PRIDE (product resource investment deployment & evaluation) annual report.

              Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona Transportation Research Center
2002
P R I D E Program
Annual Report
2002
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona Transportation Research Center
ii
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and
the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official
views or policies of the Arizona Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway
Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Trade or
manufacturer names which may appear herein are cited only because they are considered
essential to the objectives of the report. The U.S. Government and the State of Arizona do not
endorse products or manufacturers.
Arizona Department of Transportation
Arizona Transportation Research Center
2739 East Washington Street
Mail Drop 075R
Phoenix, Arizona 85034-1422
tel: (602) 712-3134
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
iii
PREFACE
The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Product Resource Investment Deployment
and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program is conducted under the sponsorship of the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) through the Highway Planning and Research Program. The PRIDE
program is partially funded by Project Number SPR-116 under the State Planning and Research
Program, Research Support Programs. The PRIDE program coordinates the review and
acceptance of new products for possible use by ADOT and maintains the Approved Products List
(APL).
On July 1, 1992, three committees were formed under the Highways Division Policy and
Implementation Memorandum No. 92-08. This policy was replaced by ADOT Intermodal
Transportation Division Policy and Implementation Memorandum No. 99-01, New Products
Evaluation and Approval Process, effective December 1999.
Under the 99-01 Policy, three Product Evaluation Committees (PECs) were created – the
Maintenance PEC, Materials PEC, and the Traffic Control PEC. The PECs were responsible for
establishing the operational policy for the new product evaluation and approval process under the
PRIDE program.
On July 18, 2002, a new ADOT PRIDE policy (SUP-9.01 PRODUCT RESOURCE INVESTMENT
DEPLOYMENT AND EVALUATION (PRIDE) PROGRAM) was adopted. Under this policy the
Maintenance PEC was eliminated with maintenance groups being represented on each of the two
remaining PECs. Unlike previous policies, this policy was adopted as an ADOT, agency-wide
policy.
Mr. Frank T. Darmiento of the Arizona Transportation Research Center (ATRC) administers the
PRIDE program. He is assisted by Ms. Jessica Kirk and Ms. Eileen Pike of ATRC.
The objective of this report is to document the efforts of ADOT's PRIDE program for the 2002
calendar year. This report describes product evaluation activities from January 1, 2002, through
December 31, 2002.
Information about the PRIDE program may also be found on ADOT’s Internet site,
http://www.dot.state.az.us. Select More About ADOT/Miscellaneous (Product Evaluation).
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Introduction................................................................................................................................................ 1
Background................................................................................................................................................ 1
Product Evaluation Process ................................................................................................................... 4
Status of the Product Evaluation Program ......................................................................................... 5
Products Considered by the Product Evaluation Committees ...................................................... 5
Program for 2003 ...................................................................................................................................... 6
LIST OF TABLES
No. Page
1 Materials Product Evaluation Committee Members During 2002........................................2
2 Traffic Control Product Evaluation Committee Members During 2002................................4
3 Decisions on Products Reviewed by the Materials Product Evaluation Committee ............5
4 Decisions on Products Reviewed by the Traffic Control Product Evaluation Committee ....6
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A — ADOT Product Evaluation Policy
APPENDIX B — PRIDE Application Instructions
APPENDIX C — PRIDE Application Form
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
1
INTRODUCTION
Construction and maintenance of a highway network utilizes a large number of manufactured
products and diverse technologies. Many of these products and technologies perform well, while
others do not perform as claimed. Rapid implementation of new technologies and products is
essential to the effective management of a highway system. However, equally important is the
judicious investment of highway dollars in the construction of field test sections. Thousands of
dollars are invested each time an experimental product is used in a construction project.
Consequently, the Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE) program
was established to provide a framework for introducing new products for use in field test sections.
The program systematically selects products for evaluation, evaluates their feasibility and
performance, and documents and reports the results. In this way, new products are evaluated
consistently and impartially.
BACKGROUND
In May 1985, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) established the Policy for Field
Test Requested by Outside Parties to address the increasing demands of technology and the
limited resources of ADOT. This policy gave the Arizona Transportation Research Center (ATRC)
responsibility for managing and documenting proposals for test sections submitted by vendors. A
Product Evaluation Advisory Committee was established to evaluate the proposals and to
recommend products or technologies to be considered for field evaluation.
The Product Evaluation Advisory Committee included an engineer from each ADOT District, a
representative from the Materials Section, and one from ATRC. The first committee meeting was
held in June 1985.
During December 1986, a full-time position was dedicated to the Product Evaluation Program and
the evaluation of construction experimental features. In September of 1988, the system was
further divided into the Product Evaluation and Experimental Projects Programs, with one
engineer responsible for each program.
