Category:123 Federal-Aid Highway Program: Difference between revisions

123.1 Discussion

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is one of the key partners with MoDOT in delivering the highway program in the State of Missouri. Federally controlled funding of highway projects is an essential part of planning, design, construction, and preventive maintenance activities undertaken by MoDOT. The FHWA is one of the agencies under the U.S. Department of Transportation and is responsible for administering the Federal-Aid Highway Program nationwide. In addition to the Washington Headquarters office and Resource Centers, the FHWA has a division office in each state to provide direct assistance and guidance to the individual state highway departments. The primary sources of guidance on the Federal-Aid Program are available in Title 23, United States Code - Highways, 23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the current federal highway act,and the Federal-Aid Policy Guide (FAPG). These documents provide current regulations, policies and procedural guidance.

To ensure projects qualify for federal funding and obtain the maximum participation, compliance with federal laws, regulations and FHWA policies and procedures is necessary. This is accomplished through a close partnership arrangement with MoDOT and has included innovative methods and practices to enhance program implementation. FHWA and MoDOT have entered into an oversight agreement that allows MoDOT to discharge some responsibilities traditionally performed by FHWA for projects not on the Interstate highway system. This agreement documents the roles and responsibilities of both FHWA and MoDOT in carrying out the Federal-Aid Highway Program. This includes identification of the type of projects that will require federal involvement by FHWA, or are exempt from federal involvement. All Federal-Aid projects, regardless of whether MoDOT has responsibility for administration, must comply with all applicable federal regulations in order to receive federal-aid funding. Specific guidance and assistance in implementing the Federal-Aid Program is available from the FHWA Missouri Division office in Jefferson City.

To further reinforce this close partnership, FHWA will be given the opportunity to participate in task forces and other quality improvement teams established to review existing processes and procedures to improve implementation of the MoDOT transportation program.

123.1.1 FHWA Oversight - National Highway System

The National Highway System (NHS) includes the entire interstate system and other urban and rural principal arterials along with major highway network connectors. The FHWA has the responsibility to ensure the safety, appropriate design, and national continuity of the NHS. This is accomplished through the oversight agreement.

PoDI Information

FY 25 Federal Involvement Project List are individual projects that require approval by FHWA for various project actions. The project list identifies projects selected by MoDOT and FHWA immediately following the development of the 5-year STIP.

123.1.2 Federal Appropriations

Current legislation provides for the appropriation of federally controlled funds from the Highway Trust Fund for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of Title 23, U.S.C. Funds are divided among the various states by an apportionment process. These funds are subject to mandatory limitations established by the U.S. Congress each fiscal year to help control spending and drawdown of the Highway Trust Fund. A certain percentage of the apportioned funds are directly allocated to urbanized areas with a population over 200,000 and are subject to the control of a metropolitan planning organization (MPO). In Missouri, the urbanized areas over 200,000 in population are St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield. The cities of St. Joseph, Joplin, Columbia, Cape Girardeau and the City of Jefferson also have MPOs but do not receive a direct allocation of funds. Other major funding categories are:

Interstate Maintenance (IM). IM funds can be used for resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation, but not for the construction of new travel lanes unless they are high occupancy vehicle (HOV) or auxiliary lanes.

National Highway System (NHS). NHS funds may be used for a variety of projects on the NHS including construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation, operational and safety improvements, start-up costs for traffic management and control systems, fringe and corridor parking facilities, carpool and vanpool projects, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

Surface Transportation Program (STP). These funds may be used for any highways, including the NHS, that are not functionally classified as local or rural minor collectors. Eligible items of work are similar to those under the NHS. However, 10% must be used for transportation enhancements and 62.5% of the remaining funds are sub-allocated to areas of the state based on population.

Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP). Eligible projects for HBRRP funding include replacement or rehabilitation of a structurally deficient or functionally obsolete highway bridge, replacement of ferryboat operations and low water crossings, bridge painting, calcium magnesium acetate applications, and seismic retrofitting. Additionally, not less than 15% will be spent on off-system bridges.

