1. TxDOt maintenance division update
Pavement Maintenance Program

2. MNT SEAL COAT PROGRAM SUPPORT GOALS
June 1, 2018
Dennis Berryhill - Maintenance Program Specialist
SHARING BEST PRACTICES
PS&E
Seal Coat Roadway Preparation
Contract Inspection Techniques
Review Past Successes/Problems
ASSIST IN DEVELOPING DISTRICT SEAL COAT SPECIALISTS/COORDINATORS

3. DISTRICT MEETINGS
San Angelo, Yoakum – June Pharr, Bryan, Paris - July Lubbock - August Beaumont- September Laredo, Fort Worth, Dallas, Waco – October Abilene - November

4. SEAL COAT STEERING COMMITTEE
Committee Comprised of TxDOT, AGC and TxAPA Employees/Members Seal Coat Program Growth $234 m (FY 18) to $276 m (FY 19) Knowledge Transfer and Enhanced Training/Regional Support

5. 4 Year Pavement Management Plans
PMIS Begins in 1993, Texas Transportation Commission establishes 90% Good or Better Goal in 2002 (86.30% in FY 17, 87.93% in FY 18)
The first 4 Year PMP was developed by the Districts for FY 09-12, Response due to 3 years of declining pavement conditions scores
First Pavement Management Plan Review was in 2010 to ensure a statewide, consistent approach
This year met with all 25 Districts in June (District Engineers, Directors of Maintenance/Operations)
Discussed Plan Development Process/Review Plan Maps
Discussed System Safety on Projects

6. In-House Seal Coat Operations

7. In-House Seal Coat Operations

8. In-House Seal Coat Operations

9. FY17 Routine Maintenance Seal Coat Work Expenditures
Seal Coat Activity
Total Expenditures
2017
$ 39,478,487.20
231 - Full Width Seal Coat
$ 30,396,260.70
232 - Strip Seals
$ 5,830,115.99
233 - Fog Seal
$ 3,252,110.51
Grand Total
Seal Coat Activity
Total Contract Expenditures ($)
2017
$ 38,060,683.00
231 - Full Width Seal Coat
$ 35,620,710.78
232 - Strip Seals
$ 2,066,231.28
233 - Fog Seal
$ ,740.94
Grand Total

10. In-House Seal Coat Work
PROS
Slower pace, good quality (allows for timely, corrective actions)
Allows for careful planning for each roadway
Training ground for new employees (institutional knowledge)
Great maintenance tool, especially strip seals
Low cost treatment to modify striping configurations

11. In-House Seal Coat Work
CONS
Crews may be redirected
Equipment issues (availability, costs)
Slower production rates (limits amount of work performed)

12. In-House ACP Operations

13. In-House ACP Operations

14. In-House ACP Operations

15. FY2017 Routine Maintenance ACP Work Expenditures
Overlay Activity
Total In House Expenditures
211 - Laydown Machine Level Up
$ 57,458,285.51
212 - Maintainer Level Up
$119,527,463.45
214 - Drag Box Level Up
$ 3,407,492.41
Grand Total
$180,393,241.37
Overlay Activity
Total Contract Expenditures
211 - Laydown Machine Level Up
$ 74,419,097.41
212 - Maintainer Level Up
$ 5,314,337.85
214 - Drag Box Level Up
$ ,313.33
Grand Total
$79,968,748.59

16. In-House ACP Work
PROS
Rental of laydown machine w/operator extends TxDOT crews
Provides for a rapid response for unplanned repairs
Addresses areas with small quantities

17. In-House ACP Work CONS Material availability for small quantities
Delivery issues
Possibly have multiple vendors for different mix gradations
Crews may be redirected
Quality of final product (segregation, density, rolling patterns, ride quality)

18. Questions