWA) and NCE (in the role of WRSC to FHWA) have worked together on the LTPP Program since 1990 (to date), which is when NCE began working on LTPP-related matters. The firms serve complimentary roles working with FHWA and the State and Provincial Highway Agencies (SHAs) to effectively conduct LTPP activities. Amec Foster Wheeler and NCE staff routinely coordinate on each aspect of the program. As LTPP WRSC, NCE is responsible for coordinating with 14 SHAs, including WSDOT, to collect, process, and QC pavement performance data, as well as to track maintenance and rehabilitation activities and to share key program findings.

D. Key Staff and Resources Availability:

The following table presents the current availability of our proposed key staff and forensic investigation team pool. The availability for the first two years, 2017 and 2018, is considered a better estimate than that for the remaining three years, 2019 to 2021.



Name Role Availability in Hours Per Month

2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Gonzalo Rada, Ph.D., P.E Project Manager 80 80 80 80 80

David Jones, Ph.D. Forensic Investigations Lead

40 40 40 40 40

Kevin Senn, P.E. State Coordinator Lead

80 80 80 80 80

Gary Elkins, P.E.

Forensic Investigation Team Pool

40 40 40 40 40 Amy Simpson, Ph.D., P.E. 40 40 40 40 40 John Harvey, Ph.D. 20 20 20 20 20 Linda Pierce, Ph.D., P.E. 40 40 40 40 40 Newt Jackson, P.E. 40 40 40 40 40

All of the other staff and equipment resources detailed earlier under Criterion A.5 will be made available to the project on an as needed basis. The team’s depth and experience with forensic evaluations will allow for efficient scheduling of the appropriate resources, which will be a key element for each LTPP section investigation.

E. Selected Relevant Project Experience:

The following tables provides relevant project experience for the Amec Foster Wheeler team. Three examples are provided for each firm on the team.

Amec Foster Wheeler

Project Name: Virginia Pavement Evaluation and Design Engineering Services, Statewide (James City and York Counties Pavement Evaluations) Dates of Services: October 2014 – October 2017 Project Fees: $1,050,204 Description of Services: Amec Foster Wheeler is providing on-call pavement evaluation and design engineering services incorporating geotechnical investigation, laboratory testing services, pavement destructive and nondestructive testing as well as onsite consultation requiring specific expertise in the areas of asphalt and concrete pavement construction, rehabilitation and design. For this three-year contract, Amec Foster Wheeler is performing the following services: pavement evaluation, testing and design; construction oversight and troubleshooting on pavement construction; specialized services related to pavement engineering; and geotechnical testing, evaluation and design services. Amec Foster Wheeler has completed 16 task orders to date under this contract and two of them (James City and York Counties) involved forensic investigations conducted in accordance with the NCHRP Report 747 protocols. These investigations included records review, pavement functional and structural condition evaluations, and ground penetrating radar survey, and they resulted in destructive testing recommendations being provided to confirm the pavement issues identified by the State. Project Name: FHWA Technical Support Services for the LTPP Program Dates of Services: March 2010 – December 2015 Project Fees: $7,658,991 Description of Services: Amec Foster Wheeler has been the primary Technical Services Support Contractor to the LTPP program since 1987. This project focuses on long-term performance of pavement assets including development of data collection



procedures for profile, rutting, falling weight deflectometer (FWD), distress, traffic, materials, and climatic data. The objective of this ongoing project is to provide pavement, database and traffic engineering technical services to the FHWA in support of the LTPP program. This project has an emphasis on monitoring and reporting pavement structural health and we have been responsible for developing all data collection protocols, QC/QA procedures and software for all major pavement performance data collection types. The products of the LTPP program developed by Amec Foster Wheeler have been adopted by most of the DOTs in the USA including protocols and manuals (including calibration procedures) for distress, profile, FWD, traffic, and materials. Many of the current pavement engineering data collection specifications in use today were pioneered by Amec Foster Wheeler through its involvement with the LTPP program. This project has resulted in the largest research quality pavement performance database in the world. Ultimately, the goal of LTPP is to help the pavement engineering community understand how pavements behave/perform and why they perform as they do. As part of this project, specific activities that Amec Foster Wheeler has been involved in of relevance to the solicitation include pavement performance, pavement evaluation, guide and/or tool development, and coordination with State highway agencies (SHAs). Project Name: Pavement Management Services for Office of Materials Technology, Statewide, Maryland Dates of Services: February 2013 to February 2018 Project Fees: $2,585,923 Description of Services: Amec Foster Wheeler has been providing engineering support services to the Pavement Management Team of the Pavement and Geotechnical Division of the Maryland State Highway Administration (MDSHA) since 1993. These services have included assisting with pavement management activities including network level performance information, performing pavement design, and developing detailed plans, specifications, and estimates for specific construction projects. Under the current contract, Amec Foster Wheeler provides on-site pavement management services to support the Pavement Management section with data processing tasks including maintenance of the Construction History and Unit Cost databases and processing of pavement performance data. As part of our work, we have performed management of technical staff providing pavement design and geotechnical services on-site at SHA facilities; managed the delivery of over 100 design and geotechnical projects; on-site support for processing of pavement condition information including cracking, rutting, ride, and video images; instrumental in development of data collection protocols and quality control/quality assurance procedures; and development of the Materials Management System Strategic Plan.

University of California Pavement Research Center (UCPRC) Project Name: In-Place Pavement Recycling Study Dates of Services: July 2011 – June 2017 Project Fees: $2,245,878 Description of Services: This UCPRC phased project for Caltrans investigated in-place recycling as a rehabilitation alternative to mill and overlay. The project included laboratory testing, accelerated wheel-load testing on a specially constructed test track, assessment of pilot studies, and modeling. A total of 11 forensic evaluations (as per NCHRP-747, including 11 test pits) were undertaken during the project to assess pavement layer behavior and to identify key parameters contributing to good and poor behavior under a variety of environmental conditions. One of the forensic



investigations covered premature failure on a pilot project. Project deliverables include a revised guideline on in-place pavement recycling in California, suggested specification language for in-place recycling, and mechanistic models that simulate behavior over the design life of a recycled pavement. Project Name: Warm-Mix Asphalt Study Dates of Services: July 2008 – June 2014 Project Fees: $1,860,000 Description of Services: This UCPRC phased project for Caltrans and CalRecycle investigated whether warm-mix asphalt would provide equal or better performance to hot mix asphalt. The project included laboratory testing, accelerated wheel-load testing on a specially constructed test track, and assessment of pilot studies. A total of 9 forensic evaluations (per NCHRP-747, including 9 test pits) were undertaken during the project to assess pavement layer behavior and to identify key parameters contributing to good and poor behavior under a variety of environmental conditions. Bi-annual visual evaluations were undertaken on 7 different pilot studies around California for up to 7 years. Deliverables included suggested specification language for using warm-mix asphalt on highway projects. Project Name: Bonded Concrete Overlay Study Dates of Services: July 2014 – June 2017 Project Fees: $1,881,077 Description of Services: This UCPRC project for Caltrans and the concrete pavement industry investigated the performance of six different bonded concrete overlays as an alternative to asphalt concrete overlays. The project included laboratory testing, accelerated wheel-load testing on a specially constructed test track, and modeling. A total of six forensic evaluations (as per NCHRP-747, including one test pit and multiple cores on each test section) were undertaken during the project to assess pavement layer behavior and to identify key parameters contributing to good and poor behavior under a variety of environmental conditions. Project deliverables include guidance on the use of bonded concrete overlays, key issues that will need to be considered in specifications, and mechanistic models that simulate behavior of bonded concrete overlays over their design life. The UCPRC is currently working with Caltrans to construct and monitor a pilot project.

Nichols Consulting Engineers, Chtd. (NCE) Project Name: LTPP Western Region Support Contract (WRSC) Dates of Services: January 2012-June 2017 Project Fees: $6,748,662 Description of Services: NCE has worked on the Western Regional Contract continuously since 1990. This covers six separate contracts totaling over $25 million that were competitively awarded. As the WRSC , NCE’s responsibilities include: collection of site-specific data from the LTPP test sections; coordination of data collection efforts of highway agencies and other contractors; quality control of data; data reduction, processing, and transmitting data into the national Oracle database; and limited analysis and summarization of data. In addition to these activities, as part of this contract the NCE team completed an intensive effort in Program Improvement that included developing and updating Data Resolution and Data Completeness Reports for 14 agencies in the Western Region, meeting with the agencies to discuss problem data sets, and finalizing revised monitoring categories for the LTPP test sections. NCE has consistently demonstrated an intimate knowledge of the pavements throughout the Western United States. The area covered for data collection includes the 12 westernmost States and the Canadian Provinces of Alberta



and British Columbia. Once the data has been returned to the office, NCE has developed a number of queries and reports to ensure the data in the Oracle database is of the highest quality. Project Name: Development of SPS-2 Pavement Preservation Study – TPF-5(291) Dates of Services: November 2015-Present Project Fees: $62,260 Description of Services: NCE is working with WSDOT (Lead Agency—agreement number Y-11728) and six more participating SHAs to develop a nationwide study to determine the most effective concrete preservation strategies for extending the service life of pavements constructed as part of the LTPP SPS-2 experiment (Strategic Study of Structural Factors for Rigid Pavements). The initial study objective was to provide a comprehensive assessment of the SPS-2 test sections, in terms of performance monitoring, materials characterization, traffic and environmental data, and surviving test sections. NCE completed the first Phase of this effort and delivered the project report within the $20,000 budget. Based on the initial assessment, in March 2017 the Panel approved an additional $42,000 to attempt to expand the comparison data set utilizing performance predictions made by the AASHTOWARE PavementME software to actual performance. Project Name: California Department of Transportation Pavement On-Call Contract (agreement number 56A0418), Task Order #5 Dates of Services: July 2016-April 2017 Project Fees: $52,060 (budget) Description of Services: NCE has completed two years of a three year on-call contract (ceiling amount: $3.5 million) with Caltrans to provide a range of services in support of the Pavement Program. These services are performed through the issuance of Task Orders. One of these Task Orders was to conduct a forensic investigation on Interstate 5 in Sacramento. The pavement section was approximately four miles of slab replacements utilizing rapid set concrete that exhibited premature deterioration and poor surface durability. In completing this Task Order, NCE collected project files, field data, and core samples, performed petrographic testing, and delivered a final report, including recommended changes to current Caltrans specifications. This Task Order was completed on schedule in April 2017 for almost $9,000 under the $52,000 Task Order budget.

SCORING CRITERIA 2. QUALIFICATIONS OF PROPOSED MANAGER

A. Relevant Project Manager Experience:

Dr. Rada has taken a key leadership and technical role on numerous national level pavement research studies - most significantly the LTPP program. He has successfully managed closed to $50 million worth of pavement research, where success is measured by quality deliverables in a timely fashion and within budget. Three recent projects that have demonstrated his technical, management and leadership skills are listed below; he served as Principal Investigator and Project Manager in all three.

NCHRP Project 01-49: Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements – June 2011 - July 2013: The objective of this research study was to develop guidelines for conducting forensic investigations of highway pavements. These investigations were to be concerned with acquiring and evaluating data to (1) identify the cause(s) of premature pavement failure; (2) understand the factors contributing to longevity of pavements; and (3) document/understand observed performance and



support development and/or calibration of performance prediction models [e.g., for use in local calibration of the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG)]. The resulting guidelines were to help highway agencies conduct cost-effective investigations that would enhance understanding of pavement performance and provide the necessary data for improving pavement design and analysis procedures. This project consisted of three phases and 11 tasks, which culminated with an LTPP-sponsored workshop in November 2012 to introduce and help disseminate the resulting guidelines and the actual publication of the guidelines (NCHRP Report 747) in 2013. Dr. Rada was responsible for technical and administrative matters. The project was completed on time and ahead of schedule and, as noted earlier in this packet, the resulting product (NCHRP Report 747) has been widely accepted, as reflected by the requirement of numerous solicitations involving forensic investigations (including this one) to use NCHRP Report 747 as a guide.

FHWA Technical Support Services Contracts for the LTPP Program, Project Title – 1992 to 1997, 1997 to 2002 and 2002 to 2008: The primary objective of these three contracts was to provide technical support to the FHWA on all LTPP activities, which included the following tasks: pavement performance monitoring, pavement instrumentation (climate and traffic), traffic monitoring, database and information management system, experiments, regional operations, coordination and communications, and special projects. From 1992 to 2008, when he served as Principal Investigator, he was responsible for technical and administrative matters associated with the stated tasks. All three projects were completed on time and within budget, and our performance on the projects was rated as exceptional.

NCHRP Project 14-33: Pavement Performance Measures that Consider the Contributions of Preservation Treatments – June 2014 – April 2017: The objective of this recently completed research study was to (1) identify and/or develop pavement performance measures that consider the contributions of preservation to performance, service life, and life-cycle costs and (2) prepare a guide document to facilitate implementation of these measures by SHAs. To accomplish these objectives, the following six tasks were conducted by the Amec Foster Wheeler team: (1) gathering of relevant information through a literature review, internet survey questionnaire and telephone interviews, (2) identification and evaluation of performance measures, (3) preparation of detailed Phase II work plan, (4) preparation of interim report, (5) execution of the Phase II work plan, and (6) preparation of a final report. Dr. Rada was responsible for technical and administrative matters. This was a challenging project, but it resulted in a guide document titled “Quantification of the Effect of Preservation Treatments on Pavement Performance,” which is currently undergoing publication by NCHRP. The project required a time extension to address challenging comments and issues received from the NCHRP panel on the draft guide document, but it was still completed within budget.

B. Project Manager’s Familiarity with State and Federal Regulations & Procedures

Amec Foster Wheeler’s Project Manager, Dr. Rada, has managed close to $50 million dollars in projects for federal, state and local government agencies. While many of the projects are at the national level (FHWA), Dr. Rada has also managed both research



and consulting projects for State agencies and is familiar with the relevant regulations and procedures. As two examples, Dr. Rada was project manager for both statewide projects (Virginia and Maryland) described in Scoring Criteria 1.E. These first contracts established our technical, work and compliance procedures used in subsequent competitively awarded contracts still in place today. Dr. Rada has also worked as Project Manager in other State projects including development and implementation of a pavement management system for the State of Delaware, development and implementation of automated deflection data analyses procedure for the State of Montana, and development of methodologies for rubblization of concrete pavement for the State of Wisconsin. He has also served as Principal Investigator for NCHRP projects on behalf of the States – NCHRP Project 01-49 Guidelines for the Conduct of Forensic Investigations for Highway Pavements, NCHRP Project 14-33: Pavement Performance Measures that Consider the Contributions of Pavement Preservation, and NCHRP 14-38: Guide for Timing of Asphalt-Surfaced Pavement Preservation.

C. Project Manager’s Ability to Manage Projects:

Examples of Dr. Rada’s project management capabilities have been provided in several places throughout this package. In this section, the following three examples highlight Dr. Rada’s ability for change-management within pavement research projects. For the original FHWA LTPP Technical Support Service Contract for the LTPP program, pavement, traffic and information management services were provided through separate standalone contracts. However because of federal limitations on direct contractor-to-contractor interaction, the day to day operations of the program were inefficient. Working with FHWA leadership, a series of contract and subcontract changes were implemented to combine the pavement, traffic and information services under the overall leadership of Dr. Rada. This improved day to day operations, and provided FHWA with a single point of accountability for the technical support services across all three disciplines. For FHWA, Dr. Rada led a research project to evaluate various equipment options to measure pavement deflections using a continuously moving device (rather than traditional stop-and-go deflection testing). Once the project was underway, including subcontracting with each of the equipment vendors, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) learned of the project, and expressed interest to add another testing device for consideration on aviation pavements. This change involved Dr. Rada working with both FHWA and FAA to develop the revised project scope. Subsequently Dr. Rada managed the addition of the new equipment via subcontract, and revised the field testing plan to incorporate the added testing (which involved equipment being mobilized to and from Europe to meet the field testing schedule). These changes also rippled through the analysis and reporting phases, involving two University sub-consultants. Dr. Rada managed and implemented the entire series of changes to the high satisfaction of FHWA and FAA. Also for FHWA, Dr. Rada managed a substantial change to the scope, schedule and budget for the project “Pavement Remaining Service Interval” (RSI). This project was an alternate approach to the historical “remaining service life” often applied to pavements, and approaches pavements as repairable systems, rather than having a terminal life.



During the term of the project, FHWA opted to incorporate the RSI technology into an existing FHWA software tool; “Pavement Health Tool” (PHT). Dr. Rada then managed a change to the RSI project to develop the software specification for code development, and then added the PHT software developer as a subconsultant to the contract for implementation. This involved a negotiated change order to be responsive to the new requirement and opportunity identified during project execution.