123.1.3 Programming

To ensure coordination of intergovernmental planning and before any federal-aid programs are approved by FHWA, all projects must be cleared under the Missouri State and Local Review System. Briefly, this is described as:

State Clearinghouse The State Clearinghouse, after notifying other state agencies, certifies to MoDOT that these agencies have been informed of the project and have indicated whether the proposed work conflicts with their programs.

Regional and Metropolitan Clearinghouses Similar clearance must be received from regional and metropolitan clearinghouses who notify appropriate local governments and other regional agencies in the area. These clearinghouses provide comments to the MoDOT on proposed projects. Any adverse comments received from the clearinghouses must be resolved. In order for any proposed project to be eligible for federal funding, it must be included on the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Before any work is performed for which federal reimbursement is expected, FHWA must provide approval. MoDOT district offices will notify the Design Division as soon as possible if any proposed work is identified that is not on the approved STIP. For projects to be constructed in stages, a separate item will be shown on the STIP for each stage.

123.1.4 Federal Authorization

Authorization to proceed with a federal-aid project can be given only after applicable requirements of federal laws and regulations have been satisfied, including the planning and programming items noted above. For construction projects, additional requirements must be completed such as an approved environmental document, right-of-way clearance, and submission of a request to FHWA by MoDOT to authorize construction with the obligation of funds. Authorization to proceed is considered a contractual obligation of the Federal Government under 23 U.S.C. 106 and federal funds will not participate in costs incurred prior to the date of authorization.

123.2 Construction Inspection Guidelines

123.2.1 General Procedures

On Federal-Aid highway projects, the terms of federal participation are established by an oversight agreement between the department and the FHWA. This agreement provides for the work to be done in accordance with predetermined criteria contained in the plans and specifications, in approved standard drawings, and in special provisions required by the nature of the project.

The Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission will award a construction contract for the project with the concurrence of the FHWA. Supervision of construction is a function of the MoDOT’s engineers and inspectors. FHWA representatives may make periodic inspections of these projects and will complete a final inspection and final acceptance.

123.2.2 The FHWA - MoDOT Relationship

The relationship between the FHWA and MoDOT does not directly involve the contractor. FHWA representatives inspect the project to review MoDOT’s procedures for assuring the project is built according to commitments contained in project documents, MoDOT/FHWA agreements and to assure that the contractor follows proper construction practices. Any deficiencies noted by the FHWA representative shall be documented and conveyed to MoDOT’s engineer or inspector. MoDOT will work directly with the contractor to resolve these deficiencies.

MoDOT employees are expected to cooperate with FHWA representatives in their inspections. Note their comments in the diary. Promptly refer to the resident engineer matters that require their attention. Should a FHWA representative give instructions to a MoDOT employee which appears to be in conflict with MoDOT policy, the FHWA representative should be courteously informed that the employee has no authority to carry out such instruction but will refer the matter to the appropriate supervisor.

The MoDOT inspector, as directed by the resident engineer, will inform FHWA representatives of necessary extra work and of any proposed changes on projects designated for federal involvement for construction in the PODI matrix. All major changes must have concurrence of the FHWA before any of the work is started.

An oversight agreement signed by MoDOT and FHWA, outlines the specific procedures which the Construction and Materials Division together with the district must follow in the administration of a project. MoDOT will complete a final inspection and final acceptance on projects not designated for federal involvement. The FHWA reserves the right to observe a project under MoDOT responsibility, including those conducted by a Local Public Agency (LPA) at any time.

123.3 Materials Requirements

123.3.1 Independent Assurance Samples and Tests (IAS) System Based

123.3.1.1 Scope

To establish procedures for sampling, testing and reporting Independent Assurance Samples (IAS) on all Federal-aid projects. Federal-aid projects are Interstate, Primary and Secondary projects let and administered by MoDOT, and Off-System and Federal-aid Urban projects let and administered by a county, city, or MoDOT.

123.3.1.2 General

These procedures apply to all projects, with an emphasis on Federal-aid projects. These procedures do not change normal job control procedures for any projects.

The intent of the IAS process is to confirm that inspectors are knowledgeable in the specification governing the testing procedures and follow through with completing the tests correctly, and have equipment that is in good working condition and is properly calibrated, where applicable. This IAS process is considered system based and the audit of a given inspector does not have to take place on a Federal-aid project. The inspector should use the same diligence and attention to detail at all times, regardless whether the project has Federal-aid status. Inspectors on Off-System projects will be audited on the specific project, in most instances. (See EPG 123.3.2.)

