Complete Workshop Proceedings

Superpave Technology Implementation

1.0 Superpave Lead States Team. The Superpave Lead States Team as established in 1996, includes representatives from six AASHTO member departments, and additional representatives from the Federal Highway Administration and industry. The participating member departments are New York, Utah, Maryland, Florida, Indiana and Texas. A guest representative from Illinois DOT also participated in the workshop. A complete listing of participants appears in Appendix 1.

2.0 Team’s Mission. Superpave Team established its mission in 1996. It reads as follows:

"The Lead States Team will assist in the uniform implementation of the Superpave (Superior Performing Asphalt Pavements) System by documenting and sharing experiences, furthering development, and providing guidance related to the practical implementation of the technology."

3.0 Team’s Accomplishments - 1997-98. The Team has an enviable record of accomplishments to its credit. Some of the highlights are as follows:

• Established a Lead State web site with an address of, http://leadstates.tamu.edu
• Collection/Publication of Program Level Data consisting of the following items:
  • Second Annual Implementation survey completed.
  • Multi media presentation material provided to Lead States, FHWA, User/Producer Group, SP Centers and industry.
  • Hard copy report created/distributed to all members of SCOH, SOM, widely distributed to industry and trade magazines.
  • Results of survey reported in many publications including, Focus, Better Roads, Construction Monthly, and World Highways.
  • Survey highlights are to be displayed at AASHTO Annual Meeting
  • FHWA Superpave Technology Delivery Team took the lead for project level data collection.
  • In this regard, the Team contracted with NCAT to develop a uniform method of project level data collection. NCAT has already collected data on 44 projects from 8 states and it will be issuing a report in the near future.
• Publication of a list of Lead State pool of experts
  • Updated this list and published it nationally on web sites, in Focus, implementation reports, and trade magazines.
• Encouraged uniform implementation by defining Superpave.
  • Three Team members collaborating on the defining elements of Superpave. This report will be released shortly.
• Participation in Conference, "Superpave: Today and Tomorrow."
  • Four Lead State Representatives made presentations in the April 1998 Asphalt Institute/FHWA sponsored symposium on, "Superpave: Today and Tomorrow." The conference was attended by several hundred professionals.
• Issued 1998 AASHTO Superpave Lead State Guidance.
  • A report on the guide for practical application of Superpave System was jointly developed by the members of the Lead State Team, six non lead states, FHWA and industry representatives. It was published in June 1998 and distributed to all State Materials Engineers, and reported in FOCUS, FHWA Superpave Update, The Asphalt Contractor, and several web pages.
• AASHTO Superpave Standards as effected by the Lead States Guidance Report.
  • Guidance document recommend a number of changes to four key AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials (SOM) Superpave Standards.
  • NCHRP 9-9, issued subsequently, also resulted in similar and/or additional recommendations for standard changes.
  • Based on the Guidance Document, AASHTO Subcommittee on Materials (SOM) established a 5 State Task Force to develop and recommend a ballot for SOM consideration.
  • Task Force is comprised of three lead states: New York, Maryland, Utah; joined by North Carolina and New Jersey. Task Force met in September 1998 and agreed to develop a ballot with nearly 50 improvements to 4 Superpave Standards, PP-2, TP-4, MP-2, PP-28.

4.0 Making the Difference - Measuring the Impact. The Team felt that it has made the difference we do business in the blacktop industry. Some if its achievements are represented in the wider acceptance of the Superpave System and the increased level of interest by the users in the work performed by the Team. The items that have made the difference are listed below:

• Lead State Guidance.
• Web Site and the recorded hits on the site.
• Superpave Survey report and results.
• Increased Communication with the potential users of the technology.
• Lead State / Client State relationship has become more cohesive.
• Accelerated adoption of SHRP Superpave System.
• Impact on research activities.
• AASHTO SOM standard changes.

5.0 Lessons Learned. In terms of sharing its experience, the Team Members outlined the following as the lessons learned:

• Technology transfer is resource intensive.
• It requires an intense commitment of all those who participate in the use and application of technology.
• It requires funding for travel and organization of meetings among members and for individual members for getting the word out and keeping in touch with potential users of the technology.
• A focused network of committed individuals must be developed and enacted.
• Maintain executive and technical level support.
• Keep the size of Team manageable and share responsibilities in an equitable manner.
• Maintain close liaison with the AASTHO Headquarters.
• Schedule and conduct effective meetings with client states.
• Market technology to targeted audience.
• Increase participation of industry and local governments.
• Establish link with AASHTO Subcommittees including Subcommittee on Materials.

6.0 Work Plans for 1998-99.

6.1 General Discussion on What Needs to be Done: Before outlining its new goals, the Team Members had an open discussion on the factors affecting their mission and the areas in the Superpave System which need their attention. These factors described in terms of, "Actions to be Taken" are noted below:

• Identify barriers to implementation in 21 states.
• Develop cost savings information.
• Support QC/QA specifications.
• Report on lessons learned from Lead State process.
• Develop O/C curves on completed projects.
• Program level bench mark survey needs to be conducted.
• Collect project level data.
• Certification in training needs of technicians must be examined.
• Support One Superpave database.
• Define what is meant by "uniform" Superpave.
• Measure the impact of Superpave Lead State Team.
• Lead States should monitor and report performance of Superpave projects.
• Extend the use of Superpave to other customers.
• Update Lead State Guidance, as necessary.
• Develop sunset plan for the Lead States Team’s work.

6.2 Specific Goals and Action Plans - 1998-99. The general discussion session enabled the Team Members to prioritize Teams goals and action plans for the next year. They are as follows:

6.2.1 Goal: Develop Sunset Plan, Paul Mack.

6.2.2 Goal: QC/QA Specification, Lee Gallivan

6.2.3 Goal: Support one Uniform Database for Project Level Data, Gary Henderson

6.2.4 Goal: Annual Survey, Paul Mack

6.2.5 Goal: Monitor and Report the Pavement Performance of Completed Superpave Projects, Jim Musselman

6.2.6 Goal: Update Lead State Guidance, Larry Michael

6.2.7 Goal: Update of Superpave Resources by FHWA-OTA, available on their web site

6.3 Estimated Budget FY 1999 and 2000. The estimated travel funds the Lead States need annual is $ 50,000; to attended the following: Asphalt Technical Working Group (meeting twice a year), Asphalt Binder Expert Task Group (ETG) (meeting twice a year), Asphalt Mixture ETG (meeting twice a year), and the Lead State Meeting (meeting once a year).

6.4 Presentation at 1999 Annual TRB Meeting. TRB Presentation / Booth: Paul, with Larry as an alternate, will give a presentation at TRB. The Team is not interested in having a booth.