D. Project Manager’s Licenses/Accreditation:

Dr. Rada is not a registered professional engineer in the State of Washington, but as shown below has an NCEES registration and is registered in several states: ► Professional Engineer with NCEES, Registration No. 27124, 2005 ► Professional Engineer, New York Registration No. 16-085169, 2007 ► Professional Engineer, Florida Registration No. 63759, 2006 ► Professional Engineer, Illinois Registration No. 62-047592, 1992 ► Professional Engineer, Maryland Registration No. 19700, 1992 ► Professional Engineer, Virginia Registration No. 023674, 1992

If selected for this project, he will apply for his registration in the State of Washington, if needed. In the meantime or in the alternative, one or more of the following Amec Foster Wheeler team members who are registered P.E.s in the State of Washington will be named as having responsible charge for the project: ► Dr. Linda Pierce, P.E., Washington Registration No. 30768, 1994

► Mr. Newt Jackson, P.E., Washington Registration No. 12290, 1970 SCORING CRITERIA 3. KEY TEAM QUALIFICATIONS (PRIME CONSULTANT AND SUB-CONSULTANTS)

A. Team Qualifications

The Amec Foster Wheeler team recognizes that successful accomplishment of the project objective will require a combination of the right resources (i.e., personnel with relevant experience and capabilities), a clear understanding of the required services and the correct technical approach to the project. In this first part of the response, we introduced the Amec Foster Wheeler key team members – the right resources for this project. They are: ► Dr. Gonzalo Rada. P.E., who will serve as Project Manager

► Dr. David Jones, who will serve as Forensic Investigations Lead

► Mr. Kevin Senn, P.E., who will serve as State Coordination Lead Dr. Gonzalo Rada, P.E. (Amec Foster Wheeler). In the role of Project Manager, he will provide management and leadership skills that meet and exceed the solicitation requirements. Dr. Rada has devoted his entire 30-year plus career to the field of pavement engineering. He has led close to $50 million worth of pavement research, in the role of Principal Investigator and Project Manager, which clearly demonstrates his technical, management and leadership skills. He is also a leading figure and a recognized expert in the field of pavement management systems (PMS), having been involved in the development and/or implementation of more than 100 systems throughout the world in the role of Project Manager and/or Principal Engineer. His



involvement with PMS covers nearly 30 years, in excess of $10 million in fees, and dozens of contracts. His project responsibilities have also included the evaluation and development of rehabilitation recommendations for thousands of miles of roads, airfield and port pavements throughout the world. As stated under Item B of Scoring Criteria 2, Dr. Rada, has managed projects for federal, state and local government agencies. While many of the projects are at the national level (FHWA), he has also managed both research and consulting projects for State agencies and is familiar with the relevant regulations and procedures. The two examples provided earlier referenced Amec Foster Wheeler’s first statewide contract with Virginia DOT to provide pavement evaluation, design and maintenance services. He was also Amec Foster Wheeler’s Project Manager for the first statewide pavement design contract with Maryland State Highway Administration. These first contracts established our technical, work and compliance procedures used in subsequent competitively awarded contracts still in place today. Dr. Rada has also worked as Project Manager in other State projects including development and implementation of a pavement management system for the State of Delaware, development and implementation of automated deflection data analyses procedure for the State of Montana, and development of methodologies for rubblization of concrete pavement for the State of Wisconsin. In addition, he has served as Principal Investigator for NCHRP projects on behalf of the States – NCHRP Projects 01-49 Guidelines for the Conduct of Forensic Investigations for Highway Pavements (which included a workshop attended by more than 30 SHAs), 14-33 Pavement Performance Measures that Consider the Contributions of Pavement Preservation, and 14-38 Guide for Timing of Asphalt-Surfaced Pavement Preservation. David Jones, Ph.D. (UC-Davis). Dr. David Jones will serve as the Forensic Investigations Lead on this project. He is the Associate Director of the University of California Pavement Research Center (UCPRC) at UC Davis and UC Berkeley, where he serves as Principal Investigator for a range of research and implementation projects for Caltrans; Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery; the FHWA, FAA, and other governmental and private institutions. Forensic investigations form an integral part of many of Dr. Jones’ research projects and he has undertaken a large number of them on test tracks and in-service pilot sections as a means to understanding why pavements perform the way that they do under a given set of parameters. Dr. Jones has also undertaken numerous forensic investigations on behalf of road owners, both in the United States and internationally, to determine the cause of early pavement failures as well as to understand exceptional or unexpected performance. He has written a number of guidance documents on undertaking forensic investigations and interpreting the results, and provides training to graduate students and practitioners on how to conduct forensic investigations. Dr. Jones wrote the detailed chapters on preliminary investigation, non-destructive and destructive testing, as well as the case studies in the NCHRP 747 guide, based primarily on his extensive experience. Dr. Jones manages the UCPRC accelerated pavement testing, field testing, and laboratory testing programs, FWD and inertial profiler certification centers, and oversees the accreditation, use and scheduling of these resources.



Kevin Senn, P.E. (NCE). Mr. Kevin Senn will serve as the State Coordination lead, and will be applying his extensive knowledge of the LTPP program, along with his coordination skills. He is the Project Manager on the current WRSC, where he is responsible for all operations in the Western Region including interagency coordination, field data collection, data processing and quality control, maintenance of the Regional Information Management System (RIMS) Oracle database, and materials sampling and testing. Mr. Senn has demonstrated an ability to conduct the program effectively, and has maintained excellent relationships with federal and state agencies and all LTPP Contractors (including Amec Foster Wheeler). As Agency Coordinator for the Western Region, Mr. Senn is responsible for maintaining communication with the western States and Provinces on all LTPP-related issues including construction, rehabilitation and maintenance, and monitoring. In addition, Mr. Senn worked with Dr. Rada and Dr. Jones on NCHRP 01-49. Mr. Senn has both his Master’s (1995) and Bachelor’s (1994) Degrees in Civil Engineering from Washington State University. He is a Principal at NCE, manages NCE’s Nevada Region, and is a member of NCE’s Management Team. In this capacity, he has the ability to quickly and effectively direct required resources to achieve results to conform to project requirements. Beyond the above stated roles and responsibilities, the key team members will also be involved in the actual conduct of the LTPP forensic evacuations, as permanent members of the investigation teams. As required by the solicitation, the following table provides three examples of prior relevant projects for each key team member – in the case of Dr. Rada, the three examples are the same ones presented under Item A of Scoring Criteria 2. Key Team Member: Gonzalo R. Rada, Ph.D., P.E. – Project Manager Project Name: NCHRP Project 01-49: Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements Dates of Services: June 2011 - July 2013 Roles and Responsibilities: Principal Investigator – responsible for all technical and administrative matters. Project Name: FHWA Technical Support Services Contracts for the LTPP Program Dates of Services: 1992 to 1997, 1997 to 2002 and 2002 to 2008 Roles and Responsibilities: Principal Investigator – responsible for all technical and administrative matters. Project Name: National Cooperative Highway Research Program, NCHRP Project 14-33: Pavement Performance Measures that Consider the Contributions of Preservation Treatments Dates of Services: June 2014 – April 2017 Roles and Responsibilities: Principal Investigator – responsible for all technical and administrative matters. Key Team Member: David Jones, Ph.D. – Forensic Investigations Lead Project Name: NCHRP Project 01-49: Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements Dates of Services: June 2011 - July 2013



Roles and Responsibilities: Senior Engineer – Key team staff member involved in all project tasks. Project Name: California Department of Transportation Partnered Pavement Research Center Dates of Services: July 2011 – June 2014 and July 2014 – June 2017 Roles and Responsibilities: Co-Principal Investigator with responsibility for sustainable pavement design, including in-place pavement recycling, recycled materials in asphalt binder and asphalt concrete, stabilization, and construction enhancement technologies. Project Name: Special Assignment to the Transportation Research Board and FHWA to Assess the Potential Role of Accelerated Pavement Testing in Supplementing LTPP Data Dates of Services: June 2003 – May 2004 Roles and Responsibilities: Investigator and report author. Additional voluntary assignment included preparation of a draft forensic investigation guidance document. Key Team Member: Kevin Senn, P.E. – State Coordination Lead Project Name: NCHRP Project 01-49: Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements Dates of Services: June 2011 - July 2013 Roles and Responsibilities: Senior Engineer – Key team staff member involved in all project tasks. Project Name: FHWA LTPP Western Regional Support Contract Dates of Services: 1990 - date Roles and Responsibilities: Project Manager and Agency Coordinator responsible for maintaining communication with the States of California, Arizona, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, and Hawaii on all LTPP-related issues including construction, rehabilitation and maintenance, and monitoring. In the past, he has also been the Agency Coordinator for Nevada, Alberta and British Columbia. Project Name: Arizona DOT Long Term Pavement Performance Special Studies, Phoenix, Arizona Dates of Services: 2000 - 2016 Roles and Responsibilities: Project Manager responsible for all technical and administrative matters associated with this on-call pavement consultant services contracts with Arizona DOT. He led a variety of pavement research and evaluation projects, including detailed evaluation of the Arizona LTPP SPS-1, 2, 5, 6, 8 and 9 experiments.

It is also worth repeating that NCE has worked with WSDOT since 1990 and is currently under contract to WSDOT as the lead State of another LTPP-related Pooled Fund Study. This has provided the opportunity to stay current with the Department’s regulations. Working with over 20 additional SHA’s on projects over the years, as well as with the FHWA and hundreds of cities and counties, provides NCE with an excellent understanding of the similarities and subtle differences in regulations and procedures between agencies. Specific to NCE’s key staff, Mr. Kevin Senn has worked with WSDOT on LTPP activities since 1995 and was a summer intern at WSDOT in 1993. In addition,



team members Dr. Linda Pierce and Mr. Newton Jackson are both retired WSDOT employees. SCORING CRITERIA 4. FIRM’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (PRIME CONSULTANT ONLY)

A. Firm’s QA/QC Processes, Tracking Systems and Processes

A.1 Quality assurance/quality control processes

Our quality assurance plan for this project follows the formal Amec Foster Wheeler quality management policies and procedures used for all company projects. In this section we will provide the following information: definition of quality performance, roles and responsibilities, how and when quality will be measured, corrective actions, internal surveillance plan, and records. Definition of Quality Performance. The Amec Foster Wheeler Quality Management System is based on a fundamental principle – quality is an attitude that permeates everything we do. It cannot be bolted on at the end and therefore quality is a continuous process that is built in to our everyday routines on each project. Our definition of quality performance is likewise based on a fundamental definition: “Quality Management encompasses those actions taken by the Amec Foster Wheeler Team to provide confidence that the results, conclusions, recommendations, and products produced by our programs and projects are accurate and reliable and conform to agreed-upon requirements and specifications, applicable standards, laws, and regulations.” Roles and Responsibilities. Our organizational chart, presented earlier, is designed around two quality management principles: (1) accountability for quality embodied in our Project Manager and (2) work execution authority to highly qualified staff. The implementation of the QC/QA process is the responsibility of all employees. Each employee receives QC/QA training and retraining as appropriate. All Amec Foster Wheeler Project Managers receive focused training and are internally certified through a strict peer review process. Project Management training includes: budgeting/estimating; contracting mechanisms; risk management strategies; project communications; quality control; continuous improvement; scheduling; financial tracking and reporting; invoicing; and scoping. Quality of work at the project level is the responsibility of everyone on the project team. Each project team member is accountable for reviewing his/her work product in addition to having a peer review. Adherence to the quality system is measured at least annually through the Corporate Audit Program. How and When Quality will be Measured. Upon award of contract we are required to prepare a Quality Assurance Project Document (QAPD), which addresses the following specific factors for a project: project description; hierarchical project management structure plus staff roles and responsibilities; contract documentation including statement of work, deliverables, schedule, and budget; deliverable review procedures; document report formats; lines of communications; time codes for each task for labor resource tracking; and contract team, client and contractor contact information.



The QAPD is a controlled document, which means if printed, copies are numbered and each numbered copy is updated with each change. Our use of modern technology has greatly reduced the need for physical control of paper based quality management documents. It is the responsibility of the Project Manager to complete the Project QA Plan. If any of these elements are missing, the project cannot be established within the Amec Foster Wheeler project control system. Using the QAPD as the basis for Quality Management, the following mechanisms are used to measure/report on the client-affecting quality metrics: ► Deliverable timeliness. A project deliverable database is populated at the start of

each contract that documents due dates for significant project deliverables. This database must be updated since variances are reported in the routine automated management reports reviewed not only by Project Managers, but also office management staff. During the past two years, 1,686 client surveys have given Amec Foster Wheeler a satisfaction rating of 97% for schedule adherence.

► Staff performance from formal employee evaluations. Amec Foster Wheeler staff is formally evaluated on their performance on a yearly cycle. Project Managers perform more frequent interventions based on their review of the work product of each employee.

► Client satisfaction feedback. For this project, the most effective client satisfaction feedback mechanism is through regular discussions with the WSDOT Project Manager, a key to project success. To date, we have effectively and proactively worked with state and federal transportation staff to identify opportunities for improvement in the conduct of our staff, work product, and operations.

Amec Foster Wheeler uses a cascading system of external project management review and quality audits. The first tier of external project management review is performed by the Office Manager at a weekly Project Managers meeting. In the secondary level of review, the automated management reports generated by the Amec Foster Wheeler project software are reviewed and discussed at the regional level. The upper level tier is comprised of quality management audits by qualified corporate staff that has no direct involvement in a project. Amec Foster Wheeler has also developed an internet procurement system that has been approved by the Federal Government’s auditing agencies. Amec Foster Wheeler’s purchases of supplies and services are routed through this web-based system that is accessible to our Project Managers and is linked to the BST accounting system. As a result, project-specific purchases are routed through the procurement system and are immediately noted in the BST accounting system as pending purchases for a project and must be approved by the PM prior to the cost accruing against the project. Project cost reports are therefore always current regarding vendor purchases, thus eliminating any cost incurred surprises due to outstanding invoices. These systems collectively produce performance and exception reports that enable our Project Managers to track progress against budget and schedule, identify potential problems, and take corrective actions. Because we gather costs and progress



information weekly, we are able to catch potential problems early and take immediate corrective actions before they become issues. Corrective Actions. Amec Foster Wheeler has a robust plan of action when quality is not meeting the standards we define. Proactive corrective actions occur when nonconforming items and services or significant conditions adverse to quality may be discovered. Corrective actions are initiated through audits, surveillances, conscientious observations or actions by personnel, peer reviews, client feedback, or in the inspection of purchased items and services. Significant conditions adverse to quality are defined as: conditions which if left uncorrected could have a serious effect on quality or safety; repetitive process errors and omissions; a specific condition adverse to quality that is repeated because the corrective action taken has not corrected the root cause; and disregard of procedures or instructions, use of nonconforming items or services, or disregard of stop work instructions. Corrective and preventive actions for nonconforming items and services and significant conditions adverse to quality are documented with the following identified: the harm to the organization, project, or the product provided to the client; the cause; the actions to correct; and the actions to prevent recurrence. If a significant quality issue arises, the WSDOT will be notified of the problem as soon as possible after detection. We will work with the WSDOT to correct the quality issue and put systems in place to minimize the chance of recurrence. Internal Surveillance Plan. The QAPD mentioned earlier contains a record of all surveillance actions taken to assess the quality management plan. The surveillance actions taken during the course of a project include: ► Chief Engineer audits of project conformance to quality program (yearly).

► Monthly review (more frequently at start) with WSDOT of project status and quality conformance.

► Quarterly progress reports submitted to WSDOT identifying conformance to budget, schedule, and timeliness.

► Monthly update of budget burn rate and forecast of remaining budget through the invoicing process.

► Monthly review of subcontractor project status including scope, budget, schedule, and timeliness. Monthly documentation of subcontractor performance.

► Weekly project management meetings between the PI and the Office Manager to review the status of each project. During these meetings, impending issues are identified and steps taken to correct problems prior to them occurring are taken.

► Weekly review of project status through PM Dashboard as explained in the next section.



Summary

The Quality Plan Amec Foster Wheeler will use, which has been successfully implemented on several state and federal transportation projects, has many proactive elements. This plan has been designed by Amec Foster Wheeler over the last twenty years to be responsive to our clients’ needs and provide services that meet our client’s expectations. We have been using this plan over the course of previous contracts for local and State DOTs as well as for FHWA and NCHRP. It has proven to be successful in managing the quality of our work in the past and will continue to be the framework through which our work on this WSDOT project will be performed. This plan will result in the identification of problems before they become an issue for the WSDOT and the project team. When issues are discovered, our plan is designed to involve the client in the resolution of the issue before it becomes a detriment to the LTPP Forensic Evaluation effort.

A.2 Tracking system to monitor project’s budget and/or scope

Budget control is a critical element of any project. During the planning phase for each forensic investigation, we will establish a detailed budget based on the agreed-to scope. The scope is broken into manageable elements with each scope element corresponding to a budget element. This becomes the baseline budget for the study. Then, as the study progresses, we closely monitor project costs. Amec Foster Wheeler’s primary project tracking tool is our project management portal, or “PM Dashboard”. This customized system allows our Project Managers to access the database from their computers anywhere there is Internet access. The portal was designed to provide real-time access to cost accounting data. With this system, the Project Manager can review the project budget versus labor effort as well as subcontractor expenses and other direct costs. It allows the Project Manager to “drill down” through the data to see when and where charges occurred (by date, location, and employee) and determine the status of subcontractor expenses. The Dashboard allows the Project Manager to track, at a glance, actual cost versus budgeted cost as well as the percentage of work that is complete. This information provides an effective barometer for reading the status of the project budget. Amec Foster Wheeler has an excellent track record of performing projects on time and within budget, and is committed to delivering quality and responsive service to WSDOT. Projects performed for current program clients including 38 State transportation agencies and Federal Highway Administration, for example, have met or exceeded project requirements and have been recognized by the award of additional projects.

A.3 Scheduling program/process

The Amec Foster Wheeler team will use MS Project to track and report project costs and schedules on the project. This tool shows costs and schedule variances to the task level and generates reports compatible with many state and federal transportation agencies reporting requirements. Its use reduces project cost and optimizes resource scheduling.



Dr. Rada, the proposed PM, is able to download costs and commitments from Deltek timekeeping and import them into MS Project to provide an accurate and updated status of the project. He has also utilized MS Project and applied this process in the role of Principal Investigator and/or Project Manager for all projects since 2008 including the following recent (within the past five years) example projects: ► NCHRP 14-38 "Guide for Timing of Asphalt-Surfaced Pavement Preservation." (to

be completed by June 2018)

► FHWA's "Design of Pavement Preservation Experiment for the LTPP Program." (to be completed by October 2017)

► FHWA's "Interstate Pavement Condition Sampling." (to be completed by July 2017)

► FHWA's "LTPP Data Analysis Program - Validation of Pavement Performance Measures." (to be completed by July 2017)

► NCHRP 14-33 "Pavement Performance Measures that Consider the Contributions of Preservation Treatments." (completed in 2017)

► FHWA's "Development of Pavement Management Roadmap Implementation Plan." (completed in 2014)

► FHWA's "Technologies to Determine Indicators for Pavement Preservation Strategies." (completed in 2013)

► NCHRP 01-49 "Guidelines for Conducting Forensic Investigation of Highway Pavements." (completed in 2013)

► FHWA's "Relating Ride Quality and Structural Adequacy for Pavement Rehabilitation/Design Decisions." (completed in 2012)

A.4 Process for interacting with internal project team

Interaction and communication with WSDOT and the internal project team is a key to Amec Foster Wheeler team’s ability to manage, administer and coordinate a project. Dr. Rada will communicate with the WSDOT Project Manager and the project team by telephone and email, scheduled project review meetings, and through progress reports. Dr. Rada has a demonstrated track record of excellent coordination and communication with the clients and project teams over his multi-decade involvement with the many projects he has managed over the course of his career.

A.5 Ability to provide interaction with client and/or stakeholders

For the past 30+ years, Amec Foster Wheeler has been involved in a variety of pavement projects, including forensic investigations, for state and federal transportation agencies. Many of these projects have involved interaction and communication with stakeholders via webinars, video conferencing, teleconferencing, newsletters, meetings/briefings, presentations to wide and target audiences including elected officials, citizens, and the public. For example: ► Maryland State Highway Administration, Pavement Management Services. Amec

Foster Wheeler prepared a Transportation Asset Management Committee newsletter to disseminate information on infrastructure management to over 2000 SHA stakeholders.

► FHWA’s Technical Support Services Contract for the LTPP Program. As the prime contractor for this multi-decade study of over 2,500 pavement test sections initiated under the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) in 1987 and continued by



FHWA since 1992, Amec Foster Wheeler performs collaboration and coordination with a wide variety of State DOT stakeholders through expert task group (ETG) meetings, communication channels, and national/regional meetings. The products of the LTPP program developed by Amec Foster Wheeler have been adopted by most DOTs in the United States and include protocols and manuals (including calibration procedures) for distress, profile, FWD, traffic, and materials. Most of the current production of pavement engineering data collection specifications in use today were pioneered by Amec Foster Wheeler through its involvement with the LTPP program. This project has resulted in development of the world’s largest pavement asset performance database.

► FHWA’s Pavement Management Systems Peer Exchange Program. For this project, Amec Foster Wheeler conducted two peer exchange meetings, prepared a report for each meeting, and brought together a total of fourteen State DOTs to share information and experiences on using PMS effectively. The exchanges also provided the opportunity to explain how the State DOTs use PMS to set priorities and make decisions.