The individual performing the IAS audit on an inspector is herein referred to as the IAS Auditor. Any person can be assigned the duties of the IAS Auditor however each district must designate an individual or individuals who aggregately have Technician Certification in all areas covered by the IAS program. The individual(s) must have been reviewed and compared favorably to another Central Office auditor within the last calendar year, and should have significant experience in materials inspection.

System Based IAS will not be limited to tests traditionally performed on certain materials, but will be extended to all tests of all materials. The process will include all project and non-project inspection. A prioritization process, described below, will be used to allocate resources so those inspectors responsible for Federal-aid projects are audited first. When resources allow, other inspectors will be audited using the procedures described here.

123.3.1.3 General Procedures

123.3.1.3.1 Report Review

As an aid in the prioritization and completion of audits, the following reports, are available in Cognos: Public Folders>AASHTOWARE>Headquarters>IAS Process Reports.

List of Testers and Audits with Contract: This report lists testers who have performed testing on a contract and whether or not an audit has been performed. If an audit has been performed, it also lists the audit sample ID number and the district who performed the audit. The report can be generated for a specific date range. The report will return sample records which list either IASA or OFFS.

IAS Auditors: This report lists the individuals from Central Office and the districts who have been designated as an IAS Auditor. Central Office maintains this list. The District Construction and Materials Engineer designates district auditors. The State Construction and Materials Engineer designates Central Office auditors. Auditors audit any Tester performing test(s) for acceptance on a Federal Project regardless of their Technician Certification credentials status.

List of Testers and Audits with Contract: This report lists testers who have performed testing on a contract and whether or not an audit has been performed. If an audit has been performed, it also lists the audit sample ID number and the district who performed the audit. The report can be generated for a specific date range. The report will return sample records which list either IASA or OFFS.

Audit Report: This report in generated by entering a specific audit sample record number, with or without a specific inspector, and will return all audit test results, equipment audit and comments in a PDF format which includes a line for the auditor signature.

IAS Off Systems: This report lists audits performed on testers for the year specified with the Sample Type of “OFFS” meaning the tester was working on a Federal-aid project not on the State system. The purpose of this report is to document audits on testers who are accepting material on Federal-aid projects but who are not otherwise audited by the IAS process. This report is used to compare against the list of testers supplied by the agency to determine if the tester has already been audited or still requires an audit.

Inspector Equipment: This report lists the equipment that has been indicated as assigned to the specific inspector or work group, or district. The report is used as a starting point during the audit of an inspector. If the inspector’s equipment is listed, then the data can be reviewed. If the equipment is not listed, the necessary data must be collected and entered into AWP. See EPG 123.3.1.4.9 Equipment Review.

Listing of current IAS Cognos reports that are available:

123.3.1.3.2 Audit Procedure

An IAS Audit should be performed on each tester who meets the following criteria based on the previous calendar year plus the year to date. (For example, if today were May 8, 2010, look at the year starting January 1, 2009 through May 8, 2010.) Listed below are the audit criterion and instructions for the actions to be taken under various circumstances.

The tester was assigned to do, or did inspection of material on any project, or created documentation related to inspection. (Note that “inspection” includes allowing the material to be incorporated into the project.) If not, no further action is taken with this tester at this time.

At least one project the tester inspected was a Federal-aid project. If not and when audit resources are severely limited, this tester will be reconsidered after all Federal-aid inspectors have been audited.

Table 123.3.1.3.2

If the tester did not perform any of the tests listed above, skip to EPG 123.3.1.3.2.3 and continue the review of this tester.

123.3.1.3.2.1

If the tester ran one or more of these tests on a project but did NOT have the appropriate Technician Certifications to run the test(s) or some of the Technician Certifications were expired, notify the appropriate supervisor(s) that the tester is not to perform testing without the required credentials. Create a record of the audit and indicate the tester as not comparing favorably.

