In this issue ... Highways
Revisiting Green Highways: A Look Back, A Look Ahead
Interstate Anniversary Commemorations Gaining Momentum
Concrete Barriers Can Increase Safety, Alleviate Traffic Woes

Green Highways was developed as a pilot program in sustainability by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Region III (serving Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia).

Sustainability is, of course, the increasingly popular approach of balancing construction needs with economic, environmental, and societal considerations. It's important to note that these words represent more than just philosophies, but a way of life for a growing number of states, cities, counties, and towns.

The EPA? Yes, the EPA …

One common question is why the EPA has taken on the very large task, particularly noting that it goes beyond purely environmental issues.

The concept began as the EPA sought meaningful ways to streamline the process of assessing environmental impact and safeguarding environmental stewardship related to highway construction. Environmental streamlining has been a much debated (and sometimes contentious) issue among agencies of jurisdiction, industry, and the general public - all of whom had different perspectives.

Bridging the gaps is arguably a lofty goal that presents a lot of challenges, but as the EPA delved into the environmental streamlining, it became clear that safety and the balance of economic, environmental, and societal considerations were both important and a good fit. With those premises in mind, the Green Highways initiative was conceived as a way of being more proactive and forward thinking.

"We wanted to move away from waiting for failure and then enforcing," said Denise Rigney, Transportation Liaison for EPA's Region III. "We want to work together in a compliance and assistance mode to find ways to positively impact everything."

What's happened … and what's next?

EPA officials have rallied the support of a large and growing number of stakeholders, including officials representing a wide range of functional areas within the Federal Highway Administration, state Departments of Transportation (DOT's); trade associations; and consultants.

Plenary meetings were held in 2005 to set program goals and objectives, as well as to establish a framework for the program, all of which gives Green Highways both a sense of purpose and a tangible set of actions to pursue.

"We have gained perspective from the wide representation of a whole new sector of the transportation community that we've never seen before," Rigney said.

Team members have not only worked together to discuss the potential ways to change public policy and best practices, but also on some other things that have been natural extensions of the program. For example, the Green Highways group has worked with the Maryland State Highway Administration to develop a pilot program in stormwater management.

The program is designed to leave the environment and the community's transportation system "better than before." This phrase has become a recurring mantra for the program as participants work to results from this effort, as well as other best practices with other agencies.

Growing interest in Green Highways

There are no mandatory requirements of Green Highways; it is simply a voluntary program, and therefore, program participants are working with state and federal agencies to encourage incentives for taking risks and implementing forward-thinking ideas, projects, and programs. The EPA also is exercising some flexibility in regulatory enforcement, looking at processes to put assistance first and leaving traditional enforcement tactics as a last resort.

Although the pilot program is currently regional in scope, there is strong interest in the program from the transportation community across the United States. A website currently in development will aim to make available regional information to interested parties throughout the United States. For its part, ACPA has been an active partner in the program for more than a year and continues to work as a supporting member of the Green Highways initiative.

"It's been our pleasure to work side by side with the EPA officials, as well as people from every quarter of the transportation community on this innovative program," said Robb Jolly, ACPA's Senior Vice President of Market Development. "Initially, there were some who questioned why and how EPA and other transportation partners would work together, but the results and feedback have been very promising.

"With growing interest in the program, it's clear that a growing number of transportation officials recognize the need to balance the environment, the needs of society, and the requirements of agencies, roadbuilders, and the traveling public," Jolly continued. "What may be less apparent is that this balanced approach is not a short-term trend; it's a long-term strategy that holds the promise of expediting road construction without trading off what's important to all concerned."

In terms of next steps, a workshop is scheduled for next month, at which time the Green Highways program leadership hopes to receive more ideas from the transportation community. Rigney and Jolly encouraged public officials, members of academia, and industry representatives to contribute questions, ideas, or other suggestions. To submit ideas or suggestions, contact Denise Rigney at 215-814-2726 or Robb Jolly at 202-887-8290.

Portable concrete barriers, with their ability to keep wayward vehicles from hitting construction vehicles, have proven to improve safety in construction work zones.

However, the benefits of the barriers also include reducing construction time and user delay costs.

According to a publication released by the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, the continuous longitudinal barrier formed by the precast concrete safety shape sections in a portable concrete barrier can prevent vehicles from hitting workers.