In 1991, the Evaluation Committee was separated into two committees: the General Highway
Product Evaluation Advisory Committee and the Traffic Control New Product Evaluation Advisory
Committee. The General Highway Product Evaluation Advisory Committee reviewed all highway
construction-related materials. This committee included representatives from the following units:
ADOT Districts, the Maintenance Section, Highway Plans Services, the Utility Section, the
Materials Section, and ATRC. The Traffic Control New Product Evaluation Advisory Committee
reviewed traffic control-related products. This committee included a representative from each of
the following units: the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), ADOT Districts, the Urban
Highways Section, the Traffic Engineering Section, Highway Plans Services, the Construction
Section, the Maintenance Section, the Structures Section, the Materials Section, and ATRC.
ATRC administered this program.
During November 1991, the State Engineer led a one-day discussion that included four District
Engineers and all section heads of the Highways Division to review ADOT’s product evaluation
effort. Three task teams were established to create a policy to provide better coordination among
units of the Highways Division.
On July 1, 1992, three committees were formed under the Highways Division Policy and
Implementation Memorandum No. 92-08. This policy was replaced by ADOT Intermodal
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
2
Transportation Division Policy and Implementation Memorandum No. 99-01, New Products
Evaluation and Approval Process, effective December 1999.
The current PRIDE policy, SUP-9.01 PRODUCT RESOURCE INVESTMENT DEPLOYMENT
AND EVALUATION (PRIDE) PROGRAM, became effective on July 18, 2002. It provides for two
Product Evaluation Committees (PECs), Materials (MatPEC) and Traffic Control (TCPEC). The
PECs are responsible for establishing the operational policy for the new products evaluation and
approval process under the PRIDE program. While each PEC has primary areas of responsibility,
product evaluations often overlap these areas, requiring decisions from both committees on a
product’s acceptability. The PECs have the authority to approve or disapprove new products.
Approved products are placed on the Approved Products List (APL). The committees have the
authority to remove previously approved products from the APL that are later found to be
unacceptable.
A copy of the current PRIDE program policy is included in Appendix A. During 2002, the PRIDE
program was administered by Mr. Frank T. Darmiento.
MAINTENANCE PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
The Maintenance PEC, created in 1995, was disbanded in 2002. The current product evaluation
policy does not provide for a Maintenance PEC. However, maintenance groups are represented
on both the MatPEC and TCPEC.
MATERIALS PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
The MatPEC is responsible for establishing the operating policy under which non-traffic control
products are evaluated. The committee reviews and evaluates non-traffic control products. The
MatPEC met four times during 2002, on February 2, May 7, August 27 and November 12.
Members of the MatPEC during 2002 are listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1
MATERIALS PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEMBERS DURING 2002
Doug Forstie Assistant State Engineer, Materials Group – Chairman
David Burbank Regional Materials Engineer, Tucson District
Paul Burch Materials Group
Frank Darmiento Arizona Transportation Research Center
Lonnie Hendrix Assistant State Maintenance Engineer
Larry Ilg Regional Materials Engineer, Flagstaff
Aryan Lirange Federal Highway Administration
Art May Roadway Support Section
Oscar Mousavi Materials Group
Mono Nourelhuda Materials Group
Perry Powell District Engineer, Phoenix Construction District
Allan Samuels Construction Operations
Jeff Swan District Engineer, Holbrook District
Scott Weinland Regional Materials - Prescott
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
3
Pipe Subcommittee
In order to properly review pipe products, MatPEC established a Pipe Subcommittee. The
subcommittee is chaired by Ken Cooper of Roadway Design Section. The subcommittee reviews
and reports its recommendations to the MatPEC. The MatPEC makes the final decisions on Pipe
Subcommittee recommendations.
The most significant action by the Pipe Subcommittee in 2002 was the establishment of a
procedure to evaluate plastic pipe products. New requirements by the American Association of
State, Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) changed the manufacturing and test
requirements for plastic pipe. The Pipe Subcommittee met with representatives of three plastic
pipe manufacturers on October 1, 2002 and agreed to a strategy for evaluating plastic pipes.
The Corrugated Polyethylene Pipe Association (CPPA) Division of the Plastic Pipe Institute (PPI)
developed a third party certification program for plastic pipe manufacturers. The PPI is the major
trade association representing all segments of the plastic pipe industry including pipe
manufacturers, resin manufacturers, and other interested groups. This third party certification
program was established by CPPA in the fall of 2001. Third party certification is a process by
which a manufacturer states that a product meets or exceeds the requirements of a standard.