Amec Foster Wheeler team personnel have either interacted face-to-face, conducted meetings, or presented relevant project information to its clients and stakeholders for many pavement related projects nationwide. SCORING CRITERIA 5. PROJECT DELIVERY APPROACH

A. Project Work Plan Preparation

Work plan preparation begins with establishing a clear understanding of WSDOT’s needs and anticipated outcomes. WSDOT, as the lead State, will instruct/guide the team with regards to the decision-making process (specifically when other SHAs that contributed to the Pooled Fund will be involved), and for ease of reference, this document refers directly to WSDOT although it is acknowledged that other SHAs are also likely to be involved. For the project at hand, this entails forensic evaluations of LTPP test sections, but there is more to it than just that. For example, does WSDOT want to focus on failures of LTPP test sections, regardless of distress mode, pavement type, and other factors? Or, does WSDOT want to pursue a more targeted approach, such as coring and/or trench studies of LTPP asphalt concrete test sections? The former will most likely lead to a series of case studies, each with its own evaluation report, while the latter will likely produce a more structured process that could potentially result in data for direct entry into the LTPP database and support generalized analysis and conclusions. Regardless of the selected option, the decision will define a clear path forward, which is critical to the success of the project. To achieve a clear understanding of WSDOT needs and anticipated outcomes, the proposed key staff -- Dr. Rada, Dr. Jones and Mr. Senn – will work together (brainstorm) at the start of the project to outline forensic evaluation options and, from those options, to identify the most appropriate for recommendation along with justification. Other important considerations that will need to be addressed at the start of the project include the following:



► What are the anticipated State DOT and LTPP program contributions (e.g., traffic control, coring and boring, deflection testing, laboratory testing, etc.). This is especially critical as it impacts on the project budget available.

► What is the anticipated outcome of the forensic evaluations; will it simply be a report or is the intent to populate the LTPP database with new data and information gained from the evaluations? This will ultimately depend on the approach selected by WSDOT.

The key staff, led by Dr. Rada as PM, will then meet with WSDOT project staff to define the path forward for the conduct of the identified LTPP section forensic evaluations. It is possible that more than one meeting may be necessary to arrive at a clear path forward, and that the meetings can be conducted face-to-face, via teleconference or a combination of the two. Once a clear path has been established, the key staff will work together to layout a detailed plan for conduct of the LTPP section forensic evaluations. It is anticipated that the plan will include the following elements: ► In coordination with Dr. Rada (PM), Mr. Senn (Agency Communications &

Coordination Lead) will communicate and coordinate with SHAs to identify LTPP test sections that could potentially be included in the list of candidates for forensic evaluation.

► In coordination with Dr. Rada, Dr. Jones (Forensic Investigations Lead) will define the framework that will be used for conduct of the LTPP section forensic evaluations in compliance with the protocols established in NCHRP Report 747. This framework will include, as a minimum, the following two key elements:

1. Formation of forensic evaluation teams – consistent with the approach recommended in Appendix A of NCHRP Report 747, which addresses generic issues, the Amec Foster Wheeler team will address the formation of the investigation teams. ► Permanent investigation team members

► Dr. Rada – will serve as investigations manager and safety lead

► Dr. Jones – will serve as investigations lead

► Mr. Senn – will serve as communications and coordination lead

► Mr. Gary Elkins – will be responsible for obtaining, reviewing and synthesizing data and information for each individual LTPP test section to be evaluated.

► SHA and/or FHWA representative(s) if desired by SHA/FHWA

► Other investigation team members

► One or two senior members will be selected from the forensic investigation team pool. The specific member(s) chosen will depend on the nature of the investigations. For example, if objectives are to address PCC-related issues, then Dr. Harvey will be a part of the team. On the other hand, if the focus is on AC pavements, then Mr. Jackson would be a more logical choice.

► Other resources – junior staff, field and lab technicians, clerical support, and field and lab equipment will also be addressed here.

► SHA and/or FHWA representative(s) if desired by SHA/FHWA



2. Formulation of a general approach to forensic evaluations – as recommended in Chapters 3 through 9 of NCHRP Report 747, a phased approach that includes the following elements will be implemented in the project, with highlights of those elements presented below. ► Communicate and coordinate with SHAs to identify candidate LTPP test

sections for forensic evaluation. Prepare a list of candidate LTPP test sections and rank them according to priority based on factors such as ability to support the NCHRP 747 approach, willingness of the SHA to support the evaluation, location of the test section, and availability of data in the LTPP database. It is recognized that this list and the priorities may change. Accordingly, the project team will only solicit approval from WSDOT to move forward with the evaluations on a section-by-section basis, such that the evaluations can be accomplished within a 6-month timeframe.

► The preliminary investigation will rely on data and information obtained by Mr. Elkins for the LTPP test section proposed for assessment, which will be reviewed by project key staff and other senior personnel from the forensic investigation team pool. Work effort in this stage of the investigation is expected to be minimal given that much of the required information is readily available in the LTPP database and that the proposed team members have intimate knowledge of the sections and performance histories for those types of data that the LTPP program collects.

► An investigation plan will be developed based on the preliminary investigation findings (but it is also recognized that the forensic evaluation may conclude at the preliminary investigation phase). This plan may include additional non-destructive testing to supplement data already captured in the LTPP database (e.g., additional FWD tests and GPR tests) and, if deemed necessary, destructive testing. If destructive testing is required, the investigation plan will be revised in line with the recommendations in NCHRP 747 to outline the destructive testing work and the justification for it. Safety issues will be considered in the decision on how best to undertake all investigations.

► Documentation – depending on decisions made in conjunction with WSDOT at the start of the project, this may entail the production of individual forensic evaluation reports and/or the entry of data and information from the forensic investigation into the LTPP database.

It is important to emphasize that due to the team’s unparalleled familiarity with LTPP program and database, the Amec Foster Wheeler team can address section-specific issues more effectively and efficiently. We have intimate knowledge of the LTPP test sections and performance histories for those types of data that LTPP collects. We are fully aware of what is available for each LTPP test section, including the presence of materials sitting in the LTPP Materials Reference Laboratory in Reno, Nevada, which could be required as part of the destructive and laboratory testing component of the phased approach. And, if there is a desire for information that LTPP does not have (e.g., GPR) for a given LTPP test section, we can incorporate those data as part of the NDT investigation component of the phased approach.



The above stage of the project should not require more than a month or two to complete, after which everything will be ready for the actual conduct of the LTPP section forensic evaluations. All that is required to move forward is approval from WSDOT. Once approval has been received, the project team will perform the following activities:

1. For each individual LTPP test section approved for evaluation by WSDOT, the project team will perform the following activities: ► Communicate with the respective SHA and confirm they will support the

forensic evaluation of the LTPP test section(s) within their jurisdiction.

► Assemble the forensic investigation team in accordance with the framework established at the start of the project.

► Prepare a detailed section evaluation work plan in accordance with the framework established at the start of the project, to include:

► List of tasks and subtasks to be carried out (within a phased approach)

► A schedule for tasks and subtasks, including milestones (e.g., completion of the preliminary investigation and determination of the need for additional data)

► Budget (taking into consideration agency and LTPP participation)

► Revise and finalize the section work plan based on WSDOT input and solicit approval to move forward with evaluation from WSDOT.

Once approval is received from WSDOT for a given test section work plan, the project team will execute the forensic evaluation in accordance with the established work plan.

A.2 Who is involved with the development of the work plan

Ultimate responsibility for development of the work plan falls entirely upon the proposed PM, Dr. Rada. However, as described in the previous section, Dr. Rada will work with the other two key staff members – Dr. Jones and Mr. Senn – to clearly define the overall approach to the LTPP forensic evaluations and desired outcomes as well as to formulate the general framework for conduct of the evaluations. Once those two key elements have been established, the key staff – Dr. Rada. Dr. Jones and Mr. Senn – will work with other senior staff members (Mr. Elkins as LTPP database specialist and one or two other members) from the forensic investigation team pool to develop the work plan for the individual LTPP forensic evaluations and, upon approval of the work plans by WSDOT, to carry out the evaluations in accordance with the work plans. These senior staff members – Mr. Elkins, Dr. Simpson, Dr. Harvey, Mr. Jackson, and Dr. Pierce – will be carefully chosen based on their experience and capabilities to maximize benefit to the evaluations.

A.3 Describe the elements of the proposed work plan

As referenced in the previous sections, there are key upfront elements to the proposed work plan, which are critical to defining the path forward for the project: ► Establishing the overarching approach to be used for the evaluations and defining

the anticipated outcomes from the evaluations – i.e., case studies or more targeted studies and individual reports or data for entry into the LTPP database.



► Establishing the general framework to be used in the evaluations, including formation of the evaluations teams and formulation of the general evaluation approach in accordance with NCHRP Report 747.

► Communications and coordination with SHAs to identify candidate LTPP test sections for evaluation, followed by the prioritization and the selection of test sections to undergo evaluation, and ultimately to the approval of test sections for evaluation by the WSDOT.

Once the above elements have been addressed, each forensic evaluation to be carried out as part of the project will require a work plan tailored to the LTPP test section, as such factors as ability of test section to support overarching approach, amount of information available in the LTPP database, agency willingness to support evaluation and location will vary from site to site. As stated earlier, each work plan will consist of the following three elements: (1) list of required tasks and subtasks, (2) schedule of activities and milestones and (3) budget (including agency and LTPP program participation, if any).

A.4 Describe how work plan addresses contingencies

The proposed work plan provides for contingencies through the high level of interactions with WSDOT. At the very start of the project, key staff will work with WSDOT to establish the overarching approach and desired outcomes, which will clearly guide the LTPP forensic evaluations. As part of this interaction, we expect to identify risks needing mitigation or contingencies. WSDOT staff will also be involved in the review and approval of the general framework to be used in the evaluations as well as the selection of LTPP test sections to be evaluated. Again, we expect to identify risks needing mitigation or contingencies as part of this step. Last, but certainly not least, the WSDOT will have the opportunity to review and comment on the work plan for each individual forensic evaluation, as well as to review and approve the work plans once revised based on WSDOT input. Another important consideration, which has been addressed earlier, but it is again raised and emphasized here is the level of participation and involvement of the SHAs participating in the LTPP forensic evaluations as well as of the LTPP program. Will agencies provide traffic control and coring and boring, if required? Will the LTPP program, via its regional contractors, provide deflection testing? This consideration is particularly critical in that it will determine the number of LTPP forensic evaluations that can be performed within the project’s budget.

B. Issue Resolution Approach

Amec Foster Wheeler’s quality management system described on pages 19-24 is the process by which we resolve issues with the project team, clients, and stakeholders.

C. Work Breakdown Structure Assumptions

The key assumption to verify in our proposed work breakdown structure is the level of interaction with WSDOT, and the availability of the project panel or empowered representative(s) to meet, review and to comment.



D. Key Project Issues and Critical Project Milestones

The key issue in pooled-fund projects is establishing a unified set of expectations from the project panel. It is very challenging for lead agencies to meld the range of views into a unified one. In light of this, the proposed work plan has been developed such that the very first element entails establishing the overarching approach and desired outcomes. Once accomplished, the project’s path forward is more clearly defined. Other key issues to consider include: ► Maximizing value of funding (could be in terms of number of projects, leveraging

SHA participation, inclusion of in-kind support from LTPP contractors, or big picture of addressing specific question across multiple projects)

► Many LTPP test sections are only going to be monitored one more time, so it is important to work with the LTPP team to leverage final monitoring with forensic evaluations when possible (saving agency costs for traffic control)

► Limited LTPP funding ► Knowing who in each SHA to coordinate with regarding individual investigations.

Similarly, critical milestones include: ► Finalizing overarching approach with WSDOT and the project panel ► Determining timing for test section monitoring (working with LTPP data collection

contractor) ► Initiating LTPP forensic evaluations ► Reporting on individual LTPP forensic evaluations ► Final Report, including overall findings and recommendations.

“connected excellence in all we do” Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. 1105 Lakewood Parkway, Suite 300 Alpharetta, GA 30009

Copyright 2013 Applied Research Associates, Inc. All Rights Reserved

PACKET A

Statement of Qualifications

Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Forensic Evaluation Services

June 13, 2017

Submitted to: [email protected]

Submitted by:

Applied Research Associates, Inc. Research Project Manager: Dr. Michael I. Darter, P.E. 100 Trade Centre Dr., Suite 200 Champaign, Illinois 61820 Phone: (217) 356-4500

Applied Research Associates, Inc. ‘

LTPP Forensic Evaluation Packet A

P a g e | 1.

Section 1: Qualification/Expertise of Firms on Team

Applied Research Associates, Inc. (ARA) appreciates the opportunity to submit to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) our qualifications for developing a “Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Forensic Evaluation” process for pavement sections prior to them being removed from service. This type of information has been needed for decades by LTPP and States to help assess why pavements fail, which was the major objective of the LTPP program. Answers to this question can lead directly to significant improvements in materials mixture design and selection, structural design, construction practices and specifications, and other areas such as rehabilitation.

We are a pavement engineering firm with over 37 years of experience providing innovative technologies and services in the areas of pavement technology (structural design, materials technologies, rehabilitation, and construction), performance evaluations and forensic analyses, pavement management and measurement, alternate contracting, asset management, highway safety, transportation operations, economic analysis and forecasting, and deployment planning and decision support.

A. Information on Prime Firm (ARA, Inc.) and Subcontractors ARA will serve as the prime contractor for this proposed work, and has teamed with HWA GeoSciences, Inc. (HWA) and Advanced Asphalt Technologies, Inc. (AAT). HWA is a certified DBE/MWBE located in Washington State and will be a major lab and field testing subcontractor. AAT is a certified SBE based in West Virginia, which will also perform laboratory testing of asphalt materials to support the forensic evaluation.

Our addresses are as follows:

Applied Research Associates, Inc. Applied Research Associates, Inc. 100 Trade Centre Drive, Suite 200 Michael I. Darter Champaign, IL 61820 3279 Seven Springs Drive 217.356.4500 Sandy, UT 84092 217.369.4500 HWA Geosciences, Inc. Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC Certified DBE/MWBE Certified SBE 21312 30th Drive SE, Suite 110 40 Commerce Circle Bothell, WA 98021 Kearneysville, WV 25430 425.774.0106 681.252.3329 As shown in Table 1, ARA does not have offices in the State of Washington or the Greater Portland Metropolitan Area, but does have senior staff—including the proposed project PM—located in surrounding States including Utah, California, Colorado, and Texas.



P a g e | 2.

Table 1. Types of expertise for each firm on ARA team.

Firm ARA, Inc. HWA, Inc. AAT, Inc. Types of Services

LTPP Regional Center; Pavement research; Forensic evaluations; Training courses; Pavement design & rehab; Pavement testing (Video vans, FWD, DCP); Environmental data collection

Asphalt materials testing; Concrete materials testing; Aggregate materials testing; Soils testing; Falling Weight Deflectometer; Dynamic Cone Penetrometer

Advanced asphalt testing; Dynamic modulus; Creep Compliance; Hamburg load test, etc.; Unbound aggregate and soil resilient modulus

How Long Provided Services

38 years 20 18

No. Employees in Washington

0 30 0

No. Employees Nationwide

1044 30 6

Figure 1 provides ARA’s proposed organizational chart for this project, including respective roles for each key staff member. Resumes of key personnel can be found as an appendix to Packet B. Short bios of each key staff are provided in section 3.



P a g e | 3.

Figure 1. Proposed organizational chart.

B. List of Each Team Member’s Offices within the State of Washington. HWA’s offices are located in Washington State, at 21312 30th Drive SE, Suite 110, Bothell, WA, 98021. Their team of 30 technical and administrative staff specialize in geotechnical and pavement engineering, hydrogeology, construction inspection, and other geoenvironmental and geoscience expertise.

C. Prime Consultant Prior Work with Sub-Consultants on Similar Projects ARA and AAT have worked together on a number of different projects in the past, including three in the past 3 years. On one of these, FHWA Deployment of Performance-Based Technologies for Mechanistic-Empirical (ME) Pavement Design and Resource Responsible Materials Design, ARA serves as a subcontractor to primary consultant Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC (AAT) on this project for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The objective of this project is to stimulate, facilitate, and expedite the adoption of performance-based technologies for ME Pavement Design; new and innovative resource responsible asphalt mixtures (R2AMs); and associated practices to improve life, performance, cost effectiveness, safety, and user satisfaction. This project started in September 2013 and is scheduled for completion by October 2017.

Although ARA and HWA have not teamed together on previous projects, we look forward to the prospect of working together on this and other projects in future.

D. Current Availability of Key Staff and Resources for Each Firm Key staff availability for this project is shown in Table 2. These hours represent the time that the key staff member can devote to this project if necessary.



P a g e | 4.

Table 2. Key staff availability (Hours per month).

Proposed Key Staff August -

December 2017

January – December

2018

January-July 2019

Michael Darter, Ph.D., P.E. (ARA) 75 Hrs/mo 75 Hrs/mo 75 Hrs/moHarold Von Quintus, P.E. (ARA) 40 40 40 Shreenath Rao, Ph.D., P.E. (ARA) 40 40 40 William Vavrik, Ph.D., P.E. (ARA) 40 40 40 Biplab Bhattacharya, P.E. (ARA) 100 100 100 Deepak Raghunathan (ARA) 40 40 40 Bryan Hawkins, P.E. (HWA) 60 60 60 Steven Greene, LG, LEG (HWA) 20 20 20 Ramon Bonaquist, Ph.D., P.E. (AAT) 20 20 20 Laboratory (AAT, 3 technicians) 80 80 80

Note: The hours listed in this table for each month are based on an average of 1,850 hours per year, which excludes holiday and vacation time. This translates to 154.16 hours per month full time.

E. List of Three Projects That Each Firm has Completed within 3 Years Related to This Project

The following recent projects (completed within the past 3 years) demonstrate ARA’s expertise related to the scope of this project.