123.3.1.3.2.2

If the tester ran one or more of these tests on a project and did have the appropriate Technician Certifications to run the test(s) and the Technician Certification was current at the time of the testing:

1. Review the tester sample records.

2. Schedule a meeting with the tester.

3. Audit the equipment in accordance with EPG 123.3.1.4.9 Equipment Review. If the equipment is not suitable for testing, alternate equipment should be used. Unsuitable equipment should not be used for any testing until repaired, calibrated or otherwise made worthy.

4. Audit the various tests the tester is certified to run (Audit means the tester runs the test while the IAS Auditor observes, and for some tests the IAS Auditor runs companion tests for comparison.).

5. Discuss the tester sample records with the tester, with focus on clarity, completeness, and compliance of the record with manuals and specifications.

6. Discuss the test results. This may be done by phone if they compare favorably and the companion results were not yet determined at the time of the audit.

7. Create a record of the audit and indicate the tester as comparing or not comparing favorably.

a. The record will include a list of each test run or observed, and the results for that test.

b. The supervisor will be notified of the tester audit results, and of any restrictions that exist following the audit, or recommendations that the tester not be allowed to run certain tests.

c. The tester may not be allowed to perform material testing in any deficient area(s) until a follow-up audit finds that the deficiency has been resolved. It will be the tester responsibility to contact Central Office and schedule the follow-up audit. Central Office personnel will perform any follow-up audits.

d. If a follow-up audit is required, and performed, and the tester is still deficient on one or more of the designated tests, the applicable Technician Certification will be suspended pending retraining.

e. If a follow-up audit is required, and performed, and the tester is still deficient in record keeping or general inspection practice, a recommendation of “not meeting expectations” will be forwarded to the supervisor with copies of the justification forwarded to the District Construction and Materials Engineer and the State Materials Engineer for potential additional action.

123.3.1.3.2.3

If the tester did not run any of the designated tests but ran other tests or was responsible for the review of material in any other way, such as certification review, visual inspection, or acceptance by PAL, perform the following:

1. Review the tester sample records.

2. Schedule a meeting with the tester.

3. Audit the various tests the tester ran (Audit in this sense means the Auditor will take typical material as might be found on the tester current project, or material brought to the meeting by the Auditor, and have the tester perform the appropriate inspection.)

4. Audit the equipment in accordance with EPG 123.3.1.4.9 Equipment Review.

5. Discuss findings in the tester sample records with the tester.

6. Create a record of the audit in accordance with Automation Section, and indicate the tester as comparing or not comparing favorably.

a. The record will include a list of each test run or observed, and the results for that test. (Test means inspection process such as look-up of pre-approved material, or review of certification in accordance with the specification.

b. The supervisor will be notified of the tester audit results, and of any restrictions that exist following the audit, or recommendations that the tester not be allowed to run certain tests.

c. The tester may not be allowed to perform material testing in any deficient area(s) until a follow-up audit, with a different auditor, finds that the deficiency has been resolved. It will be the tester responsibility to contact the District Auditors and schedule the follow-up audit. Central Office personnel will perform any follow-up audits that still do not compare favorably on the second I.A.S audit.

d. If a follow-up audit is required, and performed, and the tester is still deficient in record keeping or general inspection practice, a recommendation of “not meeting expectations” will be forwarded to the supervisor, with copies of the justification forwarded to the District Construction and Materials Engineer and the State Materials Engineer for potential additional action.

123.3.1.3.2.4

The auditor has responsibility for off-system and other Federal-aid projects as may not be managed or inspected by MoDOT personnel. In these instances, the targets tests indicated above and in Table 123.3.1.3.2 will be the focus of the audit. The auditor will observe and/or run companion tests as necessary.

The tester should have the appropriate Technician Certification credentials. Central Office has control over the status of the tester’s Technician Certification but cannot directly affect whether an tester is sent to an off-system project. When there are issues with the testing performance or equipment of an off-system tester, the appropriate agency (off-system project owner) should be contacted.

123.3.1.3.3 Frequency

The frequency at which IAS audits are to be performed is a minimum of once per year per inspector who has performed inspection on a Federal-aid project in the last 12 months. Also considered is the tester Technician Certification. A reasonable effort should be made to cover as many of the test methods the tester has performed in the last 12 months as possible.

123.3.1.3.4 Reasonable Effort

It is not the intent that an IAS audit be performed at predetermined uniform intervals. A reasonable effort should be made to have the audits occur on a random basis while still meeting the requirements of EPG 123.3.1.3.3.