The third party program evaluates whether or not the manufacturer’s product meets or exceeds
the applicable AASHTO standards through independent testing and inspection. The PPI pipe
certification program tests for the material, dimensional, and physical performance properties
specified in the AASHTO standard (M294) for pipe diameters from 12 to 60-inches. In addition,
certified manufacturers of both pipe and resin are subject to random plant audits by TRI
Environmental, Inc., a consultant employed by PPI under this program.
During 2002, three manufacturers with active PRIDE applications participated in the PPI third
party certification program. These included Hancor Inc., Advanced Drainage Systems (ADS) and
Quail Piping Products, Inc. (Quail). Quail has subsequently gone out of business and is no longer
involved in this evaluation process.
During the October 1, 2002 Pipe Subcommittee meeting the Subcommittee directed the
manufacturers to submit documentation regarding their compliance with the PPI third party
certification program to ADOT by January 31, 2003.
TRAFFIC CONTROL PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
The TCPEC is responsible for establishing the operating policy under which traffic control
products are evaluated. It reviews and evaluates traffic control products. The TCPEC met four
times during 2002, on March 21, June 13, September 19, and December 5. Members of the
TCPEC during 2002 are listed in Table 2.
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
4
TABLE 2
TRAFFIC CONTROL PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
MEMBERS DURING 2002
Mike Manthey Assistant State Engineer – Traffic Group – Chairman
Jennifer Brown Federal Highway Administration
George Chin Regional Traffic Engineer – Phoenix Region
Frank Darmiento Arizona Transportation Research Center
Ken Cooper Roadway Support
Craig Cornwell Phoenix Maintenance District
Ronald Doubek City of Phoenix
David Duffy Traffic Group
Chuck Gillick Regional Traffic Engineer – Flagstaff District
Jim Elliott Pavement Marking, Inc. (ATSSA * representative)
Tom Goodman Traffic Operations
Lonnie Hendrix Assistant State Maintenance Engineer - Maintenance Group
Paul Hurst Construction Operation
Roger Hopt Regional Traffic Engineer – Western Region
Reza Karimvand Regional Traffic Engineer – Baja Region
Jeff Johnson Trafficade Services, Inc. (ATSSA * representative)
Bob LaJeunesse Regional Traffic Engr./Maintenance Engr. – Western Region
Pam McClain Purchasing Section
Oscar Mousavi Materials Group
Joe McGuirk Phoenix Maintenance District
Terry Otterness Roadway Group
Mark Poppe City of Glendale Transportation Department
Dr. Craig Roberts Northern Arizona University
Marian Thompson Transportation Technology Group
George Wendt Risk Management
* ATSSA denotes American Traffic Safety Services Association
PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS
Applications for product evaluation are submitted to ADOT. Products are evaluated based on one
of the following processes:
(1) Products that are covered by an existing ADOT specification or drawing are evaluated
based on the appropriate specifications or drawings.
(2) Products that have no applicable ADOT specifications or drawings are submitted to
one or more of the Product Evaluation Committee for evaluation.
A copy of the PRIDE application instructions is included in Appendix B. A copy of the PRIDE
application form is found in Appendix C.
Each PRIDE application is assigned to an ADOT staff person, consultant or PEC member to
coordinate the initial evaluation of the product. In some cases the evaluation includes testing by
the ADOT Materials Testing Laboratory. For products evaluated by the Materials Section,
including the Materials Testing Laboratory, a Product Evaluation Report is prepared by the
Materials Section. This report is incorporated into the evaluation of the subject product
application.
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
5
For product applications reviewed by the TCPEC the review process consists of canvassing
affected sections, other state agencies and research organizations to verify the information
provided in the proposals. Field tests are conducted as directed by the TCPEC.
Vendors of unsuccessful requests are notified in writing by ATRC. If a vendor disagrees with a
Committee’s decision to reject a product, the vendor may appeal the rejection by providing their
objections in writing and submitting additional information for consideration by the Committee.
The applicable PECs will then reconsider the application.
STATUS OF THE PRODUCT EVALUATION PROGRAM
The APL is updated and published monthly via the Internet and ADOT’s Intranet. Products placed
on the APL are normally approved for a five-year period. However, the PECs may specify
alternate approval periods as well as conditional approvals. Products must be re-certified by the
vendor to remain on the list after the approval period expires. Re-certification entails verification
from the vendor that the listed product is still manufactured as approved. If a product has been
substantially modified the vendor must initiate a new PRIDE evaluation for the product. Products
that are not re-certified at the expiration of their five-year approval period are removed from the
APL. The ADOT web page address is http://www.dot.state.az.us. Information on the PRIDE
program may be accessed by selecting More About ADOT/Miscellaneous (Product
Evaluation).