Impact of Environmental Factors on Pavement Performance in the Absence of Heavy Loads. This was a major LTPP forensic type research project involving the SPS-8, SPS-1 and SPS-2, and GPS-1 and 3 experiments (FHWA/LTPP, 2011-2015, $269,632). Dr. Darter was the PI and Mr. Von Quintus was the Co-PI. This project utilized all of these SPS and GPS experimental sections in the US (including those in Washington State) to analyze the relative impact of environmental effects (temperature, moisture, and subgrade) and truck loadings on the performance of HMA pavements and JPCP. The work included the following major tasks: (1) data assembly from the LTPP database for all of these sections, (2) comprehensive reviews of the data, including materials test results, FWD testing, and performance, (3) engineering and statistical analyses of the performance data to ascertain the significant environmental effects and the truck loading effects (assessments of what caused the various distresses were made for many of these LTPP sections to make sure that similarly caused distress types were comparable between sections), (4) computation of the proportion of damage caused by environmental (climate and subgrade) effects, and (5) the preparation of the final technical report that provided many practical recommendations on ways to improve design, construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of HMA and JPCP pavements. Some amazing findings were discovered relative to causation of some distresses. The Tech Brief is published (FHWA-HRT-16-078) and the final report is in FHWA publication. Implementation and Calibration of the MEPDG in Georgia, Report Number FHWA/GA-014-11-17, Georgia Department of Transportation, Materials Research and Testing, Forest Park, Georgia, June 2015; 2012 to 2015; $500,000.Mr. Von Quintus was the Principal Investigator and project manager for this project. Other ARA staff that participated within this study included: Dr. Michael Darter and Mr. Biplab Bhattacharya. The project included multiple activities for



P a g e | 5.

evaluating and calibrating the Pavement ME Design software in Georgia. One objective of the implementation project was to calibrate the MEPDG global distress transfer functions to local conditions. The Georgia Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) and non-LTPP roadway segments were used for the verification-calibration-validation process. Field forensic investigations were completed for all of the non-LTPP test sections. The field investigation included the use of visual distress surveys, DCP testing, FWD testing, coring to recover materials for visual inspection and laboratory testing, and volumetric and engineering property testing for explaining the difference in performance between the different test sections. One of the first activities of the implementation project was to verify or confirm that the MEPDG transfer functions and global calibration coefficients derived from NCHRP project 1-40D reasonably predict distresses and smoothness in Georgia. The Task Order 1, Task 2 interim report focused on using the Georgia LTPP test sections to confirm the applicability of the global calibration coefficients. The interim report concluded some of the transfer functions exhibited significant bias between the measured and predicted distress and require local calibration.

The Task Order 2, Task 5 Interim Report documented the local calibration of the transfer functions using LTPP and non-LTPP roadway segments. The calibration process followed the procedure presented in the 2010 AASHTO MEPDG Local Calibration Guide. GDOT calibration coefficients were derived to remove bias for the rutting, fatigue cracking, and thermal cracking transfer functions of flexible pavements, and the faulting and fatigue cracking transfer functions of rigid pavements. The global coefficients of the smoothness degradation regression equation for flexible and rigid pavements were also checked and calibrated as needed for their applicability to Georgia conditions.

Results from the field investigations assisted in making decisions to segregate the data used in the calibration study and deriving the GDOT calibration coefficients for use in new pavement and rehabilitation design. Some of the test sections were found to exhibit stripping and premature cracking for AC mixtures containing high RAP contents. These high RAP content mixtures were eventually excluded from the data set used to establish the calibration coefficients to be used in the future because the material and mixture specifications for those older high RAP mixtures were no longer being used and had been revised. Mixtures designed and placed under the new mixture specifications were found to be performing satisfactorily.

Characterizing Existing Asphalt Concrete Layer Damage for Mechanistic Pavement Rehabilitation Design, Contract No. DTFH61-14-C-00024, Draft Report Submitted January 2016, Final report in publication; 2014 to 2017; $250,000. Designing rehabilitation strategies for a flexible pavement exhibiting various types and levels of distress is a challenge. An important factor related to the design of a rehabilitation strategy is the use of a reliable procedure to evaluate the in-place condition of the pavement. A project-level pavement evaluation program consists of multiple activities to assess structural condition, identify the types of deterioration, and determine the cause of deficiencies that need to be addressed during rehabilitation.

One of the critical steps for evaluating the in place structural condition of the existing pavement layers is deflection basin testing. Deflection basins are used to backcalculate elastic layer modulus of the existing asphalt concrete layers, which is considered input level 1 for rehabilitation designs in accordance with the Mechanistic Empirical Pavement Design Guide



P a g e | 6.

(MEPDG). Most agencies measure deflection basins as part of their pavement evaluation program, but few actually use that data to determine the in-place condition of the asphalt concrete layers. Deflection data are used to establish analysis sections and/or estimate the resilient modulus of the subgrade soils. However, more recently agencies have started to use the backcalculated elastic layer modulus to determine the amount of in place fatigue damage in the existing asphalt concrete layers.

The goal of this research was to evaluate the existing overlay design procedure using the MEPDG input level 1 rehabilitation methodology. In other words, provide proof of concept for estimating the in-place damage of HMA layers from FWD deflection basins through backcalculated elastic layer moduli for use in rehabilitation design. Some of the findings from this study are listed below:

1. The relationship between surface cracking and structural capacity of pavement structures was investigated using field data from FHWA testing facilities. Results suggest the backcalculated moduli of the AC layers can be reduced by 20 to 50 percent before any cracking appears on the surface. This demonstrated the loss of structural capacity of AC pavements before surface cracking, and the fact that using surface cracking by itself (rehabilitation input level 2) to assess damage might underestimate cumulative damage.

2. The inverse of load duration, t, and simply assuming 30 Hz were both used to evaluate and compare the laboratory measured and backcalculated dynamic modulus. In summary, a frequency of 30 Hz was recommended for use in adjusting the undamaged master curve based on the AC backcalculated elastic moduli.

3. Results from this study suggest the backcalculated elastic modulus includes a bias relative to the laboratory dynamic modulus and that bias is temperature dependent. In the interim, it was recommended that an adjustment factor be applied to the backcalculated elastic modulus values entered into the Pavement ME Design software, similar to the c-factors for unbound layers.

4. The modulus ratio (EFWD/EUndamaged) was not highly correlated to the amount of fatigue cracking and there was no consistent trend in the change of the ratio over time. The other important conclusion from these comparisons and analyses is that large differences in the design or predicted amount of fatigue cracking can be expected between rehabilitation input levels 1 and 2, everything being equal. The key issue is top-down versus bottom-up cracking. Cores are needed to confirm the type of cracking in terms of using and comparing rehabilitation input levels 1 and 2 in the Pavement ME Design software.

The following recent three projects (completed within the past 3 years) demonstrate HWA GeoSciences Inc.’s expertise related to the scope of this project.

Madison Street Corridor Bus Rapid Transit, Seattle, Washington (August 2015 through January 2016).

Mr. Hawkins Served as Project Manager for a geotechnical and pavement engineering study to evaluate existing pavement conditions along each alignment of the proposed corridor for the



P a g e | 7.

anticipated Madison Street Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) street system. This involved a total of about 4.8 miles of corridor improvements and roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction to accommodate the new BRT and the resulting revised traffic patterns and loading. Bryan performed Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing along all travel lanes proposed for BRT traffic and performed 11 pavement cores to assess existing pavement thicknesses and subgrade support. He prepared site specific traffic control plans for the fieldwork, which was all performed at night to minimize disruption to traffic. Mr. Hawkins used the results of the pavement core data, supplemented by pavement thicknesses from City of Seattle records vault searches, to analyze the FWD data. Bryan prepared a report presenting the results of FWD testing and pavement coring, along with the normalized maximum FWD deflections and backcalculated subgrade resilient moduli values to be used for new pavement design along the corridor. HWA fee was $28,670.

Redmond Pavement Preservation, Redmond, Washington (March 2015 through December 2015).

Mr. Hawkins served as Project Manager for a geotechnical and pavement engineering study to assess 148th Avenue NE, a four-lane arterial, in Redmond, Washington. Specific project tasks included conducting a visual assessment of pavement condition and distress identification, pavement coring, Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing, performing engineering analyses, and preparing the Geotechnical and Pavement Engineering Report summarizing the results of the geotechnical investigation and providing our recommendations for pavement rehabilitation alternatives. The results of FWD testing and pavement coring indicated that the existing pavement was relatively thick and structurally adequate to support the anticipated traffic; however, the upper lift of HMA was not bonded to the lower lifts over part of the alignment and was the result of the observed distress. Recommendations were provided for grinding and overlay in these areas, and areas where no remedial work was necessary were identified. HWA fee was $14,330.

4th Avenue S and Nickerson Street Pavement Inventory and Evaluation, Seattle, Washington (June 2016 through November 2016).

Mr. Hawkins served as Project Manager for a geotechnical and pavement engineering study to evaluate existing pavement conditions along each alignment through visual evaluation of pavement distresses, pavement coring, and Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD) testing. HWA prepared traffic control plans for the fieldwork, performed FWD testing of all travel lanes for each alignment, and performed pavement coring in 20 locations along 4th Avenue and 5 locations along Nickerson Street. The results of the FWD testing and pavement coring were used assess the pavement response to loading and to backcalculate subgrade resilient moduli values for use in new pavement design. HWA fee was $33,470.

The following recent three projects (completed within the past 3 years) demonstrate Advanced Asphalt Technologies, LLC (AAT) expertise related to the scope of this project.

Forensic Analysis Runway 7/25 Rehabilitation Saipan International Airport

AAT completed this forensic evaluation project in 2014. The project included testing and analysis to identify the cause of spalling and closure of grooves that occurred shortly after



P a g e | 8.

construction of an overly placed in 2013. The scope of this investigation included testing and analysis of asphalt concrete cores from the pavement and analysis of the resulting data. This forensic investigation concluded that the distresses were the result of segregation in the asphalt mixture that occurred after plant mixing. The grooves were spalling in areas that segregated coarse while the grooves were closing in areas that segregated fine. Coarse segregated areas had low asphalt content and high air voids. Areas segregated fine had high asphalt content and low air voids. Based on the extent of the segregation, it was recommended that the overlay be removed and replaced. AAT’s fee for these services was $30,000.

Contact: William Hofschneider, P.E., Hofschneider Engineering, LLC 2nd Floor JET Bldg. Middle Road, Gualo Rai, Saipan, MP 96950, (670) 234-2362, [email protected]

Wisconsin Highway Research Program Project 0092-14-06, Critical Factors Affecting Asphalt Concrete Durability

AAT completed this project in 2016. This project evaluated changes to the composition of asphalt concrete mixtures that the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) should consider to improve the durability of flexible pavements constructed in Wisconsin. Based on a synthesis of current research, a laboratory experiment was conducted to quantify the effect of: (1) effective binder volume, (2) low temperature performance grade, (3) recycled binder content, and (4) polymer modification on the resistance of typical Wisconsin mixtures to aging and load associated cracking. For the types of mixtures normally used in Wisconsin, the laboratory experiment found mixture composition had little effect on aging; however, cracking resistance was significantly affected. The laboratory experiment produced a regression equation that was used to evaluate current WisDOT specification requirements. This evaluation concluded that recent specification changes made by WisDOT will improve the cracking resistance of asphalt concrete mixtures, with the greatest improvement occurring for overlays in the Southern Asphalt Zone. The regression equation was also used to recommend additional specification changes that WisDOT should consider. AAT’s fee for these services was $250,000.

Contact: Barry Paye, P.E., Wisconsin Department of Transportation, 3502 Kinsman Blvd, Madison, WI 53704, (608) 246-7945, [email protected]

ANR Robinson International Airport, Tobago

AAT completed this project in 2016. The work include: (1) a forensic investigation to determine the cause of bleeding in an overlay placed in 2013, (2) on-site technical assistance during emergency repair work, and (3) asphalt materials testing in support of rehabilitation design. The forensic investigation included testing and analysis of cores from the airport runway to determine the cause of bleeding that appeared shortly after construction. The testing and analysis concluded that the bleeding was caused by excessive asphalt content in the mixture. The on-site technical assistance included observation of: (1) asphalt production, (2) quality control testing, and (3) paving during emergency repair work to maintain safe operations. Finally, asphalt cores from selected locations in the runway and taxiway are were tested as part of the design of rehabilitation to address the bleeding and other deficiencies in the 2013 overlay. AAT’s fee for these services was $70,000



P a g e | 9.

Contact: Nate Walnum, P.E., Kimley-Horn, 1001 W. Southern Ave., Suite 131 Mesa, AZ 85020, (480) 207-2682, [email protected]

Section 2: Qualifications of Proposed Project Manager

A. Project Manager Background and Experience Dr. Michael Darter, P.E., the proposed project manager, received his BS (1966) and MS (1968) in Civil Engineering from the University of Utah, and PhD (1973) in Civil Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. He worked for the Utah DOT for 4 years in asphalt pavement materials and design and 2 years closely with the Texas DOT developing and implementing the pavement design reliability procedure (still used today). After his PhD, he served as a professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Illinois for 30 years teaching asphalt and concrete pavement design, materials, and evaluation (created CE 421, the first university class in pavement evaluation and rehabilitation). He then worked the past 16 years as a principal civil engineer for ARA. The main thrust of Darter’s work experiences over many years has been in the field, observing and testing and evaluating countless asphalt and concrete pavements throughout North America and many other countries. He is an international expert in pavements, and has been awarded numerous awards/honors from Transportation Research Board, International Society for Concrete Pavements (Honorary Member), Association of Asphalt Pavement Technologists (Life Member), University of Minnesota, and the University of Illinois. Some of Dr. Darter’s recent work relevant to the proposed WSDOT effort includes the following.

Impact of Environmental Factors on Pavement Performance in the Absence of Heavy Loads. As detailed above, this was a major research project involving SPS-8, SPS-1 and 2, GPS-1, 2, and 3 experiments (2011-2014, $269,632). Dr. Darter was the principal investigator and Harold Von Quintus the Co-PI. Darter directed the overall conduct of the study including data assembly from the LTPP database, many reviews of the distress data including field visits to ascertain causation of distress, engineering and statistical analyses of the performance data, and preparation of the final technical report with many practical findings related to all types of distress and IRI for asphalt and concrete pavements located in four different environments.

Dr. Darter prepared the Tech Brief which describes the damage caused by both loading and environmental effects. This analysis, which looked at data collected over a 15-year period, also identified many practical design, climatic and materials effects, and a couple of surprising results. For example, many HMA pavement transverse cracks were located in warm, non-freeze climates (causation: shrinkage), and far more of these cracks occurred under heavier than lighter truck traffic (truck loading has fatigue impact on transverse cracks initiation); see FHWA-HRT-16-078. For JPCP, transverse fatigue cracking occurred much more in warm then cold climates due to high gradients, but joint faulting occurred much more in cold than warm climates due to joint openings and lower LTE. Joint spalling occurred much more in freeze thaw climates than warmer climates to name just a few. North Central LTPP Regional Coordination Office (NCRCO). Dr. Darter served as the Director of the LTPP NCRCO from June 1996 to June 2003 (over $10 million). He oversaw and coordinated the collection of field performance data for approximately 800 pavement test sites



P a g e | 10.

within a region consisting of 13 States and 2 Canadian Provinces. He supervised the processing of the collected data into a regional information management system (RIMS), which when combined with the databases from the other three LTPP regions, comprises the largest single collection of pavement performance data in the world.

As part of the data collection efforts, the ARA NCRCO performed deflection testing, gathered longitudinal and transverse profile data, and documented pavement surface distresses. Longitudinal pavement profiles were collected annually using high-speed inertial and inclinometer-based profile measuring systems. Additional data collection was performed at seasonal monitoring sites and more than a dozen automated weather stations throughout the region. ARA collected, processed, and completed quality control reviews for all of this data. Traffic data collected by the participating agencies were processed and reviewed for quality and completeness by ARA before loading into the LTPP database. Dr. Darter was also frequently called upon to conduct forensic studies of individual LTPP sections that were deteriorating and ready to be taken out of service. A decade before, he developed the initial version of the LTPP Distress Identification Manual so this was not difficult for his level of experience. Investigation of Longitudinal Cracking on I-55 Near Osceola, Arkansas. This forensic investigation was conducted for Koss Construction Co. regarding longitudinal cracking on a newly constructed 8-mile section of I-55 near the city of Osceola, AR ($16,358 ARA portion). Dr. Darter was the project manager and Dr. Rao was the technical expert that was conducted in June-August 2015. This was a preliminary investigation of the development and causes of early longitudinal cracking on this project and to recommend potential solutions. Longitudinal cracking of the JPCP unbonded overlay began to develop within a year of placement. Longitudinal cracks located near longitudinal joints initiated early on and based on cores through the joints were obviously caused by failure to provide proper sawing depth into the slab. These did not continue to increase over time. Other longitudinal cracks, however, have occurred in the center of the wheelpaths and these appear to continue to develop and increase from week to week. A number of cores were taken through the longitudinal cracks developing between wheel paths. These cores revealed that the cracks were initiating from the top of slab and progressed downward through the slab depth and length. Design data were obtained and cores were measured and sent to a lab for testing of modulus, strength, and coefficient of thermal expansion. Finite element analysis was conducted modeling the truck loading on the pavement. The following results were obtained: Longitudinal cracks initiate at the top of the slab and progress downward through the slab are fatigue cracks primarily caused by tensile bending stresses between the truck wheel loads. The 9-in JPCP unbonded overlay had a 14 ft widened slab cross section that resulted in increased tensile stress between the wheel paths at top of slab. The cores from the lab indicated a very high CTE value for the river gravel used in the PCC slab. This very high CTE (6.9*10-6 /F) resulted in greatly increased top of slab bending stresses whenever there were high negative thermal gradients through the slab. The exceedingly high truck traffic on I-55 through the project site resulted in many heavy loadings and tensile bending stresses. The AAHSTO93 design procedure consider none of the critical design and material features like widened slab and



P a g e | 11.

CTE. Thus, fatigue cracking of the unbonded overlay JPCP was not surprising. Over the years, Dr. Darter has conducted research and consulting projects for many States, NCHRP, and the FHWA that included some in the State of Washington. He has presented a number of pavement design, construction, and rehabilitation training courses for the WSDOT staff since 1980 (over 100 Pavement Evaluation & Rehab courses). He surveyed several projects in the State of Washington as part of FHWA national research projects. He is familiar with relevant State and Federal regulations and procedures for research studies and the WSDOT Research Procedures Manual, dated January 2007.

B. Project Manager’s Familiarity with Relevant State and Federal Regulations and/ or procedures.

Dr. Darter has decades of extensive experience working with highway agencies, and has a solid understanding of public agency regulations/procedures with respect to conducting studies, disseminating study findings, and managing the administrative aspects of contracts. The ARA team has active contracts with several government agencies, including FHWA, the FAA, Illinois Tollway, Florida DOT, Maryland SHA, and others. Over 80 percent of ARA clients are public agencies at the Federal, State, and local levels. As a result, our business structure is flexible and well suited to perform work under a wide range of local regulations.

As a Federal contractor, ARA is subject to numerous regulations pertaining to hiring practices, accounting and invoicing, DCAA audits, insurance coverage, and contracting. ARA has policies in place to ensure conformance with these regulations. Dr. Darter has successfully dealt with these policies and procedures for decades as project manager of many large contracts similar to this project.

C. Three Examples of Proposed Project Manager’s ability to Manage All of the following within a Project:

a. Project schedule b. Scope of work/scope creep c. Budget issues d. Changes that arise throughout the life of the project

The following example illustrates Dr. Darter’s ability to manage project schedule, scope creep, and changes that arise throughout the life of a major complex project:

Calibration and Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide in Arizona. This study began in 2010 and ended in 2014 and was broken down into 11 tasks, each with a scheduled beginning and end. Dr. Darter was the overall project manager and was responsible for completing several tasks himself. He worked closely with three other ARA pavement researchers who were each skilled in areas required, including traffic, asphalt, concrete, unbound materials, climate, data collection and measurement, statistical analyses, pavement performance, pavement modeling of distress, and of course the AASHTO mechanistic-empirical pavement design procedure.