123.3.1.3.5 Material from an Unrelated Source

An tester audit may involve material from a source that is unrelated to Federal-aid work. The goal is to determine whether the tester is capable of running the test or performing appropriate inspection. When practical, the audit will take place on a Federal-aid project, but this is not a requirement of a valid IAS audit. The auditor may obtain “audit sample” material in advance of an audit for use in the audit process. Refer to EPG 123.3.1.5.7 Prepared Audit Standard Samples.

123.3.1.3.6 Equipment

Each inspector assigned to be an IAS Auditor is to be fully equipped or have ready access to the equipment necessary to perform all field tests listed in Table 123.3.1.3.2, except nuclear density tests, asphalt binder content with a nuclear gauge, asphalt binder content with binder ignition oven, gyratory compactor and maximum specific gravity testing equipment. This equipment is to be used on a portion of the tests performed. As a guide, it is recommended that approximately 80% of each type of field test specified be performed by the IAS Auditor using equipment other than that assigned to project personnel, except when nuclear density testing, asphalt binder content by nuclear method, asphalt binder content by binder ignition method, gyratory compactor operation and maximum specific gravity testing are used. On the remaining tests to be made, the IAS Auditor may perform the test, or participate in the sampling and testing, or witness the sampling and testing.

123.3.1.3.7 Immediate Supervisor

When possible, the IAS Auditor and the tester being reviewed should not report to the same immediate supervisor.

123.3.1.4 Auditing Specified Tests

The instructions for each of the specified tests is as follows:

123.3.1.4.1 Nuclear Density

When nuclear density testing methods are used for project job control, the IAS Auditor is not required to perform any of those tests. However, designation of the location for the test, witnessing the test, checking calculations, and reporting is required. As indicated above, it is acceptable for the test to be run on a non-Federal-aid project or at any location where a valid test could be completed. In addition, the IAS Auditor is to review the daily standardization check for the machine being used, if the checks are required by policy. The audit report needs to state whether the standardization check was examined. If the standardization check has not been performed as required, please note in the remarks.

123.3.1.4.2 Asphalt Binder Content

When asphalt binder content, for normal job control, is determined by nuclear gauge or binder ignition oven, the IAS Auditor is not required to perform any of those tests. However, observing the sample preparation, testing, checking calculations, and reporting are required. When the nuclear gauge is used, the IAS Auditor is to review the statistical stability test records and the daily background check for the nuclear gauge being used. The report is to state that the statistical stability test and the background check were reviewed and found current and satisfactory, or not. The asphalt content by nuclear gauge or binder ignition oven is to be reported on the appropriate test template in AWP.

123.3.1.4.3 Gyratory Compactor

When a gyratory compactor is used for normal job control, the IAS Auditor is not required to perform any of those tests. However, if a gyratory compactor other than the one being used by the inspector is available, a split sample should be obtained and compacted on the alternate machine. In lieu of compacting a sample on an alternate machine the auditor may observe the required sample preparation, testing, and reporting. When a gyratory compactor is used, the IAS Auditor is to review the calibration records for the gyratory compactor being used. The report is to state that the calibration records were reviewed and found current and satisfactory, or not.

123.3.1.4.4 Suitable Locations

Independent Assurance tests may be performed at any suitable location in the field, district laboratory, or Central Laboratory in Jefferson City as condition and need dictates, unless otherwise directed.

123.3.1.4.5 Rounding Off

Test results are to be rounded off for reporting in conformance with the procedures set out in EPG 106.20 Reporting.

123.3.1.4.6 Sample Preparation

All IAS aggregate gradation tests are to be “washed” and are to include each sieve specified. The size of sample and method of sieve analysis of fine and coarse aggregate is to be in accordance with EPG 1001.5.1.2, except: (1) the size of hot bin gradation samples for bituminous mixtures shall be as shown in Division 400 of the specifications and (2) for coarse aggregate, the nominal maximum size of particle is to be considered as the largest sieve size on which material is retained.

123.3.1.4.7 Obtaining the Sample

IAS requirements for gradation, PI, or liquid limit tests on aggregates and base materials are to be fulfilled by obtaining the sample by one of the following methods.