PRODUCTS CONSIDERED BY THE PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEES
The PRIDE program received 155 applications during 2002. The MatPEC approved four products
for the APL. All four applications had been submitted prior to 2002. The TCPEC approved 11
products for the APL. Eight applications were submitted prior to 2002, the remaining three were
submitted during 2002. Summaries of these decisions are shown in Tables 3-4.
TABLE 3
DECISIONS ON PRODUCTS REVIEWED BY THE
MATERIALS PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
Pride
ID No. Product Name Company Name Action
01031 Boral SPC Boral Material
Technologies,
Inc.
Approved for APL
01043 EPCON Maxima 7
Glass Capsules
ITW Ramset/Red
Head
Approved for APL
01063 Recast Autoclaved
Aerated Concrete
Enviroc, Inc. Approved for APL
01032 ISOGRID Retaining
Wall System
The Neal
Company
Approved for APL
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
6
TABLE 4
DECISIONS ON PRODUCTS REVIEWED BY THE
TRAFFIC CONTROL PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEE
PRIDE
ID No. Product Name Company Name Action
01093 ThermaLine
Preformed
Thermoplastics
Linear Dynamics,
Inc
Approved for APL
01097 Triangular, Mulit-directional
Slip Base
Xcessories
Squared Dev. &
Mrg., Inc.
Approved for APL
01098 Slip-Mate Western Highway
Products, Inc.
Approved for APL
01003 Temporary
Removable Road
Tape, RW-140
(White)
Trelleborg
Industri, AB
Approved for APL
01004 Temporary
Removable Road
Tape, RY-140
(Yellow)
Trelleborg
Industri, AB
Approved for APL
01048 C88 Raised
Pavement Marker
Avery Dennison Approved for APL subject to the
conditions specified in note (3) under APL
category V-23
01116 BarrierGate Energy
Absorption
Systems, Inc
Approved for APL subject to the
successful operation of one unit.
01058 Visa-line Temporary
Marking Tape (Type
III – Non-removable)
Swarco, Inc. Approved for APL
02027 B400-A Plastic
Safety Drum
Work Area
Protection
Corporation
Approved drums B400 & B400R for APL
02046 Thermoplastic Pervo Paint
Company
Approved for APL
02077 ET-2000 Plus with
Hinge Breakaway
(HBA) Post
Trinity Industries,
Inc.
Approved for APL
PROGRAM FOR 2003
The PRIDE program in 2003 will continue to actively involve the Product Evaluation Committees in
the PRIDE process. Equally important is providing timely responses and evaluations to vendors
submitting product applications to the PRIDE program. Objectives for 2003 include updating the
PRIDE product database, issuing quarterly application status reports, and preparing a set of
standard operating procedures for the PRIDE program.
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
APPENDIX A
ADOT PRODUCT EVALUATION POLICY
ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
SUP-9.01 PRODUCT RESOURCE INVESTMENT
DEPLOYMENT AND EVALUATION (PRIDE) PROGRAM
Effective: July 18, 2002
Supersedes: None
Responsible Office: Arizona Transportation Research Center,
(602) 712-3134
Review: July 18, 2004
Transmittal: 2002 – July
Page 1 of 5
1.01 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Policy, which was originally established by Arizona Department of
Transportation (ADOT) Highways Division Policy and Implementation Memorandum 92-08 and
modified by ADOT Intermodal Transportation Division Policy and Implementation Memorandum 99-
01, is to redefine, reaffirm, and delineate responsibilities and procedures for the evaluation and
approval of new products.
1.02 SCOPE / APPLICABILITY
This Policy applies to ADOT entities involved with selecting, evaluating, using or specifying the use
of new products for use on, or in association with, ADOT roadways.
1.03 AUTHORITY
This policy is promulgated under the authority and approval of the Director of the ADOT
Transportation Planning Division.
1.04 BACKGROUND
a. The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) Product Resource Investment Deployment
and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program is conducted under the sponsorship of the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) through the Highway Planning and Research Program. The PRIDE
program is established as item 116 under the State Planning and Research Program,
Research Support Programs. The PRIDE program coordinates the review and acceptance of
new products for possible use by ADOT and maintains the Approved Products List (APL).
b. On July 1, 1992, three committees were formed under the Highways Division Policy and
Implementation Memorandum No. 92-08. This policy was replaced by ADOT Intermodal
Transportation Division Policy and Implementation Memorandum No. 99-01, New Products
Evaluation and Approval Process, effective December 1999.
c. The PRIDE program is now under the authority of the ADOT Transportation Planning Division
(TPD) in the Arizona Transportation Research Center (ATRC).