P a g e | 12.

Completion on schedule: The original schedule called for completion in 3 years. Most tasks were completed on schedule, but some were completed earlier and some later than scheduled for a variety of reasons related to Arizona DOT limitations and a change in scope. The contract was extended 12 months to allow for completion of the final editing and production of the final report (mostly performed by ADOT) which required significant time. The following summarizes the work schedule completed on each task:

Task 1. Review Previous Work and Prepare Detailed Work Plan (on schedule) Task 2. Assemble Available Data (on schedule) Task 3. Prepare detailed Work Plan (on schedule) Task 4. Collect and Summarize All Required Additional Data (took 20 percent longer

than expected; Arizona DOT Falling Weight Deflectometer data took longer than expected, plus the DOT added “new composite” pavements)

Task 5. Calibrate the Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) for Arizona (on schedule except for the asphalt rutting prediction model, which took 30 percent longer to complete)

Task 6. Validate the Calibrated Version for Arizona (took 30 percent less time than scheduled, except for the asphalt rutting model)

Task 7. Prepare Final Version for Arizona (required 20 percent less time than scheduled) Task 8. Practical Methodology to Recalibrate MEPDG (on schedule) Task 9: Deliver Implementable Arizona-Calibrated MEPDG and User’s Guide (on

schedule) Task 10. Prepare Final Report (draft report delivered on schedule, but the Arizona DOT

technical and editorial process took 50 percent longer than scheduled) Task 11. Training (on schedule)

Scope of work/scope creep: Although the scope of work was clearly written and defined to minimize scope creep, research projects such as this are particularly susceptible to scope creep based on the nature of discoveries that are made during the conduct of the project and the multi-year length of the contract. For this project, the scope included the primary asphalt and concrete pavements and overlays of these pavements, but it was soon discovered that the special thin overlay of an asphalt rubber friction course (ARFC) of newly constructed JPCP was a significant “new” pavement type in the existing network for heavily trafficked highways and it was performing very well over a number of years. When the ARA team realized this they communicated this to the Arizona DOT, and discussion led to an agreement to include a number of these designs since Arizona had been building these composite pavements to reduce noise in urban areas. A special grouping of these ARFC/JPCP were surveyed, data collected, and included in the local validation process for fatigue cracking and rutting, which proved to be unbiased using the MEPDG AC Overlay/JPCP procedure. A slight reduction in the number of asphalt (flexible) pavements was made since there were already nearly 100 of these sections in the database. This tradeoff provided the DOT with a validated procedure for new ARFC/JPCP for design, as well as sufficient number of other pavement types. ARA is always willing to consider ways to improve on the deliverables to make for a more successful research project.



P a g e | 13.

Budget issues: The project had a well thought out budget that itemized labor and fees and other direct costs. Careful management of costs made it possible to deliver all of the project deliverables within the original allowed budget.

Changes that arise throughout the life of the project: Many changes can occur during the life of a research project as new discoveries are made which clarify the most appropriate direction to take. These discoveries are always immediately communicated with the sponsoring agency, and a revised scope is sometimes needed. The consideration of an additional type of pavement in the Arizona DOT MEPDG validation is a good example of that. Other than that, there were no other significant changes in staffing, or scope of the work. The final technical report is available online at: https://www.azdot.gov/planning/research-center/library/research-reports. Mr. Paul Burch was the ADOT project manager of the work ([email protected]).

D. Professional Licenses/Accreditations of Proposed Project Manager Dr. Darter holds Professional Engineering licenses in four US States (Utah since 2011, Illinois since 1997, Arizona since 1988, and Maryland since 2008). He does not have a PE license in the State of Washington.

Section 3: Key Team Member Qualifications (Prime and Sub-Consultants)

A. Examples of Prior Relevant Projects and Understanding of WSDOT and/or public agency regulations/procedures.

For each proposed key team member, three examples of prior relevant projects are provided. The name of projects; dates of the projects; and roles/responsibilities for each team member on the project are provided. Resumes for key team members can be found as an appendix to packet B.

Harold Von Quintus, PE Mr. Harold Von Quintus will serve as a technical expert for HMA or flexible pavements and rehabilitation. Mr. Von Quintus has nearly 42 years of experience and successfully carried out similar responsibilities as the PI or Co-PI for several FHWA, NCHRP, and other agency projects that involved pavement forensic investigation including the use of: nondestructive testing, materials testing and characterization, and application and use of mechanistic-empirical (M-E) based techniques for pavement rehabilitation design. Mr. Von Quintus has also lead and/or been a major contributor to numerous LTPP projects. He served as the Quality Assurance Manager of the Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Southern Regional Coordination Office contract from 1988 to1992. He was also one of the only in-house consultants to the SHRP Asphalt Research Program from 1991 to 1993. Mr. Von Quintus continues to participate in multiple projects related to analyzing the performance of LTPP test sections and using the LTPP database for various projects.

Mr. Von Quintus has led forensic investigations for multiple clients, three of which are briefly described below.

Cadillac Asphalt, Analysis of Premature Cracking in Cold-In Place Recycled Asphalt Pavement, 2008: Mr. Von Quintus served as an expert consultant on this



P a g e | 14.

potential litigation project (Contractor versus City). A preliminary forensic investigation was completed to correlate the amount and severity of cracking to specific features of the rehabilitation project. The investigation consisted of a distress survey (video-taping of the entire project) and a relatively few number of cores to explain the causes of the cracking (inadequate structure for the existing traffic).

Georgia Department of Transportation, Detection of Stripping in Hot Mix Asphalt, 2004 – 2006: Served as a Co-PI on this study which consisted of multiple forensic investigations to explain the premature failure of selected rehabilitation projects. The study included the use of the infrared camera, seismic testing with the PSPA, FWD deflection basin testing, GPR, cores, and laboratory tests (dynamic modulus, indirect tensile strength, volumetric property measurements, etc.) to determine the condition of the in place HMA layers prior to placement of overlays. The study resulted in a procedure using nondestructive testing to identify layers that were expected to exhibit stripping or moisture damage. The procedure was used on other projects to validate the procedure.

Montana Department of Transportation, Development of Pavement Performance Models, Contract No. HWY-322-DT, 2000-2007: Served as the PI on this study which included a forensic investigation of non-LTPP projects to identify the location and initiation of rutting and cracking exhibited on several roadway segments for use in calibrating the MEPDG. Some of these roadway segments have exhibited exceptional performance. Deflection basin testing, cores, borings, DCP testing, and materials testing (dynamic modulus, resilient modulus, triaxial strength, indirect tensile strength and creep compliance, and binder testing was used to characterize all pavement layers for use in calibrating the MEPDG and determine the reason for much less distress than similar flexible pavements in the adjacent states. The MEPDG was calibrated to local conditions and materials, and the exceptional performance was found to be related to improved rolling or compaction practices resulting in mixtures with consistently lower air voids and higher densities.

Biplab Bhattacharya, PE Mr. Bhattacharya will serve as Assistant Project Manager. In this capacity he will assist Dr. Darter in all aspects of the project from monitoring the budget to ensuring that various work items are underway in a timely fashion and are completed in an acceptable way. He will assist in (1) data retrieval, processing, and assembling for each of the LTPP sections required, and (2) organize expert review of the LTPP sections for appropriate failure mechanisms. Mr. Bhattacharya has been working with the LTPP database since 2006 on many FHWA/LTPP program studies for asphalt and concrete pavements. For example, he served as the lead engineer in assembling all of the LTPP data for sections in AZ, CO, GA, PA, WI, and WY used in the MEPDG local calibrations. He also assisted in the performance data analysis of these sections in several projects, as listed below.

Local Calibration and Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide in Pennsylvania; 2015-2017. Mr. Bhattacharya served as Project Manager responsible for all aspects of the project. The project included a forensic investigation of non-LTPP projects to identify the location and initiation of distresses exhibited on several roadway segments used in local calibration of the MEPDG. Field testing includes manual distress surveys. Laboratory tests for characterizing pavement layers include: asphalt dynamic modulus, asphalt low temperature indirect tensile



P a g e | 15.

strength and creep compliance, asphalt intermediate temperature indirect tensile strength, asphalt repeated load plastic deformation, PCC compressive strength, PCC elastic modulus, PCC coefficient of thermal expansion, resilient modulus of soil and aggregate base materials, Atterberg limits.

Local Calibration and Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide in Colorado; 2009-2014. Mr. Bhattacharya served as the lead engineer responsible for assembling all of the LTPP data for sections used in the MEPDG local calibrations. The project included a forensic investigation of non-LTPP projects to identify the location and initiation of distresses exhibited on several roadway segments used in local calibration of the MEPDG. Field testing includes: deflection basin testing, cores, manual distress surveys, Hamburg Wheel Tracker (HWT), and trenching. Laboratory tests for characterizing pavement layers include: asphalt dynamic modulus, asphalt low temperature indirect tensile strength and creep compliance, asphalt intermediate temperature indirect tensile strength, asphalt repeated load plastic deformation, PCC compressive strength, PCC elastic modulus, PCC coefficient of thermal expansion, resilient modulus of soil and aggregate base materials, Atterberg limits.

Local Calibration and Implementation of the AASHTO Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide in Arizona; 2010-2014. Mr. Bhattacharya served as the lead engineer responsible for assembling all of the LTPP data for sections used in the MEPDG local calibrations. The project included a forensic investigation of non-LTPP projects to identify the location and initiation of distresses exhibited on several roadway segments used in local calibration of the MEPDG. Some of these roadway segments have exhibited exceptional performance. Defection testing was performed.

Shreenath Rao, Ph.D., P.E. Dr. Shreenath Rao will serve as a technical expert for PCC or rigid pavements and rehabilitation. Over the past 20 years, Dr. Rao has led, managed, and participated as a researcher, consultant, and instructor in a wide variety of projects that included forensic analyses of concrete pavements, pavement design, pavement performance modeling, field distress surveys, experimental design, data collection and analysis, specifications development, contracting methods, construction monitoring, mechanistic-empirical design, analytical modeling, forensic analyses, and cost analyses. Throughout his career, he has worked closely with highway agencies at all levels and is intimately familiar with public agency regulations and procedures. Dr. Rao has experience specifically in JPCP rehabilitation, including restoration, and will serve as an expert reviewer of the SPS-2 sections for appropriate preservation treatments. He took a major role in the study that provided the first factual data from around the US on the survival (or extra preservation life) of JPCP restoration projects, as well as other research relevant to the proposed WSDOT effort, as described below:

The Longevity and Performance of Diamond-Ground Pavements. This project was sponsored by the Portland Cement Association Research and Development group in 1999. Dr. Rao took a leading role in (1) conducting a comprehensive review of existing information on diamond grinding, (2) field data collection of JPCP from all over the US and cleaning of the data, (3) survival analysis of the restored JPCP projects, and (4) documentation of the study findings. Dr. Rao conducted extensive field surveys to obtain the performance data needed for the analysis. In all, he surveyed 60 pavement sections in



P a g e | 16.

18 States. In addition, performance data for 133 sections were obtained from an earlier study of the performance of diamond ground pavements conducted for the FHWA. The data from the LTPP sections (JPCP rehabilitation) were also used to conduct direct side-by-side comparisons of the performance of diamond-ground pavement sections and other rehabilitation alternatives. Various analyses were conducted to document the performance of diamond-ground pavements, including an evaluation of faulting performance, longevity of diamond-ground texture, and the effects of diamond grinding on service life. Diamond-ground surfaces with appropriate other preservation treatments (e.g., joint resealing, spall repair, slab replacement) were demonstrated to provide an average of 14 additional years of service prior to another rehabilitation (either another grinding, an asphalt concrete overlay, or reconstruction). No evidence of any deleterious effects of diamond grinding was observed at any field site. The project report, written by Rao, Darter, and Yu, is titled, “The Longevity and Performance of Diamond-Ground Pavements,” Research and Development Bulletin RD118, Portland Cement Association, Skokie, Illinois, 1999.

Preventive Maintenance Process Analysis. This project was sponsored by the Ohio DOT in 2007. Dr. Rao took a leading role in (1) collecting and analyzing field data, (2) collecting and analyzing historical data from Ohio DOT’s database, (3) interviewing Ohio DOT regions and other key stakeholders, and (4) developing recommendations and presenting the initial work plan and the final results. As part of this research, ARA evaluated the performance and cost-effectiveness of various pavement treatments in Ohio for flexible, rigid, and composite pavements. The research report submitted to Ohio DOT was authored by Rao, Hein, and Smith and is titled “Preventive Maintenance Process Analysis,” 2007. Portions of this research were also presented and published in the proceedings of the First International Conference on Pavement Preservation, Newport Beach, CA, April 2010, authored by Hein and Rao, “Rational Procedures for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Pavement Preservation Treatments.”

Pavement Evaluation-Rehabilitation Strategy Selection Guide. This project was sponsored by FHWA in 2011. As part of this project, ARA was tasked to develop a detailed strategy selection guide for asphalt, concrete, and composite pavements. Dr. Rao led the effort for developing the portions of the guide pertaining to concrete pavements. The Pavement Evaluation Rehabilitation Strategy Selection Guide (Von Quintus, Rao, Mallela, and Darter) is a comprehensive but practical manual that provides pavement engineers with guidance for project-level pavement evaluation tools and rehabilitation strategies that minimize future maintenance and repair activities—the long-life pavement concept. The approach to strategy selection was divided into short-term strategies, design life strategies, and long-term strategies that were consistent with the MEPDG. The guide details items to consider while selecting a repair strategy, including cost analysis. Specifically for concrete pavements, the first step is identifying pavement condition. Only pavements with adequate strength and sufficient remaining life (structurally sound) were recommended for preventive maintenance or preservation treatments. The guide also included application and use summary of preservation methods including joint/crack sealing, partial-depth repairs, full-depth repairs, load transfer restoration, slab stabilization and slab jacking, and diamond grinding and grooving. ARA developed a 1-day workshop and presentation materials to disseminate the information included in the guide.



P a g e | 17.

Bryan Hawkins

Mr. Hawkins has over 17 years of experience performing geotechnical site investigations, project management, construction monitoring and inspection, and pavement testing using HWA’s in-house Falling Weight Deflectometer (FWD). He holds an MS degree in geotechnical engineering from the University of Cincinnati. He has performed geotechnical engineering on a broad range of projects including buildings, roadways, bridges, retaining structures, and storm and wastewater systems and facilities. Mr. Hawkins’ area of expertise involves pavement evaluations, FWD test data acquisition and processing, development of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) and Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement designs, as well as design of pavement rehabilitation alternatives. Mr. Hawkins also has extensive experience in deep and shallow foundation design; slope stability analyses; retaining wall design; and laboratory and field-testing of soils, concrete and asphalt. Mr. Hawkins currently manages HWA’s pavement department as well as the construction inspection and materials testing department.

Bryan has worked on many WSDOT funded projects and is very knowledgeable with their road and bridge procedures. He has extensive experience working within Everett and the surrounding locations and is familiar with the local geology and soils along with their behaviors allowing him to assess geotechnical challenges utilizing historical data.

Bryan served as Project Manager for all three of the HWA projects described in Section 1E.

Steven Greene, LG, LEG | Principal Senior Engineering Geologist, Vice President

Mr. Greene has over 30 years of experience in engineering geology, materials testing and construction required for roadway and wall foundations, critical area and geologic hazard assessments, borrow material evaluations, stormwater infiltration feasibility assessments, detention pond design, soil stabilization, pervious pavements, full depth pavement reclamation and other low impact development (LID) methods. He holds an MS in Geology from the University of Idaho. He has extensive experience conducting and managing exploration programs for large State, County and Municipal transportation projects including bridges, roadways, freeway lanes, transit facilities, and providing design input and construction QA during installation of pervious pavements. Past works have included MSE wall design ranging from 15 to 30 feet in height and roadway reconstruction utilizing cement stabilized recycled pavement. Mr. Greene also participates regularly on projects that require expertise regarding soil infiltration assessments and on-site disposal of storm water, or inception of groundwater seepage.

Ramon Bonaquist, Ph.D., P.E.,

Dr. Bonaquist has served as Principal Investigator and Project Manager on several research projects and engineering contracts with state highway agencies, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program and the Federal Highway Administration. Additionally as the Chief Operating Officer of AAT, he was also responsible for administration of the contracts. He has managed contracts with the Maryland State Highway Administration, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. Dr. Bonaquist has served as Project Manager, Principal Investigator, and Subject Matter Expert for



P a g e | 18.

several design, evaluation, research, development and training projects associated with asphalt materials and flexible pavements. Relevant and notable examples include:

Maryland State Highway Administration Contract BCS 2000-19: Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA)- Superpave Methodology Statewide: Dr. Ramon Bonaquist served as Project Manager for this task order project that provided specialized technical support to the Maryland State Highway Administration Asphalt Technical Team. All asphalt materials testing was performed in AAT’s laboratory. The services were provided on an as-needed basis between June 2001, and May 2008. A total of 18 task orders were completed. These task orders included evaluations of mixtures containing recycled asphalt pavement (RAP), evaluations of mixtures with warm mix additives, methods to improve the durability of asphalt concrete mixtures, training for the Asphalt Mixture Performance Tester, and evaluation of moisture sensitivity.

Wisconsin Highway Research Program Project 0092-10-06, Effect of Recovered Binders from Recycled Shingles and Increased RAP Percentages on Resultant Binder: Dr. Ramon Bonaquist served as Principal Investigator on this research project that was conducted between September 2009 and December 2011. The project evaluated the properties of recycled asphalt binders from Wisconsin sources. Continuous grading properties were measured for 18 recycled binder sources: 12 reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) sources and 6 recycled asphalt shingle sources (RAS). The data were used to evaluate the binder replacement criteria contained in the 2011 Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) Standard Specifications for Highway and Structure Construction using a reliability analysis. This analysis considered the variability of both the design pavement temperature and the blended binder in the mixture. Recommendations were made to improve the reliability of the low temperature grade of the binder in the mixtures when recycled sources are used. All testing for the project was performed in AAT’s laboratory.

PennDOT MEPDG Calibration Testing: This project was conducted under subcontract with Applied Research Associates. Dr. Bonaquist served as Project Manager for AAT’s work on this project that was conducted between October, 2015 and February 2017. The work included specimen fabrication and testing to measure Level 1 MEPDG characterization for various asphalt materials included in the local calibration performed by ARA. The tests included: (1) dynamic modulus, (2) low temperature creep and strength, (3) repeated load permanent deformation, and (4) intermediate temperature indirect tensile strength. All testing was performed in AAT’s laboratory.

The ARA team has extensive experience working with highway agencies, and we have a solid understanding of public agency regulations/procedures with respect to conducting studies, disseminating study findings, and managing the administrative aspects of contracts. The ARA team has active contracts with several government agencies, including FHWA, the FAA, Illinois Tollway, Florida DOT, Maryland SHA, and others.

Section 4: Firm’s Project Management System ARA’s quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) processes start with a culture of personal accountability, as we feel everyone is responsible for the quality of his/her work product every



P a g e | 19.

day. Providing direction to individuals who work on a project is the responsibility of the project manager.