(a) By the tester taking a sample in the presence of the IAS Auditor and then furnishing one-half of the sample to the IAS Auditor. The tester is to perform the required tests in the presence of the IAS Auditor and report the results to the IAS Auditor. The IAS Auditor will perform the required IAS tests on the other one-half sample, recording the results obtained by both the tester and the IAS Auditor in AWP.

(b) By the IAS Auditor taking or bringing a sample and furnishing one-half of the sample to the tester currently assigned to that plant or location, who will then perform the required tests and report the results to the IAS Auditor. The IAS Auditor will perform or will have previously performed the required IAS tests on the other one-half sample.

123.3.1.4.8 Samples sent to the Central Laboratory

The IAS Auditor may designate samples to be sent to the Central Laboratory. These samples are to be designated “IAS” in the Sample Type field of AWP. The sample record is to contain the prescribed information regarding the location and shall indicate the person designating the location and performing or witnessing the sampling. The IAS Auditor will record the Sample ID(s) of such samples sent to the Central Lab, review the results, and will make a final sample record regarding the results of the inspector audit.

123.3.1.4.9 Equipment Review

The test equipment used by the tester must be reviewed for status of calibration, general condition, and appropriateness for the test performed. Equipment assigned to an individual may be reviewed with the query designated in EPG 123.3.1.3.1 Report Review. Data will be edited or updated as necessary by individuals designated by the District Construction and Materials Engineer using the Calibrated Equipment window in SM (AS-3340). The tester is to make the initial determination of condition/calibration of the equipment and the auditor is to confirm this information. If the tester is in error, the nature of the error should be recorded as part of the audit of the inspector. The tester is to confirm that the calibrated equipment records are kept current, including notation of equipment taken out of service.

123.3.1.5 Test Procedures

The following tests are described as though the IAS Auditor and tester are working on a particular project. It is not necessary that the material be taken from, or for, a particular project. The tester will describe appropriate site selection and sampling, on the basis of the material be tested. When possible, the sampling site will be typical of that to be selected for a Federal-aid project.

123.3.1.5.1 Grading

The location of tests, for both embankment and subgrade preparation are to be selected so as to be typical of that which might occur on a Federal-aid project.

IAS Auditor performed density tests, other than nuclear, are to be located in the very near vicinity of the density test performed by the tester and are to be performed by the same method used by the tester.

In areas of the state where it is routine to determine that the material is too rocky to test, the IAS Auditor should ask the tester to identify a location that cannot be tested and a location where the test is to be performed. It may be necessary to move away from the roadway in order to find a location suitable for the test.

123.3.1.5.2 Aggregate, Sand-Soil, Soil-Cement, or Soil-Lime Bases

IAS Auditor performed density tests, other than nuclear, are to be located in the very near vicinity of the density test performed by the inspector and are to be performed by the same method used by the tester.

Care should be taken to show the location of IAS tests by roadway, station, distance right or left of centerline or of the edge of pavement, number and nominal thickness of the lift or lifts identified shall be shown. The purpose of this part of the process, with regard to system based IAS is to confirm that the inspector is capable of making such a determination.

Samples of material for gradation or PI are to be obtained at a point just prior to use, i.e., stockpile, pug mill, spreader, belt feeder or bin discharge. The place of sampling and the approximate roadway station number where the material is laid is to be shown on the report. The samples are to be taken by one of the methods described EPG 123.3.1.4.7 Obtaining the Sample.

123.3.1.5.3 Crushed Stone or Gravel Surfacing

Samples for gradation are to be taken at a point just prior to use. The samples are to be taken by one of the methods described in EPG 123.3.1.4.7 Obtaining the Sample.

The report is to show the roadway, approximate station number where the aggregate is placed and the place of sampling if this applies.

123.3.1.5.4 Bituminous Mixtures

The asphalt plant tester may obtain the IAS samples for gradation provided the IAS Auditor observes the sampling. The sample is to be split and the IAS test performed on one-half the sample. The tester would test the other one-half of the sample and the results may be for acceptance purposes. The IAS Auditor may perform the IAS test at the project using equipment other than project equipment, except, both tester may use the same scale if the scale has been calibrated within the immediate past 12 months, or the IAS test may be performed in the district laboratory.