1.05 DEFINITIONS AND ACRONYMS
ADOT Arizona Department of Transportation
Approved Products List (APL) A list of products which have been evaluated or meet
ADOT standard specifications and are approved for
ADOT use
SUP-9.01 Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program
Effective: July 18, 2002 Transmittal: 2002-July
Supersedes: None Page 2 of 5
SUP-9.01
ATRC Arizona Transportation Research Center
ATSSA American Traffic Safety Services Association
FHWA Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation
Lead Evaluator The person assigned by one or more PECs to coordinate
the initial review of a product application.
MatPEC Materials Product Evaluation Committee
MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet
MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
New Product Any product submitted for approval which has not
previously been evaluated or does not meet a current
ADOT specification or standard drawing. Any new
materials, equipment, or methods to be used on a
federal-aid project which may be included and evaluated
in experimental construction (in accordance with Vol. 6,
Chap 4, Sec 2, Subsec. 4 of the Federal-Aid Highway
Program Manual).
PEC Product Evaluation Committee
PRIDE Product Resource Investment Deployment and
Evaluation Program
TCPEC Traffic Control Product Evaluation Committee
Traffic Control Products Various types of materials and equipment necessary to
carry out the requirements of the ADOT, MUTCD or
FHWA Safety Standards, which shall include but not be
limited to signing materials, pavement marking materials,
energy attenuators, temporary barrier systems, flexible
and non-flexible delineators and those items which are
used in traffic signal systems, highway lighting systems
and overhead sign lighting systems
1.06 PRODUCT EVALUATION COMMITTEES
a. Two Product Evaluation Committees (PECs) are established under this Policy, the Traffic
Control Product Evaluation Committee (TCPEC) and the Materials Product Evaluation
Committee (MatPEC). The PECs are responsible for establishing the operational policy for the
new products evaluation and approval process through the PRIDE Program. The PECs are
responsible for coordinating the introduction of new, cost effective products and technologies to
ADOT. The PEC chairpersons shall be responsible for resolving issues within their respective
PECs and coordinating the resolution of issues that include both PECs.
SUP-9.01 Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program
Effective: July 18, 2002 Transmittal: 2002-July
Supersedes: None Page 3 of 5
SUP-9.01
b. The TCPEC is responsible for establishing the operating policy under which all traffic control
products are evaluated. The TCPEC has the authority to approve or disapprove all traffic
control products for addition to the Approved Products List (APL) or to remove traffic control
products from the APL that are no longer acceptable to ADOT.
c. The TCPEC shall be chaired by the Assistant State Engineer, Traffic Group. The chairperson
shall determine the membership of the TCPEC, subject to the conditions of this paragraph.
The chairperson may consult with other TCPEC members regarding individuals or
organizations to include in the TCPEC. Members shall include at least 10 ADOT employees
and may also include up to 7 additional individuals from outside organizations. The following
organizations may be invited to nominate members to the TCPEC.
· FHWA – 1 member maximum
· ATSSA –2 members maximum
· Local governments – 2 members maximum
· Ad hoc members – 2 members maximum
d. The ad hoc members may be added at the discretion of the TCPEC and may include, but are
not limited to, university representatives or members of the general public. The PRIDE
program administrator shall be a non-voting member of the TCPEC. The total number of
TCPEC members shall be determined by the TCPEC chairperson.
e. The MatPEC is responsible for establishing the operating policy under which all materials-related
products are evaluated. The MatPEC has the authority to approve or disapprove
materials products for addition to the APL or to remove materials products from the APL that
are no longer acceptable to ADOT.
f. The MatPEC shall be chaired by the Assistant State Engineer, Materials Group. The
chairperson shall determine the membership of the MatPEC, subject to the conditions of this
paragraph. The chairperson may consult with other MatPEC members regarding individuals or
organizations to include in the MatPEC. Members shall include at least 5 ADOT employees
and may also include a maximum of 4 additional individuals from outside organizations
(including FHWA). The PRIDE program administrator shall be a non-voting member of the
MatPEC. The total number of MatPEC members shall be determined by the MatPEC
chairperson.
g. The Arizona Transportation Research Center (ATRC) through the PRIDE program, is assigned
the responsibility of serving as the clearinghouse for all new products. The PRIDE program
administrator will serve as the Administrative Secretary to the PECs and shall maintain the
APL.
h. Establishing of Sub-committees: Sub-committees can be established by any PEC to review
specialty issues. The sub-committees shall conduct themselves within the charters that are set
by their originating PEC, and shall report all their findings and recommendations to the
originating PEC for decision.
