Geotechnical Asset Management Plan: Analysis of Life-Cycle Cost and Risk

Abstract

The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities is implementing a geotechnical asset management program for its rock and soil slopes, retaining walls, and material sites. The program includes a geographic inventory, periodic site assessment of condition and risk, and a quantitative investment analysis that includes risk and life-cycle cost. In developing the program, the department has addressed all the requirements of federal laws and the proposed regulations for performance measurement and transportation asset management (TAM) plans. Ultimately, the goal is to include these asset classes within the department’s TAM plan. This paper describes the motivation and goals of the analysis; performance assessment process; means of integrating risk with life-cycle cost; models of treatment cost, effectiveness, and deterioration; and methods for assessing the likelihood and consequences of service disruption. Examples focus on the inputs and results for rock slopes.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Morehouse

Transportation Asset Management: Introduction. Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Juneau, 2013.

Thompson

P. D.

Enterprise Transportation Asset Management: Synthesis and Work Plan, Final Report. Prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Juneau, 2013.

Turner

A. K.

, and Schuster

R. L.

(eds.). Rockfall Characterization and Control. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc., PB Consult, Inc., and Texas Transportation Institute. NCHRP Report 551: Performance Measures and Targets for Transportation Asset Management. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006.

Anderson

S. A.

, and Rivers

B. S.

. Corridor Management: A Means to Elevate Understanding of Geotechnical Impacts on System Performance. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2349, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2013, pp. 9–15.

Gordon

, Jason Smith

, Thompson

P. D.

, Park

, Harrison

, and Elston

. AASHTO Transportation Asset Management Guide, Volume 2: A Focus on Implementation. AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2011.

FHWA. Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on Transportation Asset Management Plans. Federal Register, Vol. 80, No. 34, 2015, pp. 9231–9253.

Committee on Increasing National Resilience to Hazards and Disasters, and Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2012.

Hughes

J. F.

, and Healy

. Measuring the Resilience of Transport Infrastructure. Research Report 546. New Zealand Transport Agency, Auckland, 2014.

10.

Levina

, and Tirpak

. Adaptation to Change: Key Terms. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Report JT03208563, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 2006.

11.

Allenby

, and Fink

. Toward Inherently Secure and Resilient Societies. Science, Vol. 309, No. 5737, pp. 1034–1036.

12.

FHWA. Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on National Performance Management Measures. Federal Register, Vol. 80, No. 2, 2015, pp. 326–393.

13.

Manual for Bridge Element Inspection. AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2013.

14.

Beckstrand

, Mines

, Thompson

P. D.

, and Benko

. Development of Mitigation Cost Estimates for Unstable Soil and Rock Slopes Based on Slope Condition. Presented at 95th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016.

15.

Thompson

P. D.

, Ford

K. M.

, Arman

M. H. R.

, Labi

, Sinha

, and Shirolé

. NCHRP Report 713: Estimating Life Expectancies of Highway Assets. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012.

16.

Sobanjo

J. O.

, and Thompson

P. D.

. Enhancement of the FDOT’s Project Level and Network Level Bridge Management Analysis Tools: Final Report. Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, 2011.

17.

User and Non-User Benefit Analysis for Highways. AASHTO, Washington, D.C., 2010.