The first tangible item prepared for a project is a project plan prepared by the project manager. The project plan covers all elements of project management, including contractual requirements, customer expectations, technical approach, reporting, budget, schedule, staffing, subcontracting, quality performance, and risk management/mitigation. The project manager will review this plan with each person working on the project so that everyone understands the objectives that will meet WSDOT’s needs.

As a matter of company policy, ARA also practices the “two person” rule—all essential work products and external communications will be reviewed by a second person competent in the subject before the product is transmitted to a customer. ARA also requires every project be reviewed at the 35 and 65 percent fiscal expenditure stages. These reviews are face-to-face sessions between the engineer and the reviewer that focus on the technical and cost progress of the project versus the schedule, so that we can identify potential problems early and develop economical solutions.

The project tracking system used by ARA is called E-Office; a screen shot is provided in figure 2. This web-based system offers the project manager up-to-date information about financials, past invoices, review reminders, and access to the contract document library. E-Office also has features for scheduling each project’s major deliverables and tracking the project budget versus the overall schedule. Dr. Darter has used E-Office to manage numerous projects at ARA.

Figure 2. Example screen shot of ARA’s E-Office.

Each project team assembled within ARA is led by the project manager, with support provided by key project engineers and technicians. Soon after the kick-off meeting with the client, ARA has an internal planning meeting involving all employees identified to work on the project. This meeting is led by the project manager, who reviews each task and deliverable. Key roles or task



P a g e | 20.

leaders are assigned to individuals who champion portions of the project and communicate directly with the project manager.

Internal communication typically involves face-to-face meetings between staff members. Other tools available for internal communication include office phones, cell phones, e-mail, and the ARA computer network that can be accessed by ARA employees regardless of their location. Large files can be transferred by using ARA’s FTP site or ShareFile as needed.

Dr. Darter will serve as the main point of contact for this project, thereby providing WSDOT and other team members an easy means to disseminate information. The tools available to the project manager to communicate with WSDOT include those described above, as well as capabilities such as videoconferencing.

Section 5: Project Delivery Approach

A. Work Plan, Decision Making Process, Elements of Work Plan, and Contingencies ARA always develops a detailed work plan for a project through a collaborative effort of the key engineers who will work on and be responsible for the project. For this project, the proposed project manager, Dr. Darter, has organized and written most of this preliminary work plan with consultation from other members of the team. The other key team members reviewed the work plan, provided feedback, technical editors reviewed the work plan, and finally a senior member of ARA reviewed the document. Thus, the work plan was reviewed and revised several times in an iterative approach to ensure all RFP requirements were met. After notification of award, this same ARA team will develop a more detailed work plan for the project.

Work Plan for This Project The State of Washington has a total of 34 LTPP sections that have been in-service for many years. About 32 percent of them have already been take out of service. This statistic varies from State to State around the country. Obviously, with all of the effort and expense that was expended to construct, monitor, and test these sections (materials, layer thickness, deflections, smoothness, distress, etc.) it would be of great value to know the specific causes and reasons why these sections eventually reached a point where they required rehabilitation or reconstruction. We firmly believe that it is possible to ascertain the primary causes for existing sections, and even for those sections already taken out of service, due to the extensive data collection and information available over many years. The ARA team has broad forensic experience in all areas (materials, structure, traffic loads, climate, variability, etc.) for decades in conducting forensic tests and surveys and computations to determine the causes for the types of deterioration that take place in pavements located in the US and other countries.

The scope of this project is to investigate the LTPP test sections as they prepare to go out of service so that it will be possible to ascertain the reasons why the sections exhibited specific distress and roughness. This may require additional special testing (beyond LTPP latest testing) to ascertain exactly the causes and mechanisms involved. ARA believes in the four key broad aspects that are listed in NCHRP Report 747:



P a g e | 21.

Pavement sections layers: key properties of asphalt, concrete, and unbound materials, layer thicknesses, soundness of the material (e.g. stripping, micro-cracks) and layer bonding to each other are all critical plus others.

Subgrade soil: various physical properties, moisture content, water table, depth to bedrock, sub-drainage, etc.

Traffic loadings: volume, classifications, axle load distributions, truck lane distribution, etc.

Climate: temperature, moisture, frost depth, freeze-thaw cycles, extreme conditions, etc.

However, to this list, we add the following equally important factor which we have used successfully in many forensic studies to determine causation(s):

Variation along and across traffic lanes of the project: variations both along the project and from lane to lane can be a Major factor in identifying the causation of distress. The impact of traffic loadings can be distinguished between traffic lanes with higher and lower truck volume/weights. A section along a several mile project exhibiting significantly larger or smaller amounts of distress in certain areas can be compared with other areas with larger or smaller amounts to help ascertain causation.

The NCHRP Report 747 “Guide for Conducting Forensic Investigations of Highway Pavements” provides an excellent overall and detailed plan. The ARA team endorses the concepts and recommendations contained in this report and have essentially followed this approach for many years on many forensic analysis projects. When a section is identified for removal from service, the ARA team will prepare a preliminary plan and budget for all work that needs to be done for the forensic analysis of that section or group of sections. The ARA team will provide detailed information to WSDOT and only proceed upon approval.

Additional work will include building tracking lists of remaining sites, contacting districts for updates on site status, and planning action for sites about to go out of service.

This work will involve utilization of information from the national LTPP database, with which ARA has had extensive experience over several decades. We will utilize a decision process that considers the condition and age of existing in-service LTPP sections to rate and rank those that fall below a critical condition as potential sections to be taken out of service. An automatic procedure to contact districts will be developed to obtain their update on what their plans are for these sections. Such a process could conceivably be automatic and work on a continuing basis to prioritize LTPP in-service sections for potential to be taken out of service.

Contingencies often develop when conducting forensic investigations. No matter how well you plan and provide for different things to occur, you can never be sure other issues will not develop. As the investigation uncovers various pieces of information about a distress type, this often leads to additional testing or analyses that had not been planned. Typically, in a given forensic investigation there are events that happen that add and subtract to the efforts required to determine causation of deterioration. These balance themselves out and the project is completed on time and within budget. However, a fact may be uncovered that requires additional costly testing to fully resolve. If this were to happen, ARA will bring this to the immediate attention of the project manager for WSDOT. The pros and cons of expending additional money and/or time will be laid out and WSDOT can decide either to conduct the additional testing and time or to not



P a g e | 22.

conduct this extra work, and these decisions will of course be documented in the study report as a potential limitation.

B. Resolution of Issues within the Project Team, Clients, and Stakeholders ARA provides a working environment in which highly qualified technical professionals can pursue their specialties with a maximum of support and a minimum of bureaucracy. These individuals form a network of colleagues with complementary capabilities, similar goals, and a willingness to cooperate on challenging and important technical problems. ARA has a Dun & Bradstreet Summary Performance Rating of 92 percent, which places the company in the top level quartile of companies rated by D&B. We enjoy long-term relationships with our customers, and we consistently achieve strong past performance ratings.

ARA’s fundamental commitment to technical excellence has been one of the primary reasons the company has experienced continued growth and success. We define quality as the degree to which our services and products meet and exceed customer’s expectations. We independently review our work products with the intent of “being our own worst critics” as we continually strive for excellence. Our philosophy and basic concepts of quality performance are contained in “Quality Performance Plan and Review Guidelines.” ARA’s principal investigators, project managers, and technical staff members are expected to read, understand, and implement these guidelines.

The ARA team has worked together for many years, and the team members have great respect for each other’s knowledge and experience. Nonetheless, unforeseen issues may arise within the project team and/or with clients and other stakeholders. The proposed team members have many years of experience in resolving differences in professional opinions by obtaining all expert opinions on the issue, and then coming to a consensus. If different opinions are relatively equally divided, all opinions would be reported and considered.

In order to resolve any future issues or more importantly to avoid any issues from the very beginning, our team will interact regularly via face-to-face meetings, e-mail, and telephone. The proposed ARA PM will serve as the primary point of contact and will be responsible for (1) staying on top of all work activities, (2) ensuring efficient and effective communication among all parties involved, (3) making sure that there is regular interaction and coordination among all team members, and (4) reporting and resolving any issues that have taken place.

ARA has employed a multi-pronged approach to ensure overall project quality and compliance as well as to resolve and prevent issues. As noted, ARA will utilize proven professionals in the execution of the research. Additionally, we will execute our corporate quality assurance program, which has the stated goal of providing “best in class” services and products and the best total value to our customers. As part of that program, we will achieve quality using the three following activities:

Two Person Rule: Essential work products and external communications will be reviewed by a second person competent in the subject before the product is transmitted to a customer.

Independent Project Reviews: Compliance will be formally tracked with independent quality reviews at 35 and 65 percent of project completion. These reviews will be performed by our principal-in-charge and will address all elements of project



P a g e | 23.

performance. Customer Feedback: At an appropriate time in the project, ARA’s principal-in-charge

will meet with the WSDOT project manager to obtain feedback on ARA’s performance. This feedback will be incorporated into project execution to enhance overall quality and customer satisfaction.

C. Assumptions for Work Breakdown Structure All forensic investigation under this contract will be conducted in close coordination with WSDOT. Table 3 summarizes the work breakdown structure as well as the responsibilities and the deliverables.

As soon as ARA is informed of a section to be investigated, the team will compile and review all of the available data for that particular section. Then, ARA will prepare an initial forensic investigation plan for the preliminary evaluation and/or non-destructive testing, and submit to WSDOT for review and approval. Upon approval of the initial plan, ARA team will conduct the investigation and prepare an interim report which documents the findings from the investigation and recommendations for destructive testing, if deemed necessary.

Upon WSDOT approval for destructive testing, the ARA team will prepare a forensic investigation plan detailing all of the destructive testing needed, the schedule, and plans for analysis. The plan will be finalized based on any comments received from WSDOT’s review.

ARA has subcontracted HWA and AAT on this project to assist with some field investigation work and laboratory testing. HWA will be asked to conduct most field testing and laboratory testing work and provide their work product to ARA for use in any project deliverables. However, AAT offers some unique capabilities for advanced asphalt testing, such as dynamic modulus, resilient modulus, creep compliance, indirect tensile strength, etc., which may be needed for some LTPP sections to identify the reasons for failure. In these instances AAT will be sourced for that investigation and lab testing work. AAT will also deliver their work product to ARA, who will provide all deliverables to WSDOT directly.

After the ARA team conducts the destructive / laboratory testing, ARA will conduct the necessary analysis as proposed in the investigation plan. However, it is also understood that the analysis plan may be revised based on the data that was gathered from the testing. In such situations, ARA will keep WSDOT informed of any issues and plans for resolving them.

After completing the analysis, the ARA team will prepare a final forensic report which documents all of the project related activities and information. The forensic report will include the following major sections:

Introduction Summary of Compiled Data for the LTPP Section Initial Non-Destructive Investigation

o Description of Each Test o Results and Findings o Recommendations from Non-Destructive Testing

Destructive and Laboratory Testing o Description of Each Test



P a g e | 24.

o Results and Findings Data Analysis and Hypothesis Testing

o Analysis Procedures o Overall Results from Nondestructive and Destructive Tests

Conclusions and Recommendations

Upon WSDOT’s review, ARA will revise the final technical report to address all comments and suggested revisions. In addition, the ARA team will make a presentation to WSDOT to explain the findings and recommendations, if requested.

Table 3. Work breakdown and responsibilities.

Task Deliverables / Responsibilities

ARA Team WSDOT Compile LTPP Data Compile and review available

data for the particular section from the LTPP database as well as those provided by WSDOT

Inform ARA of LTPP section to go out of service

Provide available information

Initial Forensic Investigation Plan

Prepare initial investigation plan and submit to WSDOT

Review and approval of initial investigation plan

Non-Destructive Testing and Interim Report

Conduct non-destructive testing

Prepare interim report with findings and recommendations for destructive testing

Review and approval of interim report

Provide feedback

Finalized Forensic Investigation Plan

Prepare and submit forensic investigation plan, identifying all destructive tests deemed necessary with proposed schedule and plan for analysis

Revise and finalize the plan based on WSDOT feedback

Review and approval of forensic investigation plan

Destructive and Laboratory Testing

Conduct destructive testing approved by WSDOT (HWA/AAT)

Data Analysis and Hypothesis Testing

Analyze the destructive testing data along with the previously gathered non-destructive testing data

Conduct statistical analysis, hypothesis testing, and other relevant analysis deemed necessary



P a g e | 25.

Task Deliverables / Responsibilities

ARA Team WSDOT Document Results and Recommendations and Prepare Final Forensic Report

Summarize results and prepare final forensic report

Review and approval of forensic report

Request for presentation

Presentation (as requested)

Provide a presentation of the results, findings, and lessons-learned to WSDOT

D. Key Issues and Critical Milestones for the Project The ARA team understands that this is an open-ended contract that will be in place for about 2 years until project completion. There are essentially two project plans to consider: 1) the on-call schedule and summary of deliverables which demonstrate that ARA possesses the resources and expertise to successfully address any service removals that may arise during the 2-year period, and 2) the per-request forensic evaluation schedule for data collection, testing, analysis, and reporting for each LTPP pavement section or group of sections that may go out of service during the 2-year period. We will first address the second of these in the next section.

Forensic Evaluation Schedule and Deliverables

As an LTPP section is scheduled to go out of service, the schedule for conducting the non-destructive and destructive testing may become tight. To maximize the efficiency and the effectiveness of the forensic investigation, the ARA team will act promptly whenever an LTPP section is identified to go out of service. A preliminary example of the forensic evaluation schedule is shown in Table 4. However, it is also understood that each section is unique and the schedule may need to be altered.

Table 4. Example section-level forensic investigation schedule.

Task Week 1-2 Week 3-4 Week 5-9 Week 10-12 Compile LTPP Sections Data Prepare Initial Forensic Investigation Plan

Conduct Non-Destructive Testing and Provide Interim Report

Finalize Forensic Investigation Plan Based on Non-Destructive Testing

Conduct Destructive and Laboratory Testing

Conduct Data Analysis and Hypothesis Testing



P a g e | 26.

Task Week 1-2 Week 3-4 Week 5-9 Week 10-12 Document Results and Recommendations and Prepare Final Forensic Report

Presentation (as requested)

When a section is identified, the ARA team will perform a preliminary evaluation, based upon which we will establish a detailed timeframe for performing the various evaluations for the forensic analysis since each section will be unique. The forensic evaluation schedule is anticipated to require between 2-6 months for a given request, depending on how straightforward the reasons for failure appear to be upon initial investigation. We will also reference the LTPP database for the history of that section, or comparable sections, and consult with district engineers to see what we can learn from their knowledge of that section.

By taking a stepwise approach to the forensic evaluation, ARA will be able to deliver cost and time savings to WSDOT to enable optimal use of project budget and resources, and present multiple options of what may need to be done going forward. If the causes of distress or failure are deemed by the team to be very straightforward, then only a simple analysis may be needed to confirm that result. If the cause is not very clear or may have multiple contributing factors, then more extensive evaluation and testing may be required.

Project Schedule and Deliverables

After notification of award, the ARA team will meet with WSDOT to develop a more detailed approach.

Key issues and critical milestones for the project are highlighted in the work breakdown shown in Table 3.

At the end of the contract, ARA will deliver a summary technical report that documents all of the work completed on this project and the findings for all sections removed from service during the 2-year period, along with any recommendations.

Again, a draft report will be prepared and submitted to WSDOT. ARA will consider any and all comments and suggested revisions from WSDOT in preparing a final technical report, including the recommendations. In addition, the ARA team is willing to present results to WSDOT to explain the findings and recommendations.

for Washington State Department of Transportation

June 13, 2017

Portland, Hood River, and Salem OR | Vancouver, Longview, Tacoma, and Seattle WA | Anaheim CA

LTPP FORENSIC EVALUATION

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATIONS | PACkET A

1

www.geodesigninc.comStatement of Qualifications | Packet A : LTPP Forensic Evaluation

A. TEAM QUALIFICATIONS

Firm IntroductionEmployee-owned and founded in 1997, GeoDesign, Inc. provides pavement, geotechnical, and environmental services from offices in Tacoma, Seattle, Longview, and Vancouver, Washington; Portland, Hood River, and Salem, Oregon; and Anaheim, California. From planning and design through construction, we provide services for transportation and water infrastructure; schools and universities; residential, commercial, and industrial developments; and healthcare, recreation, and institutional facilities. Our team consists of over 90 engineers, geologists, engineering geologists,

environmental scientists, technical personnel, and administrative staff.

GeoDesign will not require subconsultants on our team. We will use subcontractors for trenching/coring and traffic control.

Pavement EngineeringGeoDesign provides pavement engineering services for roadways, airfields, bridges, parking lots, and multi-use pathways. Services include:

∙ Pavement testing and evaluation ∙ Pavement condition assessment

∙ Pavement materials characterization ∙ Full-depth reclamation and subgrade improvement studies ∙ Maintenance and rehabilitation studies ∙ Flexible and rigid pavement design ∙ Airport rehabilitation studies

We own and operate a Heavy Falling Weight Deflectometer (H-FWD), which we use on a frequent basis to conduct non-destructive deflection testing to assess pavement and subgrade soil stiffness characteristics. We routinely use our H-FWD to assess existing pavement capacity and evaluate rehabilitation options. Our H-FWD can impart loads representing wheel loads of light trucks to large aircraft. Accordingly, it can deflect a wide range of pavement structures—from thin, light-duty pavements such as parking lots and low-volume residential streets to thick, heavy-duty interstate, port facility, and airfield pavements.

Our H-FWD is equipped with nine deflection sensors, and we measure deflections from 0 to 72 inches from the load impact location as a matter of standard practice, where the deflection directly under the load is representative of the response of the entire pavement structure and the deflections furthest from the load impact location are representative of subgrade response. We analyze the H-FWD data to back-calculate pavement layer and subgrade soil stiffness using a software program most appropriate for project requirements. Our engineers have extensive experience using a variety of

CRITERIA 1 | QUALIFICATIONS/EXPERTISE OF FIRMS ON TEAM

WASHINGTON & PORTLAND METRO OFFICESGeoDesign has offices in Vancouver, Longview, Tacoma, and Seattle, along with its headquarters in the Portland metro area.

2


programs, including BAKFAA, DARWin, EVERSERIES, FAARFIELD, JULEA, PCASE, and WESLEA; and we have developed our own in-house software based on the procedures described in the AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures.

Due to the sensitivity of back-calculated results to pavement layer thickness, we commission a drilling subcontractor to complete subsurface explorations (pavement borings) for all projects where we conduct H-FWD testing. In all cases, a member of our geology staff supervises the driller and assesses layer type, layer thickness, and subsurface type. Before completing subsurface explorations, we assess the longitudinal and transverse variability of deflection data within a project to determine the uniformity of the pavement structure and subgrade, and to pinpoint locations

for pavement borings within each unique segment of a project.