1.07 APPROVED PRODUCTS LIST (APL)
a. The APL is to serve as a guide to what products are acceptable for use for construction and
maintenance by ADOT. Products listed on the APL are to be used unless otherwise specified
in contract documents. Not all products used by ADOT are listed on the APL. If an APL
category does not exist for a product, approval through the PRIDE program is not needed to
use the product. However, the PECs may elect to modify the APL by adding, deleting or
modifying APL categories within their areas of responsibility.
SUP-9.01 Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program
Effective: July 18, 2002 Transmittal: 2002-July
Supersedes: None Page 4 of 5
SUP-9.01
b. The PRIDE program administrator will maintain the APL. The APL format shall be developed
and revised, as necessary, by the PRIDE program administrator with the concurrence of the
PEC chairpersons.
1.08 PRIDE APPLICATIONS
a. The format of the PRIDE application shall be developed by the PRIDE program administrator,
with concurrence from the PEC chairpersons. Modifications or updates to the application
format may be made at the discretion of this group.
b. Procedures for submitting a PRIDE application shall be developed by the PRIDE program
administrator, with concurrence from the PEC chairpersons. Modifications or updates to these
procedures may be made at the discretion of this group and will be documented in meeting
summaries.
1.09 TESTING
For products being proposed for inclusion on the APL that require testing, the testing can be done
by ADOT or by an independent testing laboratory. The TCPEC or MatPEC will determine what
tests are to be performed on a given product and assign an individual to direct the tests. Test
results shall be documented by written reports.
1.10 EVALUATION PROCESS
a. The PRIDE program administrator will evaluate the completeness of all new product
applications submitted under the PRIDE program. Those submittals not meeting program
requirements will not be forwarded to a PEC for consideration. If an application is submitted
for a product that is clearly not addressed by the APL, the PRIDE program administrator will
notify the applicant that no action will be taken to either approve or disapprove of the product
with respect to the APL.
b. If an application is submitted for a product that the PRIDE program administrator believes may
be of interest to a PEC the product information will be presented at the appropriate PEC
meeting. A PEC may create or modify an APL category to accommodate a product if the PEC
believes there is a need for such an action.
c. Each complete application will be logged into a database maintained by the PRIDE program
administrator and assigned a unique identification (ID) number. After an application is logged
in the PRIDE program administrator will coordinate identification of lead evaluators for the
product with the PEC chairpersons. If a product appears to have a potential chemical safety or
health concern a copy of the material safety data sheet (MSDS) for the product will be
forwarded to the ADOT Safety and Health unit for evaluation. Further consideration of such
products will be subject to a written response from the ADOT Safety and Health unit confirming
their acceptability to ADOT with respect to safety and health considerations.
d. After applicable safety and health approvals (if any) are obtained the PRIDE program
administrator will forward a copy of the application to the lead evaluators. The lead evaluators
will then be responsible for reviewing the applicant’s submittal determining whether additional
information from the vendor is needed and how to implement tests specified by the PECs, if
any, or other tests that may be necessary.
e. Upon completion of the initial evaluation the product application will be scheduled for
discussion at a meeting of the appropriate PEC. The applicable PECs may then vote on the
SUP-9.01 Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE) Program
Effective: July 18, 2002 Transmittal: 2002-July
Supersedes: None Page 5 of 5
SUP-9.01
acceptability of the product, or request further evaluation. If further evaluation is required, the
process will continue until the applicable PECs make a final decision on the application.
1.11 APPLICANT NOTIFICATION
If a product is approved for listing on the APL, the PRIDE program administrator will provide a
written notification to the applicant regarding this approval. If a product is disapproved the
applicant will be notified of this decision and a copy of applicable documentation will be sent to the
applicant. The disapproval notice will contain sufficient information to ensure the applicant can
understand the reasons the subject product was not approved. (See Section 1.12.) When a
product is approved, the notice to the applicant will contain the approval date and the date the
product requires re-certification.
1.12 APPEAL PROCESS
a. If a product receives an unfavorable decision from a PEC after the committee has reviewed the
applicant’s proposal and all relevant information, the applicant will be notified. The applicant
may file an appeal with the PRIDE program administrator. The appeal must be received by
ADOT within 30 days after the vendor receives notification from the PRIDE program
administrator. The appeal shall be in writing and shall include the following information as a
minimum:
(1) The name, address and telephone number of the appellant.
(2) The appellant’s signature.
(3) Name of the product and PRIDE program identification number.
