ACPA Quarter 3 2019

www.acpa.org Quarter 3, 2019 25 A JOINT EFFORT LED TO THE INCLUSION of full- depth reclamation (FDR)* in the FAA’s Standard Specifications for Construction of Airports, also referredtoasFAAAdvisoryCircular150/5370-10H. The industry’s interest in revising the specifica- tion stemmed from FDR being promoted to airport owners, most notably by the Southeast Chapter, says Gary Mitchell, ACPA’s VP of Air- ports and Technology. He says the Chapter and other ACPApromoters have done an outstanding job promoting FAA projects, adding, “They’ve completed several where they’ve rehabilitated pavements with in-place cement-treated base material, but those projects often had to be com- pleted through a modification of existing airport pavement construction standards.” The process involves the engineer submitting the modification request and reasoning to the FAAdistrict office or ADO. “The ADO canmake decisions on some modifications, but for that particular type of modification, they would have to send it up to the region for review, and if they agreed with it, they would have to send it to the engineers at FAA headquarters,” Mitchell says. If they approved it, he says, the response would then have to follow the same path back to the ADO and then to the engineer. “In all, the process could take anywhere between a fewweeks to as much as three months,” Mitchell says, adding, “It was really a burdensome process and it wasn’t done as often as we would have liked, so the FDR strategy wasn’t considered an alternate on a lot of projects because it was too difficult to get the modification quickly.” All of this changed during the process whenMitch- ell, with support fromcontractors and othermem- bers of ACPA’s Airport Task Force were working together with the FAA on a revision of the FAA’s 150/5370-10 standard. The entire construction guide specificationswere revisedduring the review and revision process, including specifications for concrete pavement construction (P-501), aggregate base course (P- 209), cement-treated base course (P-304), and other specifications. “We discussed with the FAA the development of the FDR spec so we could avoid going through modifications,” he says. “They were receptive to the idea, which we advocated because it would give engineers the option using a specification instead of the cumbersome modification of standards.” Mitchell says during almost daily conversations with key FAA officials, notably Doug Johnson and Greg Cline, were instrumental in identify- ing potential challenges and working through changes efficiently. Messrs. Johnson and Cline are both Senior Civil Engineers and pavement subject matter experts (SME) for the FAA’s Of- fice of Airports Safety and Standards, Airport Engineering Division in Washington, DC. On a parallel path,Mitchell saidhewas alsohaving discussions with key personnel at PCA, including Wayne Adaska, Director of Pavements &Geotech- nical Markets, Dr. Paul Tennis, Director, Product Standards &Technology, and others at PCAwho recommended specification language, provided technical guidance, and joined in the discussion. He also credits long-time PCAmember Al Innes, who remains active with LafargeHolcim and the MIT SustainabilityHub. Together, this group pro- vided sound engineering judgment and technical information, which led to the FDR specification. Team Ef for t Leads to Changes in Airpor t Pavement Specifications Photo courtesy of Greg Dean, Carolinas Concrete Paving Association. continues on page 26 »