Road mix gradation samples of aggregate should be taken at a point just prior to use, however, for IAS, this is not a requirement.

The tester may obtain the IAS samples for maximum specific gravity provided the IAS Auditor observes the sampling. The sample is to be split and the IAS test performed on one-half the sample. The tester would test the other one-half of the sample and the results may be used for acceptance purposes. The IAS Auditor may perform the IAS test at the project using project equipment. Both may use the same scale if the scale has been calibrated within the past 12 months. The IAS Auditor is to review calibration records for the maximum specific gravity testing equipment being used. The report is to state whether the calibration records were reviewed and found current and satisfactory, or not.

Volumetrics (specific gravity of gyratory compacted specimens) should be determined on a set of specimens (pills) compacted by the tester using a gyratory compactor. The IAS Auditor should review the tester’s use of the gyratory compactor. The IAS Auditor may use the specimens produced by the tester.

IAS tests of compacted SuperPave asphaltic concrete pavement, plant mix bituminous pavement or plant mix bituminous base are to be performed on the same samples taken by the project tester. The tests may be performed in the district laboratory or the Central Laboratory. When tests are performed in the district laboratory, the test report is to show the location by roadway, station, distance and direction from centerline, and the lift designation of the course. If submitted to the Central Laboratory for testing, the identification sheet is to also show this information.

When performing IAS on bituminous mixes using RAP, the combined gradation will be calculated using the RAP gradation being determined daily by the project personnel and the aggregate gradation determined from the cold feeds or the hot bins. At some batch plants, the RAP may be added prior to the hot bins. In that case, the combined gradation will be determined from the hot bins only. Project personnel should be consulted, prior to testing, to determine where the RAP is being added.

If the contractor elects to use the binder ignition method to determine the combined gradation for job control, the IAS Auditor shall witness the testing process to ensure proper testing procedures are being used.

123.3.1.5.5 Portland Cement Concrete Pavement and Base

Aggregates are to be obtained at the batching plant from the belt or the bin discharge as they are proportioned for use and are to be taken by one of the methods described in EPG 123.3.1.4.7 Obtaining the Sample. The place of sampling and the approximate roadway station number where the aggregate is used is to be shown on the report. For coarse aggregate produced in more than one fraction, the gradation of each fraction, percent of each used and the combined gradation shall be shown.

The concrete sample for IAS for air and slump is to be from the same concrete sample taken by the project tester for an acceptance test.

When a compression testing machine is used for normal job control, the IAS Auditor is not required to perform any of those tests. However, observing the sample preparation, testing, and reporting are required. When a compression testing machine is used, the IAS Auditor is to review the calibration records for the compression testing machine being used. The report is to state that the calibration records were reviewed and found current and satisfactory, or not.

When a thickness measuring device is used for normal job control, the IAS Auditor is not required to perform any of those tests. However, observing the sample preparation, testing, and reporting are required.

123.3.1.5.6 Concrete Masonry

Aggregates are to be obtained at the batching plant from belt or bin discharge as they are proportioned for use and are to be taken by one of the methods described in EPG 123.3.1.4.7 Obtaining the Sample. The place of sampling, class of concrete, structure and structure elements are to be shown on the report.

The concrete sample for air, slump, and cylinders is to be from the same concrete sample taken by the tester for the acceptance test.

A compressive strength test shall consist of the molding and testing of a cylinder. Molding and testing need not be performed on the same specimen. The testing of IAS comparison cylinders is to be performed on a machine independent of the machine used by the tester, or sent to the Central Laboratory at 28 days. IAS comparison cylinders are to represent routine compressive strength tests, not tests made for a specific operational control such as form removal, heat removal, etc.

123.3.1.5.7 Prepared Audit Standard Samples

To accommodate the process of auditing tester when no project is active, or when the active project work does not include the type of work being audited, the auditor may provide previously prepared and tested samples. The tester is prompted to run the appropriate tests on the sample as though the sample had been obtained on the project by the tester. It is not necessary that audit sample material be specification compliant however it should be reasonably representative of the target material so that a valid test can be completed.