(4) A detailed statement of the factual grounds for the appeal with supporting documents
to specifically address the shortcomings of the PEC analysis.
(5) The form of relief suggested.
b. All appeal correspondence shall be addressed to the PRIDE program. The PRIDE program
administrator will review the appeal submitted by the applicant for completeness. The appeal
will be considered incomplete if it addresses only the disagreement with the PEC's decision
without pointing out any error in the PEC's analysis or the procedure through which this product
was evaluated. Only those completed appeals received by the PRIDE program within the
stated 30-calendar-day limit will be presented to the PECs for ruling. Presentation of the
completed appeals will be in the next meeting of the respective PEC if they are received by
PRIDE program administrator more than 14 calendar days before the scheduled meeting.
After considering all the facts that have been presented by the applicant and the responsible
PEC the PEC may select one or more of the following resolutions:
(1) Require a new test or evaluation by ADOT.
(2) Require a new test or evaluation by an independent testing laboratory.
(3) Add the subject product to the APL.
(4) Deny the appeal.
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
APPENDIX B
PRIDE APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS Page 1 04/01/2003
PRODUCT EVALUATION APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS
The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) strives to develop and maintain the State
highway system in a cost-effective manner. The materials and products used to accomplish this
are an important element in achieving this goal. Before accepting new products or materials for
use on the State highway system ADOT thoroughly evaluates the item’s performance, reliability,
cost, and safety though its Product Resource Investment Deployment and Evaluation (PRIDE)
program.
Product evaluations are often requested by outside parties (Applicants) as a means of
demonstrating claimed advantages of a product or procedure. These evaluations require
commitments of time and resources by ADOT. To help expedite these evaluations, it is the
Applicant's responsibility to comply with the policy stated herein. Deviations from this policy may
cause delay or rejection of such requests.
A request for evaluation requires submission of a complete Application for Product Evaluation
(Application). The format of this submittal is discussed in the following sections. A separate
Application shall be submitted for each product. Furthermore, a product with more than one use
in the highway industry shall be submitted with a separate Application for each use.
All requests must be submitted to ADOT with the appropriate forms and the required information.
Two complete copies of each application
(including attachments) must be submitted.
The submittal address is:
PRIDE Program
Arizona Department of Transportation
2739 East Washington Street, Mail Drop 075R
Phoenix, Arizona 85034-1422
Tel: (602) 712-3134
The Approved Products List and these forms are available via the Internet at:
www.dot.state.az.us
Select: More About ADOT/Miscellaneous (Product Evaluation)/
Download the Approved Products List
A. Evaluation Options
Only one of the following options should be selected for each Application.
(1) Applications for products covered by current ADOT specifications should be
submitted using the guidance described in Section B of these instructions.
(2) Applications for products that are not covered by current ADOT specifications
should be submitted using the guidance described in Section C of these
instructions.
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS Page 2 04/01/2003
B. Acceptance Based on Current Specifications
ADOT has standard specifications and standard drawings, which encompass many of the
products in the highway industry. If ADOT has applicable specifications the product will be
evaluated based on these specifications. If this option is selected the applicant should identify the
section of the ADOT specifications and other specifications that apply to the product under the
Application heading Product Meets the Following Specifications and Test Procedures.
ADOT specifications and standard drawings are available from:
ADOT Engineering Records
1655 W. Jackson St., Mail Drop 112F
Phoenix AZ 85007
(602) 712-7498
The Application should include necessary support documentation, such as certifications of
compliance from independent laboratories. It is the Applicant's responsibility to satisfy all criteria
set forth in ADOT current specifications.
C. Request for Evaluation
Products which have no applicable ADOT specifications require a case-by-case evaluation. The
evaluation program will be based on the recommendation of one of ADOT’s Product Evaluation
Committees (Materials and Traffic Control).
The Application should include necessary support documentation, such as reports, brochures,
etc. The supporting material should demonstrate the product's advantages and benefits to ADOT.
Each Application submitted under Section C of this Policy shall contain, as a minimum, the
following elements:
(1) A completed Application signed by an authorized agent of the company.
(2) An estimated cost of the product or procedure (delivered to Phoenix).
(3) Specifications for the product or procedure.
(4) A description of the claimed advantages over existing products or
procedures (be specific).
(5) Verification of the advantages. (Include laboratory reports, data,
calculations, etc.)
(6) History of past use, if any. Include reports of evaluations, if any, with
names and telephone numbers of contacts, and whether or not such
evaluations support the claimed advantages.
(7) Availability of product. (State whether the product is in commercial
production. If so in what quantities? If not when will it be?)