State DOT's also have discovered the added benefits of portable concrete barriers. Easily moved to allow for the highest traffic volume at all times, they can reduce the amount of construction time necessary to complete a project and user-delay costs.

For example, with portable concrete barriers, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation was able to complete the westbound Interstate 94 St. Croix River Bridge project in one construction season, as well as reduce user-delay costs to $480,000. Without concrete barriers, the project was estimated to take two construction seasons and cost $1,810,000 in user-delay costs.

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation completed its westbound Interstate 94 St. Croix River Bridge project in one construction season, compared to the two seasons it would have cost using traditional methods to manage traffic flow.

There is an often-overlooked tool that can help contractors ensure the overall quality of concrete, the unit weight test, now called the Standard Test Method for Density, Yield and Air Content of Concrete.

When commenting on what research is badly needed in order to improve the quality of concrete in practice, a leading authority states that what may be needed more urgently than new research is the employment of existing technologies to improve the uniformity of concrete.(1) Excessive variability, batch-to-batch and even within-batch, can compromise overall concrete quality.

A recent shift among state highway agencies toward performance-related or performance-based specifications will require concrete paving contractors to emphasize process control to accomplish quality consistently.

Unfortunately, process control can cost money. Fortunately, the cost of implementing improved process control can be offset by savings from reduced standard deviation in the strength of the concrete (as well as other measured properties), allowing for less over-design.(1)

The unit weight test is a simple test performed on plastic concrete. It allows contractors to determine the quantity of concrete produced per batch in a matter of a few minutes.

The test method involves placing fresh concrete in a unit weight measure of known volume (usually a pressure meter bucket) in three consolidated layers of equal volume, and determining its mass to the nearest 0.1 lb.

With the possible exception of a scale, the quality technician's tool kit should already include the equipment needed to perform the test.

The only additional step beyond the typically required pressure meter test (ASTM C 231, AASHTO T 152) is to weigh the pressure meter bucket (unit weight measure) immediately after filling.

The test method also gives formulas for calculating the yield and cement content of the concrete. The unit weight can also be used to determine the air content of concrete, provided the specific gravities of the constituents are known.(2)

Unit weight results can be used as an indicator of the variability and overall quality of freshly mixed concrete.

Use of the unit weight test on an ongoing basis during production allows on-site personnel to have a much better handle on batch-to batch concrete uniformity. It also will allow contractors to respond to concrete variability quickly and proactively. By performing unit weight tests at the batch plant, contractors can readily identify loads that may not perform well through the paver before the concrete is delivered to the site. Such simple real-time process control using unit weight tests has the potential to greatly reduce the frequency of mixture-related paving problems.

The unit weight test is a basic tool that can assure the quality of concrete. It is easy to implement and difficult to use incorrectly.
_____________________________
(1) Adam Neville, Neville on Concrete - An Examination of Issues in Concrete Practice, ACI, Farmington Hills, Michigan, 2003.
(2) Kosmatka S. H., et al, Design and Control of Concrete Mixtures, PCA, Skokie, Illinois, 2002.
(3) Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete, ASTM C 94, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2003.

After considering comments made during a stakeholders' meeting in October, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has made available for comment the Highways for L.I.F.E. (1) implementation proposal plan.

Comments will be accepted until February 28, giving the surface transportation community the opportunity to provide input on the document.

FHWA specifically requests feedback on technology partnerships and the application of Highways for L.I.F.E. performance goals set by the plan, according to a notice posted in the FEDERAL REGISTER.

The proposal outlines the six program elements identified as key points of HfL, including: technology transfer; technology partnerships; information dissemination; projects; funding; and accountability.

To submit comments, members may mail or hand deliver them to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL–401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590; submit electronically at http:// dms.dot.gov; or fax comments to (202) 493–2251.

Comments also may be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.

Click here to read the proposal plan, including more information about submitting comments.
_________________________
(1) In the name, "Highways for L.I.F.E.," the acronym represents long lasting, innovative and fast construction of efficient and safe highways and bridges.

ACPA Concrete Pavement Progress is published 12 times per year and covers current practices and case histories in the concrete pavement industry. ACPA Concrete Pavement Progress is distributed free of charge to public officials, ACPA members, executive committee, board of directors, and affiliated chapter/state paving associations.

All rights reserved. Copyright 2006 by the American Concrete Pavement Association. No portion of this publication may be reproduced mechanically or electronically without the expressed written permission of the American Concrete Pavement Association.