If possible, the tester will actually obtain a sample of the target material as the auditor observes to confirm the use of correct sampling procedure. That sample may be discarded, or the tester can use the sample for routine job control testing. The auditor may witness the tester sample and test any sample taken for acceptance purposes. At a minimum, the tester will explain to the auditor the correct procedure for obtaining the sample under normal inspection practice.

123.3.1.6 Comparison of Test Results

All test results obtained by the IAS Auditor, including those not meeting specifications and those from samples submitted to the Laboratory for testing, are to be compared with the companion results obtained by the tester using established guidelines as soon as possible and the results reported. The IAS Auditor’s test result and the tester’s test result should compare within the limits shown in established guidelines. If the two tests do not compare within those limits the tester should be found as not comparing favorably and test procedures are to be reviewed, equipment checked, and if necessary, the test repeated to determine the reason(s). Results of the audit should be reported to the project's manager and owner.

123.3.1.7 Sample Record

Results of IAS are to be reported on the appropriate form in AWP with complete information shown. The reports should be submitted promptly after tests are completed, within ten working days of the determination of the final test results, when multiple tests were involved. The sample record described in AWP MA Sample Record, General is also required.

IAS tests are not to be reported as “accepted” or “rejected”. The IAS test result is not to be used for purposes of acceptance or rejection of material. When IAS testing compares with acceptance testing or when IAS confirms equipment calibrations are current and proper testing procedures were utilized, the AWP report will show the status as “Compared Favorably/Compliant (IAS only)”. When IAS testing does not compare with acceptance testing or when IAS finds equipment calibrations are not current or proper testing procedures were not utilized, the AWP report will show the status as “Not Compared Favorably/Not Comply (IAS only)”.

The following information is also to be on the IAS report:

The report shall state that the calculations were checked and are on file in the district office. It will not be necessary for intermediate calculations to be shown on the report, since only the final result for the particular test is required, however all calculations shall be carefully checked for accuracy and maintained on file in the district office.

The report shall state that test results of the IAS were compared with the inspector’s test results. The sample record number (when used), date performed and test results of the companion tests are to be shown on the report. In addition, the comparison difference between the tests is to be shown for each test result obtained. The report shall state whether the comparison was favorable or not favorable. If the comparison was not favorable, the probable reason(s) and any corrective action taken shall be shown on the report. If the acceptance test does not have a sample record number, other information shall be shown to identify the comparison test. When comparison testing is performed in whole or as part of an audit, the appropriate SM template should be used.

If the IAS Auditor witnessed a test, state what parts of the tests were observed and include the statement “location designated, procedure and computations checked by the IAS Auditor.” The name of the project inspector performing the test is to be shown.

The report shall state where the tests were performed (field, district laboratory, or Central Laboratory) and what equipment was used (district Material’s or belonging to field personnel), e.g. “The test was performed in the district Laboratory using Materials equipment”.

Each audit sample record is to be authorized by the IAS inspector or the District Construction and Materials Engineer.

The IAS Inspector must be the creator of the sample record.

123.3.1.8 Progress Report of Independent Assurance Process

A monthly progress report is submitted to the State Construction and Materials Engineer, The Assistant State Construction and Materials Engineer, The FHWA, District Construction and Materials Engineers and the IAS Audit Group. The report outlines the goals and progress of district and Central Office’s auditors. In addition this report is used to report the IAS Tracker Measure. Construction and Materials Liaison Engineers or their designated person prepares the report.

Any instances of non-compliance are reported to the subject’s supervisor, FHWA and the District Construction and Materials Engineer.

123.3.2 Independent Assurance Samples and Tests (IAS) Project Based

Refer to EPG Independent Assurance Samples and Tests.

123.3.3 Local Public Agency (LPA) Federal-Aid Acceptance Sampling and Testing

The following information establishes procedures for LPA Federal-Aid Acceptance Sampling and Testing (FAST) for all Federal-Aid projects awarded and administered by MoDOT. If a local public agency receives federal funds from MoDOT but does not specify MoDOT QC/QA practices, the guidelines in the Off-Systems Guide Schedule for Federal-Aid Acceptance Sampling and Testing (FAST) table should be followed. The acceptance sampling and testing procedures for other materials and construction processes are to be as shown in other articles in the Engineering Policy Guide.