(8) Safety and environmental precautions associated with the product or
procedure. Include a completed copy of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration Material Safety Data Sheet.
(9) Description of the desired evaluation program. Discuss the project type,
project duration, quantities, controls, specifications, special features, etc.
(10) A statement that the product or procedure will be provided to ADOT free of
charge in support of the proposed evaluation program.
(11) A statement that the Applicant will provide technical assistance in
formulating the evaluation program at no cost to ADOT.
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS Page 3 04/01/2003
(12) A statement that the Applicant will reimburse ADOT for costs involved in
conducting any special tests or other extra costs involved in testing. The
terms and conditions of the Applicant’s reimbursement offer should be
clearly stated, including, but not limited to statements regarding the
maximum funding proposed by the Applicant for the evaluation, the
proposed joint adventure agreement, and the terms of reimbursement.
(13) A statement that the Applicant agrees to provide on-site technical
assistance during any field tests at no cost to ADOT.
(14) A statement granting permission to ADOT to reproduce, in full or in part,
any information supplied by the Applicant in association with the Application
unless specifically excluded and clearly marked as not being authorized for
reproduction. This permission also will apply to material with copyrights
held by the Applicant.
Items 11 through 14 above must be explicitly listed in the Application. If the Applicant
cannot comply with a condition required by Items 11 through 14, this must be clearly
stated in the Application, along with special terms or conditions the Applicant proposes to
place upon such requirements.
If a Product Evaluation Committee recommends a product for evaluation, the Committee will
propose an ADOT evaluation strategy. This may include preparation of a work plan to accomplish
the evaluation. Evaluations will be performed in strict accordance with such work plans.
D. Exceptions
This policy shall not preclude ADOT from performing, on its own initiative, evaluations or field
tests of any product or procedure which may benefit ADOT. This includes products or procedures
originating from sources other than vendors, as well as vendor proposals which include
exceptions to requirements set forth in this policy.
E. Product Endorsement
The evaluation or use of a product by ADOT does not constitute an endorsement by ADOT nor
does it imply a commitment to purchase, recommend, or specify the product in the future.
Furthermore, the vendor is prohibited from using ADOT or its test results in product advertising.
PLEASE DO NOT SEND ANY PRODUCT SAMPLES
UNTIL THEY ARE REQUESTED BY ADOT
PRIDE Annual Report — 2002
APPENDIX C
PRIDE APPLICATION FORM
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION Page 1 04/01/2003
Application for Product Evaluation
(submit two copies of this document and all attachments)
I, being an authorized
(Name of Company Representative)
agent of , request that
(Company Name)
the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) perform a product evaluation of
.
(Name of Product)
I have read and understood the ADOT Product Evaluation Policy. I recommend that the following
course of action be taken: (one action per request)
Submit the product to ADOT for acceptance under current specifications Submit all
the necessary information as described in Section B of the Application
instructions. When selecting this option identify the section of the ADOT specifications
and other specifications that apply to the product under the Application heading Product
Meets the Following Specifications and Test Procedures.
Submit the product for evaluation by ADOT (Submit all the necessary information as
described in Section C of ADOT's Product Evaluation Policy.)
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION Page 2 04/01/2003
REQUEST FOR PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE
UNDER CURRENT ADOT SPECIFICATIONS
DATE______________________
MANUFACTURER:
ADDRESS:
CONTACT:
TELEPHONE:
FAX:
DISTRIBUTOR:
ADDRESS:
CONTACT:
TELEPHONE:
FAX:
PRODUCT:
Trade Name:
Description:
Primary Use:
Secondary Use:
Guarantee:
Arizona Department of Transportation
PRIDE APPLICATION Page 3 04/01/2003
PRODUCT MEETS THE FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS AND TEST PROCEDURES:
ADOT:
ASTM:
AASHTO:
OTHER:
Product is proposed for the following uses:
GENERAL:
Attach available literature pertaining to the product, including, but limited to, instructions and
limitations for use, composition or laboratory analyses, handling precautions, health hazards, a
complete Material Safety Data Sheet, specifications, and cost. The Arizona Department of
Transportation reserves the right to refuse to test any material that cannot be safely tested with
the laboratory equipment available to ADOT. If unused product portions would be considered
hazardous waste (as defined by 40 CFR 261 et seq.) then the Applicant must accept the financial
responsibility for proper return or disposal of this material.
________________________________________________
(Signature of Company Representative)
Return the completed Application and the appropriate attachments to:
PRIDE Program
Arizona Department of Transportation
2739 East Washington Street, Mail Drop 075R
Phoenix, Arizona 85034-1422
Tel: (602) 712-3134