(2) Determine feasible M&R alternatives
amount of maintenance other than patching. If the
based on pavement condition evaluation summary (fig
engineer feels that a section should be evaluated as
having high previous maintenance, then this evaluation
(a) The purpose of this step is to
should take precedence over evaluation criteria based
determine whether alternatives other than existing
on only patching and slab replacement. In our example,
maintenance policy should be considered (e.g., overlay
figure 4-1, patching was in excess of 3.5 percent; so
or recycling), and, if so, what specific feasible
"High" was circled at line 8.
alternatives to consider. This is done by analyzing the
section evaluation summary (fig 4-1) for the pavement
i. Comments. Any specific requirements or items
section under consideration. Based on this analysis,
that might have an impact on the selection of feasible
existing maintenance would usually be recommended
alternatives should be noted on the form.
except when one or more of the following conditions
4-3. Determination of feasible M&R alternatives
1. Long or short-term rate of pavement
a. Assumption. In the process of selecting feasible
alternatives, one of the primary assumptions is that the
2. Load-carrying capacity is deficient
strategy will be implemented within 3 years.
(indicated by a "Yes" rating on the summary sheet).
b. Procedure. The process of selecting feasible
3. Load-associated distress accounts
M&R alternatives is summarized in figure 4-9 and is
for a majority of the distress deduct value.
4. Surface roughness is rated major.
(1) Determine M&R strategy.
(a) The purpose of this step is to
tial is rated major.
identify the pavement sections that need comprehensive
6. Previous M&R applied is rated high.
analysis. The data required for the identification are the
PCI, distress, pavement rank, pavement usage, traffic,
7. A change in mission requires
and management policy.
greater load-carrying capacity.
(b) Based on the factors in (a) above, a
(b) Table 4-6 lists most of the available
limiting PCI value is established for each type of
overall repair procedures for asphalt and jointed
pavement; e.g., 75 for primary roads with traffic volume
exceeding 10,000 vehicles per day, and 70 for primary
(c) All feasible alternatives should be
roads with traffic volume less than or equal to 10,000
identified based on a careful analysis of the section
vehicles per day. If a pavement has a PCI above the
evaluation summary (fig 4-1). Life-cycle cost analysis of
limiting value, continuation of existing maintenance
the feasible alternatives will help rank the alternatives
policy is recommended unless review of the distress
based on cost, and thus provide necessary information
data shows that the majority of distress is caused by
for selecting a cost-effective M&R alternative.
inadequate pavement strength and/or the rate of
procedure for performing a life-cycle cost analysis is
described in chapter 5.
these factors exists, proceed with the methods listed in
(c) below; if not, determine feasible M&R alternatives as
4-4. Establishing M&R priorities
discussed in (2) below.
. The criteria for establishing priorities
(c) If the M&R strategy decision is to
for pavement sections where routine M&R is required
continue existing maintenance policy, the information in
are different from those used for sections which need
tables 4-4 and 4-5 is used as a guide to select the
appropriate maintenance method. These tables present
feasible maintenance methods for each distress type at
routine M&R are a function of existing individual distress
a given severity level. If the distress does not have any
types and severity's. A single method is usually applied
severity level, the letter "A" is used in place of the
for a given area, which may consist of many sections,
severity level. For example, for pumping distress in
rather than different M&R methods for one section.
concrete pavements, the appropriate maintenance
Distresses that may have a considerable negative effect
method (depending on existing conditions) could be
on the section's operational performance are usually
crack sealing, joint sealing, and/or undersealing of the
corrected first. For example, medium and high-severity
bumps, corrugations, potholes, and shoving would
usually receive high priority.