We also own two Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) antennas that we mount independently or in tandem on our H-FWD tow vehicle, and conduct GPR surveys at up to posted roadway speeds. We use our GPR antennas on a frequent basis to collect continuous pavement thickness profiles and locate areas of variability, such as delaminated layers, moisture damage, and voids within the pavement, as well as objects such as utilities beneath the pavement. As requirements dictate, we use our air-coupled, 2 GHz horn antenna for surveys to depths up to about 18 inches and our ground-coupled, 400 MHz antenna for surveys to depths up to about 12 feet. We use both antennas simultaneously to obtain

the highest level of detail within and beneath the pavement for the deeper surveys.

Following our GPR surveys, we commission a drilling subcontractor to complete subsurface explorations (pavement borings) under the supervision of GeoDesign personnel. In all cases, a member of our geology staff accompanies the driller to assess type and thickness of each pavement layer and to identify delaminated layers in pavement surfacing, moisture-damaged hot mix asphalt (HMA), disintegrated Portland cement concrete (PCC), and voids within and/or beneath the pavement.

Our H-FWD tow vehicle is equipped with a high-end global positioning system (GPS) with sub-meter accuracy. We use our GPS for all our H-FWD and GPR work, allowing us to display the georeferenced data in AutoCAD, ArcGIS, and Google Earth. The GPS data also allows us to efficiently link together H-FWD and GPR data on projects where we conduct both types of testing.

With the FWD’s non-destructive testing capabilities, we provide an accurate measurement of pavement capacity, which reduces the risk of under-designed rehabilitation.

H-FWD load plate H-FWD sensors

3


GeoDesign’s field personnel routinely conduct pavement condition surveys to evaluate the type, severity, and extent of distress to support our pavement studies. Based on client preferences, we collect data in accordance with the methods described in ASTM D 6344, the Distress Identification Manual for the Long-Term Pavement Performance Program, the distress identification manuals published by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and the Pavement Surface Condition Rating Manual jointly developed by WSDOT, the Northwest Pavement Management Systems User Group, and the University of Washington.

GeoDesign’s in-house soils laboratories in Seattle and Portland offer services that include all commonly performed soil index tests. Our laboratory tests conform to standardized procedures, and are typically completed in accordance with ASTM methodologies. We are capable of performing tests in accordance with equivalent American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) or WSDOT methodology, as necessary, to meet the requirements of our clients’ projects.

Where special testing is required, we are proficient in developing and performing customized non-standard test methodologies to meet unique project requirements. We have fully automated systems for completing tests for consolidation and swell, direct shear strength, triaxial strength envelopes, and permeability. We own and operate an electro-mechanical, closed-loop, triaxial resilient modulus test apparatus capable of testing undisturbed and re-compacted soil samples in accordance with AASHTO T 307 and the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) P46 Protocol. In addition, we perform standard tests that include moisture content, dry density, compaction (standard and modified Proctors), organic content, grain size analysis, Atterberg limits, and specific gravity. We can also arrange for the disposal of clean and contaminated samples.

Experience with the Public SectorGeoDesign takes pride in successfully completing projects, meeting regulatory requirements, and maintaining a high level of communication with and service to our clients. Our experience with the public sector includes on-call and emergency response contracts with local, state, and federal agencies. In Washington, we have provided on-call services, or work on a project-specific basis, to the following agencies:

∙ City of Des Moines ∙ City of Sumner ∙ City of Tacoma ∙ City of Milton ∙ City of Olympia ∙ City of Puyallup ∙ City of Edmonds ∙ City of Langley ∙ City of Redmond ∙ City of Seattle

∙ City of Shoreline ∙ City of Snoqualmie Falls ∙ City of Tukwila ∙ City of Vancouver ∙ King County ∙ Thurston County ∙ Lewis County ∙ Cowlitz County ∙ Washington State Department of

Transportation

4


Number of StaffGeoDesign has 81 staff in Washington and the Portland Metro area. We have 95 staff firmwide.

Organization Chart

TODD SCHOLz, PE, PhDProject Manager/Point-of-Contact

POINT-OF-CONTACT

Washington Department

Of Transportation

PROjECT LEADS

Krey Younger, PEProject Engineer/Technical

Support

Kevin Lamb, PEAs-Needed QA/QC &

Puget Sound Area Support

GEORGE SAuNDERS, PEPrincipal-in-Charge &

QA/ QC

qA/qC

PROjECT SuPPORT

Dan j. Fischer Excavating, Inc.Coring

Continental Dirt Contractors, Inc.Trenching

K&D Services, Inc., Altus TrafficTraffic Control

B. TEAM MEMBERS’ OFFICES

GeoDesign’s offices in Washington and the greater Portland Metro area include:

Location number of Staff ServiceS Provided

Portland, OR 60 ∙ Pavement Engineering ∙ Geotechnical Engineering ∙ Environmental Consulting

Vancouver, WA 11 ∙ Pavement Engineering ∙ Geotechnical Engineering ∙ Environmental Consulting

Longview, WA 4 ∙ Mining Consulting

Tacoma, WA 1 ∙ Pavement Engineering ∙ Geotechnical Engineering

Seattle, WA 5 ∙ Pavement Engineering ∙ Geotechnical Engineering

5


C. TEAM PROJECT COLLABORATIONS

GeoDesign and its team of subcontractors can perform all items listed in the scope, including trenching/coring, measuring lift deflection, lab testing, and data analysis. We are the sole consultant.

D. AVAILABILITY OF KEY STAFF

Key Staff HourS avaiLabLe Per montHGeorge Saunders, PE – Principal-in-Charge 8 - 16Todd Scholz, PE, PhD – Project Manager 32

Krey Younger, PE – Project Engineer 16 - 24

Kevin Lamb, PE – Principal Engineer 8 - 16

E. PROJECT SUMMARIES

ODOT, GPR Testing: Louse Creek Interchange Improvements, Portland, OR (2016)Budget: $22,641; Billed: $11,928

For ODOT, GeoDesign provided GPR services along OR99E, Hwy #081, between mileposts 3.16 and 4.26, both north and south bound directions. The GPR testing provided information as to the location of the longitudinal edge of the old existing PCC pavement underlying an HMA overlay along the highway segment. In addition to locating the PCC edge, GeoDesign collected and interpreted data that provided the depth of the HMA overlay. As a part of the scope, GeoDesign attended a pre-work meeting with ODOT Pavement Services staff to discuss ODOT’s expectations and coordinate data collection with traffic control. GPR field work was completed using walk-behind and vehicle-mounted GPR units.

Polk County, FWD Testing: Grand Ronde Road, Unincorporated Polk County, Oregon (2015)Budget: $5,590; Billed: $5,530

GeoDesign provided pavement engineering services for this 1.2-mile-long section of Grand Ronde Road in Polk County, Oregon (County). The scope involved pavement testing, analysis of testing results, and pavement rehabilitation and reconstruction recommendations. Work included H-FWD testing and providing recommendations for rehabilitation and reconstruction based on the H-FWD tests, existing pavement thickness information, and estimated traffic loading.

The project consisted of a collaborative effort between GeoDesign and the County to keep costs below a funding level that the County could afford for the project. In this regard, the County performed subsurface explorations to determine HMA layer thickness and aggregate base layer thickness and provided these data to us in an ArcGIS shapefile. The County also conducted vehicle classification counts for us to use for forecasting anticipated future traffic loading for design purposes. We estimate the savings to the County through this collaborative efoort easily exceeded $3,000.

6


Port of Portland Terminal 6, Portland, Oregon (2016)Budget: $13,950; Billed: $13,949

For International Container Terminal Services (ICTSI) Oregon, Inc., GeoDesign provided pavement engineering services for the proposed improvements to selected pavement areas at the Port of Portland’s Terminal 6. ICTSI Oregon, Inc. had identified selected pavement areas at Terminal 6 that required investigation for the purposes of developing and providing improvement options through maintenance, restoration, or reconstruction activities. GeoDesign’s investigations involved observation of surface distresses, subsurface explorations, and pavement testing.

Our pavement designs were based on the results of H-FWD and DCP tests, on-site visual evaluations and subsurface explorations, and traffic loading for 10- and 20-year design periods. We completed our pavement designs according to established design procedures for highway and heavy-duty (port facility) pavements where the heavy-duty pavements were designed to accommodate reachstackers weighing up to 105 tons when fully loaded.

Port of Portland Terminal 6 Pavement Evaluation

7


A. BIO AND EXPERIENCE

TODD SCHOLZ, PE, PhD – Senior Associate EngineerProject Role: Project ManagerTodd Scholz has over 28 years of experience in the field of pavement engineering and has been a professional engineer since 1992. In this time, he has worked for state and federal agencies, private consulting firms specializing in pavement engineering, and major heavy civil construction companies. Todd also spent a decade in academia as a professor of civil engineering at Michigan Technological University and Oregon State University. In the private sector, Todd has expertise in pavement engineering, pavement management, pavement materials, quality control and quality assurance, forensic investigations, and software and database design and development. Clients have included the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, the Federal Highway Administration, the USDA Forest Service, the National Lime Association, Caltrans, Oregon Department of Transportation, many county and city agencies, and private industry.

In academia as well as in the private sector, Todd has been involved in numerous research projects covering a broad range of aspects associated with pavements, and on many of these he served as principal investigator. This work has been published in dozens of journal and conference proceedings and technical reports. Todd also has been heavily involved in training throughout his career. He has co-authored materials for National Highway Institute short courses and Caltrans training workshops, and served as an instructor during these training events. As a professor, Todd developed and taught undergraduate- and graduate-level courses covering civil and construction engineering materials, airport and highway pavement structures, heavy civil construction management, and geographical information systems.

Todd has managed several projects specifically involving forensic evaluation to determine causes of pavement failure. Nearly all of his recent projects have involved pavement evaluation using our H-FWD and/or our GPR antennas in combination with pavement distress surveys and subsurface explorations. Listed below are three examples demonstrating Todd’s prior experience as a Project Manager:

1. Puyallup Street Overlay, City of Sumner (December 8, 2016 to June 3, 2017). Todd recently managed a forensic evaluation project to identify the causative factors of failure of an overlay within weeks of installation and to provide recommendations for mitigating the failure. Forensic evaluation involved reviewing the original geotechnical investigation report for the project, project plans and specifications, construction documents, WSDOT Inspector’s Daily Reports, photographs, results from core sampling and density testing, and correspondence between the design consultant, City of Sumner personnel, and the paving contractor. In addition, we completed site reconnaissance and density testing as part of our forensic investigation. The project also involved providing construction observation services during remediation to ensure the work was completed properly.

CRITERIA 2 | QUALIFICATIONS OF PROPOSED PROJECT MANAGER

8


Todd had overall responsibility for: developing the scope of services and schedule based on City of Sumner goals and expectations; developing the fee estimate for our services; coordinating field staff for our forensic evaluation services; completing construction observation services according to the paving contractor’s schedule; and managing the budget.

2. I-5: Roberts Mountain to South Umpqua River, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) (December 21, 2015 to December 31, 2019). Todd is presently managing a project to provide recommendations for rehabilitating the travel lanes of a five-mile segment of I-5 near Roseburg, Oregon and to add climbing lanes in both directions over Roberts Mountain. The field work involved site reconnaissance and completing a pavement distress survey, H-FWD testing, Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing, and subsurface explorations. The latter three tasks required traffic control and, accordingly, coordination with ODOT’s Motor Carrier Transportation Division and district personnel. We selected subsurface exploration locations based on assessment of the H-FWD deflection data and as required by ODOT near four bridge approaches. We completed the subsurface explorations to evaluate thickness and type of each pavement layer and to determine subgrade soil type. We completed laboratory testing on samples of subgrade soil obtained from our subsurface explorations to assist in developing our recommendations. We restricted DCP testing to the segments where widening is planned for the climbing lanes. Todd had overall responsibility for: developing the scope of services and schedule based on the goals and expectations of ODOT; developing the fee estimate for our services; obtaining traffic control plans and right-of-way permits for our field work; coordinating our field staff and our drilling and traffic control subcontractors for the field work; reducing, summarizing, and analyzing the data collected from our field work; developing pavement cross sections and specifications for pavement rehabilitation and new construction; and review of plans, specifications, and estimates developed by ODOT based on our recommendations. Todd also manages the budget and will be responsible for providing consultation at the time of construction.

3. Investigating Premature Pavement Failure Due to Moisture, Oregon Department of Transportation (October 2005 to June 2009). As a professor at Oregon State University, Todd served as the Principal Investigator on a project involving forensic evaluations of five interstate highway projects in Oregon— four on I-5 and one on I-84—that had failed shortly after a rehabilitation activity. The principal objectives of

this research effort were to identify sources of moisture and other conditions that led to the early rutting problems observed along the five projects; and, to evaluate design, construction, and materials requirements that would minimize the risk of such failures for future rehabilitation projects.

I-5: Roberts Mountain to South Umpqua River, Roseburg, Oregon

9


The primary tasks included a literature review, field investigations, laboratory testing, evaluation and discussion of results, development of guidelines, and conclusions and recommendations. The field investigations included site reconnaissance, pavement coring, pavement trenching along three projects, and GPR surveys along the four I-5 projects. Interviews of ODOT maintenance personnel and review of historical records were also completed for each project. Laboratory evaluation included bulk specific gravity, theoretical maximum specific gravity, and permeability testing of pavement cores. Todd had overall responsibility for: developing the work plan and schedule to meet the goals and expectations of ODOT; hiring and managing graduate research students to assist in completing the work; coordinating with ODOT district traffic control and maintenance personnel to complete the coring and trenching activities; documenting progress through quarterly reports and occasional meetings; development of four guidelines; managing the budget; and development of the final report. (http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_RES/ResearchReports/Moisture_Damage.pdf).

B. FAMILIARITY WITH RELEVANT STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS/PROCEDURES

Having worked on dozens of projects for state, county, and city agencies, Todd Scholz is experienced with the logistics and scheduling challenges encountered on projects requiring work within the right-of-way; and at obtaining the necessary permits from local jurisdictions and agencies, public notification, and techniques to minimize disruption to project sites. Todd understands the importance of work zone safety and routinely works with traffic control specialists to develop and implement a traffic control plan designed to protect the safety of workers within each unique work zone. Todd has managed several projects involving night work and understands the special challenges and requirements associated with work zones for such work.

Todd has managed several projects requiring Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) involvement goals. He is familiar with agency tracking and reporting processes.

Todd is well versed with the WSDOT Pavement Policy and the WSDOT Standard Specifications for Construction, which we routinely reference in our pavement engineering and geotechnical engineering reports for projects in Washington. With his intimate knowledge of these standards relative to pavement structures, Todd is in a strong position to steer the field work and other efforts to efficiently accomplish the goals of this project.

C. PROJECT EXAMPLES

The vast majority of the projects that Todd has managed have had tight budgets. Many have been on a compressed schedule. Accordingly, Todd has developed effective strategies for delivering projects on time and within budget under these constraints. Some of these strategies include clearly defining the scope of services and a realistic schedule, anticipating potential challenges to completing the work on schedule,

10


identifying and implementing ways to work efficiently, and employing techniques for addressing issues that arise during project execution. Examples of Todd’s ability to manage the project schedule, scope of services and scope creep, budget issues, and changes that arise throughout the project life are provided below.

1. Project Schedule, Scope of Services, and Budget IssuesOver the past four years Todd has managed projects that have provided pavement engineering services to the City of Tigard, Oregon (in collaboration with a civil design firm) for its annual overlay program involving several street segments each year. Over the past three years, GeoDesign’s scope has included GPR testing/evaluation, DCP testing/evaluation, subsurface explorations, and pavement rehabilitation recommendations for each segment. Overall, we have evaluated more than 50 street segments, with an average of about 13 segments each year.

Our schedule to complete all work except providing the pavement rehabilitation recommendations has ranged from four to six weeks, making scheduling and meeting deadlines a significant challenge. Nevertheless, in anticipation of the compressed schedule, Todd has developed strategies for scheduling subcontractors and our field crew before or immediately following notice to proceed, scheduling data reduction and analysis to immediately follow receipt of field data, and scheduling time for report development and production well in advance of our deadline.

This year, the City requested that we also complete vehicle classification counts on an above-average number of street segments under a budget slightly less than the budgets of the previous two years. Given the added scope relative to projects of previous years, Todd negotiated with City personnel to reduce the number of segments evaluated from 19 to 14 and to reduce the number of subsurface explorations and DCP tests on some segments, while keeping the budget for our services within the amount allocated by the City.

2. Project ChangesTodd managed a project for the Pacific Surgical Institute in the City of Longview, Washington involving the parking lot pavement at the facility, where the striping became discolored and rapidly degraded shortly after being applied to the pavement. Our original scope included: completing a forensic evaluation to confirm or refute suspicions that the discoloration and degradation was caused by iron leaching out of the aggregate used in the hot mix asphalt surfacing; critically evaluating a proposal by the paving contactor to mitigate the problem via thin grind and overlay; and providing recommendations for a long-term solution that would eliminate the problem.

During our site visit to observe the striping, we also observed other distresses in the form of cracking and aggregate disintegration. Given that these distresses played a significant role in recommending suitable, long-term mitigation options, Todd discussed with the owners the potential ramifications of accepting the contractor’s proposal without completing additional forensic evaluation and proposed some options to consider. Based on this discussion, the owners approved a scope and fee adjustment to complete additional forensic evaluation. The findings from the additional evaluation

11


led to rejection of the contractor’s proposal and mitigation of the pavement problems through complete removal and replacement of the hot mix asphalt surfacing.

D. PROFESSIONAL LICENSES/ACCREDITATIONS

EducationBS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1987MS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1989PhD, Civil Engineering, University of Nottingham, 1995RegistrationProfessional Engineer, OR (No. 16079), July 1992 – Present*CommitteesMember, Transportation Research Board Committee AFH60, Pavement Construction and Rehabilitation Friend, Transportation Research Board Committee AFD70, Pavement RehabilitationAssociationsAmerican Society of Civil EngineersAmerican Public Works Association

*Please note: While Todd Scholz does not currently have a PE license in Washington, he is in the process of filing the required reciprocity paperwork. Our other key team members—George Saunders, Krey Younger, and Kevin Lamb—are all licensed Professional Engineers in Washington.

I-205 Mill Plain Interchange

12


GEORGE SAUNDERS, PE – Principal Engineer

Project Role: Principal-in-Charge & QA/QCGeorge Saunders brings more than 30 years of experience to our team. He has participated in a range of full-scale civil engineering projects throughout the Pacific Northwest. George has been responsible for all phases of geotechnical investigations for large-scale residential, commercial, industrial, retail, mixed-use, and mid- to high-rise developments, along with transportation-related projects and pavement and slope stability studies. George has extensive experience with public agencies, with municipal clients in Washington that include the cities of Vancouver and Seattle; King County Housing Authority; and the Bellevue and Evergreen school districts, among others. In Oregon, he works with the cities of Portland, Salem, and Eugene; Multnomah, Washington, Marion, and Clackamas counties; and ODOT.

George Saunders and GeoDesign possess a depth of understanding of state and local regulations and procedures. Our engineers have completed several recent bridge designs using AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design Specifications and the current WSDOT manuals, including the Engineering Design Manual, Geotechnical Design Manual, Pavement Design Manual, Bridge Design Manual, Highway Runoff Manual, Manual for Sizing Infiltration Ponds, and the recent Standard Specifications and Standard Drawings.

In addition, we are familiar with various national codes, including the 1997 Uniform Building Code, 2003 and 2006 International Building Codes, 2003 International Residential Code, AASHTO specifications, Washington State Department of Ecology rules and regulations, and relevant Washington State Department of Health regulations.

PROJECT EXAMPLES ∙ WSDOT/City of Vancouver, I-205/Mill Plain Interchange, Washington. George

served as principal-in-charge for geotechnical engineering and pavement design for proposed improvements to this interchange. The project included construction of a 600-foot-long overpass, 2,000-foot-long embankment, multiple retaining walls, embankments, infiltration systems, signal poles, and pavement improvements. Geotechnical design parameters for the bridge foundation systems were developed using LRFD methods.

∙ ODOT/OBDP, South Valley View Road and Green Springs Highway Bridges over I-5, Ashland, Oregon. George served as principal-in-charge of pavement design services for the proposed improvements to these two bridges over I-5. For South Valley, plans called for replacing the bridge, widening the approach, and raising the bridge elevation. For Green Springs, plans called for repair, widening the approach and ramps, and lowering I-5 to increase clearance. George’s team provided recommendations for pavement reconstruction.

∙ ODOT, Highway 101 – SE 19th to SE 32nd, South of Lincoln City, Oregon. George served as principal-in-charge of our pavement testing services for this stretch of Highway 101 south of Lincoln City. Our scope involved performing H-FWD testing on

CRITERIA 3 | kEY TEAM MEMBER QUALIFICATIONS

13


¾ mile of roadway. We provided pavement design parameters for the soil subgrade modulus and effective modulus of the pavement.

EDUCATIONMS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1987BS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1985BS, Biology, Oregon State University, 1980CREDENTIALS/AFFILIATIONSProfessional Engineer, WA (#43820), American Society of Civil EngineersAmerican Public Works Association

KREY YOUNGER, PE – Senior Associate Engineer

Project role: Project EngineerKrey Younger has more than 19 years of experience with geotechnical engineering and pavement design projects throughout the Pacific Northwest. He is responsible for project management, observation of subsurface explorations, analysis, and design of geotechnical applications, and construction observation for transportation-related and commercial development projects. His specific pavement design experience includes flexible and rigid design for both new and rehabilitation projects.

Krey has worked on projects with WSDOT Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) funding, and is familiar with WSDOT’s relevant regulations and procedures. He is familiar with the current WSDOT manuals, including the Engineering Design Manual, Geotechnical Design Manual, and the Pavement Policy.

PROJECT EXAMPLES ∙ WSDOT/City of Vancouver, I-205/Mill Plain Interchange, Washington. Krey led

pavement design services for proposed improvements to this interchange, including pavement structural sections and materials for new I-205 lanes, new off-ramps, and new on-ramps. Pavement design options were provided to the project team, which included the contractor, City of Vancouver, and WSDOT.

∙ City of Tacoma, Stadium Reconstruction Project, Tacoma, Washington. Krey provided pavement design in support of this reconstruction project. The overall project involved retaining wall design for new walls and rehabilitating existing walls; slope stability analyses for a large slope above Schuster Parkway and below Stadium Way; and roadway pavement design and analysis, including rail line support recommendations. The project involved extensive explorations, geologic studies, and numerical analysis of the slopes, along with atypical wall designs for existing walls that are as much as 80 years old and showing signs of deterioration. The project also included WSDOT TIB funding.

∙ ODOT, On-Call Pavement Design Services, Various Locations. Since 2008, Krey has served as project manager on several ODOT projects including: I-5 from Elkhead to Anlauf; Highway 101 from McCullough Bridge to Fir Avenue; US 30 Bypass from NE 122nd Avenue to NE 141st Avenue; US 26: SE 122nd Avenue to SE 136th Avenue;

14


US 26: FS Road 35 to FS Road 36; Ashland Bridges at Exit 14 and Exit 19; and I-5 Jumpoff Joe to Glendale Climbing Lanes.

EDUCATIONMS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1994BS, Civil Engineering, Oregon State University, 1992CREDENTIALS/AFFILIATIONSProfessional Engineer, WA (#45048)American Concrete InstituteAmerican Society of Civil EngineersAmerican Public Works Association

KEVIN LAMB, PE – Principal Engineer

Role: As-Needed QA/QC & Puget Sound Area Support Kevin Lamb has more than 29 years of geotechnical engineering consulting experience in the Pacific Northwest. His work focus includes municipal infrastructure and facilities, educational campuses, industrial and commercial developments, and infiltrating Low Impact Development (LID) stormwater management systems. He has provided geotechnical services to support paving projects throughout the region and is experienced in addressing poor subgrade conditions through over-excavation, installation of geosynthetic reinforcement, and ground improvement methods such as cement stabilization. Kevin has followed many of these projects from design through construction, assisting in developing special provisions and acting as the owner’s resident engineer and special geotechnical inspector.

Kevin specializes in work for both small and large municipalities, including the cities of Seattle, Shoreline, Everett, Tacoma, Tukwila, Sumner, Bonney Lake, Redmond, Marysville, Puyallup, and Olympia, among many others. Having worked on many projects for municipal agencies, Kevin is experienced with the logistics and scheduling challenges encountered on projects requiring work within the right-of-way; and at obtaining the necessary permits from local jurisdictions and agencies, public notification, and techniques to minimize disruption to project sites. Kevin is also familiar with WSDOT/FHWA contracting and accounting requirements for funding on local projects, along with the various relevant WSDOT design manuals. Kevin is GeoDesign’s principal engineer in the Puget Sound area, and works out of our Seattle and Tacoma offices.

PROJECT EXAMPLES ∙ City of Tacoma, Stadium Way Reconstruction Project, Tacoma, Washington.

Kevin was project manager of geotechnical work in support of this reconstruction project. Work involved retaining wall design for new walls and rehabilitating existing walls; slope stability analyses for a large slope above Schuster Parkway and below Stadium Way; and roadway pavement design and analysis, including rail line support recommendations. The project involved extensive explorations, geologic studies, and numerical analysis of the slopes, along with atypical wall designs for existing walls that are as much as 80 years old and showing signs of deterioration. Kevin’s team provided cost effective ground improvement recommendations that included a combination of compaction grout and stone columns in order to reduce construction costs and minimize impacts to residents.

15


∙ City of Redmond, Cleveland Streetscape Project, Redmond, Washington. Kevin was lead engineer of a geotechnical investigation and FWD pavement survey to support the reconstruction of Cleveland Street between 160th Ave NE and 164th Ave NE, in Redmond. The improvements included reconstruction and widening of the roadway, along with rain gardens for stormwater management. The FWD survey provided cost effective information used to prepare recommendations for Portland Cement pavement options, in addition to Hoit mix asphalt pavement overlay and replacement options.

∙ City of Tacoma, Ruston Way (McCarver Street to North 49th Street), Tacoma, Washington. Kevin was principal-in-charge of pavement design services for this section of Ruston Way. Areas of moderate to high severity distress were present primarily in the southern half of the alignment, where the pavement conditions varied from fair to poor. GeoDesign’s study determined that, outside of the areas impacted by differential settlement and concentrated fatigue cracking, the majority of the pavement could be rehabilitated through grind, inlay, and overlay, plus localized repairs. GeoDesign presented several rehabilitation and reconstruction options to the City’s design team.

EDUCATIONMS, Geological Engineering, University of Idaho, Moscow, 1988BS, Geology, University of California, Davis, 1984CREDENTIALSProfessional Engineer, WA (#29441)HAZMAT Certificate of Training Safety & Transportation of Nuclear Density GaugesAmerican Society of Civil Engineers

A. PROJECT MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS

QA/QCThe quality of GeoDesign’s services—including deliverables such as draft and final reports—is controlled through use of skilled personnel; adequate scoping, team discussions, and planning; use of suitable tools and procedures; proper definition of job requirements; proper supervision; and effective technical leadership.

For GeoDesign’s deliverables, every document that leaves the office is reviewed by our technical editor, the project manager, and the principal-in-charge. This enhances the quality of our reports and helps to keep the reports succinct and easy-to-read for our clients. On completion of our assignments, we will solicit feedback from WSDOT to identify areas of our work that can be improved or altered for the purpose of providing continually improved services.

Monitoring Budget and ScopeOur accounting software system provides up-to-date reporting of charges against projects, and also is customized to send out 75 percent and 90 percent of budget reminders to project managers. Our system provides a snapshot of project budget,

CRITERIA 4 | FIRM’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

16


amount billed, work in progress, and total amount spent—both in terms of dollars and hours—allowing our project managers to quickly monitor budgets at a glance. The system also allows drilling down to obtain detailed charges. Accordingly, our project managers generally monitor budgets on a weekly basis following entry of payroll, and at least monthly prior to invoicing.

GeoDesign takes great pride in our ability to communicate to the various members of the project team. By actively communicating with team members, we develop solid working relationships with our clients and a better understanding of their priorities and needs. This approach allows a fuller comprehension of the project scope, allowing

our project managers to efficiently and effectively monitor progress and deliver a product to the client on schedule and on budget.

Scheduling Program/ProcessGeoDesign has numerous project managers that have been with the firm in excess of 10 years. Part

of this longevity stems from allowing each project manager to handle management tasks, such as scheduling, in ways that best suits the project manager, rather than enforcing use of a particular program or process. Accordingly, each project manager has developed unique processes to handle scheduling. Many use Excel spreadsheets, while others prefer a calendar-based system (e.g., Outlook). Todd Scholz uses a combination of the two, wherein he develops a Gantt chart in Excel showing the overall schedule by task, beginning and ending dates of each task, milestones such as deliverable dates, and the critical path through the tasks. He works backward from the beginning date for a field work task to schedule subcontractors and our field crews. Similarly, he works backward from the ending date of office- and laboratory-based tasks to schedule time for the project work under each task (i.e., lab work orders, analysis, CAD work, report preparation, and report publication). In all cases, he blocks out time on his Outlook calendar corresponding to each task.

Interacting with Internal Project TeamGeoDesign’s principal engineers and project managers meet weekly to discuss ongoing and future project work, staff capacity, and project priorities and deadlines. Project managers, in turn, meet with support staff on a frequent basis to relay these priorities and deadlines, and to schedule project work.

Interacting with Clients and StakeholdersGeoDesign will serve as an extension of the WSDOT’s staff, providing additional technical expertise and resources for the LTPP forensic evaluations. This partnership ensures that we collectively tap into the intimate understanding of applicable area regulatory requirements, while bringing sufficient staffing, equipment, and technical knowledge for high-quality outcomes.

MONITORING BUDGETSOur accounting system can provide a “snapshot” of project budget, amount billed, work in progress, and total amount spent, while also drilling down to show detailed charges.

17


Consistent with our company culture and reputation, we commit to prompt and effective communication with WSDOT personnel throughout the duration of the project. Depending on project needs, we will attend meetings and present our findings for review prior to sending our reports. GeoDesign issues easy-to-understand and comprehensive results in our technical reports; and we provide avenues for feedback through draft report review and discussion with agency personnel.

A. WORK PLAN DEVELOPMENT

How does your firm develop a work plan for this projectOur approach to developing a work plan for this project will begin with communication with WSDOT personnel; and we will maintain communications throughout the duration of the project. We understand from the RFQ that the study involves forensic evaluation of LTPP test sections to determine why they have failed and that the protocols identified in NCHRP Report 747 are to be followed in conducting the evaluations. While NCHRP Report 747 clearly lays out the methodologies to follow in a phased approach, interaction with WSDOT personnel will be required to determine whether or not all phases are necessary to determine with confidence the most likely causative factors that led to failure of each test section. Accordingly, we will develop our work plan using the guidance provided in NCHRP Report 747 with provision for WSDOT personnel actively participating in the process.

Who is involved with the decision-making process for developing the work planGeoDesign’s project manager, Todd Scholz, will be the primary person responsible for developing the work plan. He will work closely with WSDOT personnel and GeoDesign’s other key team members to ensure the plan meets the goals and expectations of WSDOT.

Elements of Proposed Work PlanAt the very least, our work plan will include completing a visual assessment to determine the type, severity, and extent of distresses exhibited by the pavement within each test section. Objective assessment of the pavement surface in this way can provide compelling evidence for the causes of pavement failure, but it is a poor indicator of subsurface conditions and pavement structural capacity—both of which are necessary (in our opinion) to obtain a robust assessment of pavement performance.

Accordingly, we anticipate including in our work plan subsurface explorations in the form of pavement borings through the pavement and into the subgrade, typically to depths up to about 10 feet below ground surface. Pavement borings will allow us to evaluate—at each location—the type, thickness, and condition of each pavement layer, as well as the type and condition of the supporting subgrade soil. Pavement borings at crack locations also allow evaluation of crack penetration depth and top-down versus bottom-up cracking. In addition, pavement borings allow us to obtain samples of pavement surfacing, base, subbase (if present), and subgrade soil for laboratory testing as warranted.

CRITERIA 5 | PROJECT DELIVERY APPROACH

18


We anticipate including H-FWD deflection testing and back-calculation analysis to evaluate the stiffness of each pavement layer and the subgrade soil at each test location. Given that a large number of locations can be tested in a short period, H-FWD testing has the potential of evaluating these characteristics at closely-spaced intervals. If a test section is comprised of jointed concrete pavement, H-FWD testing can be conducted to evaluate load transfer across joints. In addition, H-FWD testing can be used to detect voids beneath concrete slabs. However, GPR testing may be a more cost-effective evaluation technique for detecting voids.

If our subsurface explorations reveal delaminated layers, moisture damage in HMA layers, disintegration in PCC layers, and/or voids within or beneath the pavement structure, we anticipate recommending GPR testing and evaluation as part of the work plan. We can also include GPR testing if a continuous profile of pavement thickness along a test section is desired. In either case, our GPR data will be adjusted, if necessary, to the data obtained from the pavement borings.

Although trenching typically provides a wealth of valuable information, it can result in significant, localized disruption to the integrity of the pavement structure. To this end, inclusion of trenching in the work plan warrants consideration of a number of factors including, but not limited to: the value of information gained from the operation in relation

to other investigation techniques; the traffic volume that uses the facility; the safety of investigators during the operation; the challenges in repairing the trench; the overall cost of performing the work; and many others. Accordingly, we will assess these factors and work closely with WSDOT personnel prior to making recommendations for trenching in our work plan.

As indicated previously, we have in-house laboratories and are fully capable of conducting a variety of laboratory tests on aggregate and soil samples obtained from our subsurface explorations. We anticipate including in our work plan several laboratory tests that will add benefit to our evaluations. Our initial thoughts are to include moisture content tests, sieve analyses including fines content, and Atterberg limits tests as warranted. In addition, we will include specialized testing on samples of HMA and/or PCC if desired or if conditions suggest added value can be gained from such testing.

Our work plan will describe our approaches for analyzing the data, which will depend on the issues being investigated and the type of data being analyzed. In all cases, we will perform quality checks to ensure reasonableness and correctness prior to performing any analyses. Given that traffic has a significant effect on pavement performance, we will work with appropriate WSDOT personnel to ensure we have the best estimate of historical traffic for each test section evaluated. Similarly, our analyses will take into consideration the impact of past climatic conditions on pavement performance, if applicable. Finally, we use statistical analyses to assess variability of the data, test for outliers, and potentially conduct hypothesis testing as appropriate.

COLLABORATING WITh WSDOTGiven that traffic has a significant effect on pavement performance, we will work with appropriate WSDOT personnel to ensure we have the best estimate of historical traffic for each test section evaluated.

19


How work plan addresses contingenciesAlthough we provide above a general description for each element of a work plan, our approach will be to describe each element in much greater detail to clearly and explicitly define our scope of services. We will work closely with WSDOT personnel to ensure our work plan meets the goals and expectations of WSDOT. Nevertheless, given that it is difficult, if not impossible, to anticipate all circumstances we may encounter during our evaluations, we will clearly and concisely document unforeseen circumstances that will potentially affect the budget, schedule, quality of data, or purpose of completing the forensic evaluations. We will provide the document to appropriate WSDOT personnel, together with proposed mitigation options, for the purposes of collaboratively deciding how to move forward with the project.

B. APPROACh TO RESOLVING ISSUES

GeoDesign’s client references (see Packet B) can attest to our willingness to listen. We resolve any project issues through proactive communication with the project stakeholders. By actively communicating with team members, we develop solid working relationships with our clients and a better understanding of their priorities and needs. This approach alerts team members up-front of potential issues, provides us the opportunity to design site-specific exploration and laboratory testing programs, and delivers a product to our clients on schedule and on budget.

C. WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE

Whether or not the LTPP test sections to be evaluated under this study are active LTPP sections, we assume that most of the relevant historical data for each section is contained in the LTPP InfoPave database. Irrespective of our assumption, we anticipate WSDOT deliverables to include the following:

∙ Notice to proceed ∙ LTPP section numbers identifying the specific sections to be evaluated within this

study ∙ Limits of LTPP section segments if partial sections are to be evaluated ∙ Values for data elements missing from the LTPP InfoPave database, if relevant to

this study and if available ∙ As-designed and as-built typical pavement sections for each study section, if

available (otherwise, we shall assume the sections contained in the LTPP InfoPave database represent in situ sections)

∙ Any data collected from the test sections and not included in the LTPP InfoPave database, if relevant to the objectives of this study (e.g., vehicle classification data, if available, potentially would be particularly beneficial)

We assume that we will need to provide monthly (or quarterly) reports documenting our progress and DBE utilization on the overall project. In addition, for each test section evaluated under this study, we assume our primary deliverables will consist of the following:

∙ Preliminary work plan ∙ Data report summarizing findings from approved preliminary work plan

20


∙ Revised work plan to complete additional testing, if warranted ∙ Project report summarizing undertakings, findings from all approved phases, and

opinion regarding the most likely cause factor(s) leading to pavement failure

D. KEY ISSUES AND CRITICAL MILESTONES

The key issues that come to mind at this stage are missing data and the accuracy of data in the LTPP InfoPave database. Without knowing the LTPP test sections to be evaluated in this study, it is not known if there are missing data. However, if data are missing, this will create challenges in interpreting data and it will introduce error during analysis, which could potentially adversely skew the results. Similarly, inaccurate data will also introduce error and potentially shew results. Accordingly, until we check for missing data and confirm the data has passed QC checks, we foresee these as potential issues that may hamper our efforts to infer accurate conclusions from the data.

With regard to critical milestones, we consider these to correspond with:

∙ Initial site visits to each test section ∙ Submission of the preliminary work plans ∙ Deadlines for completing the field work, analyses, and data reports under the

preliminary work plans ∙ Submission of the revised work plans (if warranted); ∙ Deadlines for completing the field work, analyses, and data reports under the revised

work plans (if authorized) ∙ Submission of the project report

Printed on 100% Recycled Paper

Documents

2017 LTPP Forensic Evaluation Packet A - wsdot.wa.gov · Cell: 512-496-4465 Email: [email protected] Contents ... same key staff involved in NCHRP Project 01-49, which led to