TABLE OF CONTENTS

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No. )

Filed by the Registrant ☑
Filed by a party other than the Registrant  o

Check the appropriate box:

 o

Preliminary Proxy Statement

 oConfidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

Definitive Proxy Statement
 o

Definitive Additional Materials
 o

Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12


Arcosa, Inc.
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if Other Than The Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):
No fee required.
o
Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11
 
(1)
Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
 
 
 
 
(2)
Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:
 
 
 
 
(3)
Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):
 
 
 
 
(4)
Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:
 
 
 
 
(5)
Total fee paid:
 
 
 
o
Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.
o
Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.
 
(1)
Amount Previously Paid:
 
 
 
 
(2)
Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:
 
 
 
 
(3)
Filing Party:
 
 
 
 
(4)
Date Filed:
 
 
 


TABLE OF CONTENTS




TABLE OF CONTENTS




Arcosa, Inc.
Chairman Letter
Dear Fellow Stockholder:

On November 1, 2018, Arcosa, Inc. became an independent public company. YouShareholders:

We are cordially invitedpleased to attendinvite you to our first Annual Meeting of StockholdersShareholders on Tuesday, May 7, 20193, 2022 at 8:30 a.m. (CDT), whichCentral Daylight Time. For the continued protection of the health and safety of our shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders, the Annual Meeting of Shareholders will be held at Ross Tower invirtually via the Lower Level Conference Center, 500 N. Akard St., Dallas, Texas 75201.Internet through a live, audio-only webcast. Shareholders will be able to participate, listen, vote, and submit questions virtually from any remote location with Internet connectivity. A notice of the meeting and a Proxy Statementproxy statement containing information about the matters to be acted upon are attached to this letter.

Your vote is important to us. Whether or not you plan to attend the Annual Meeting,virtually, we encourage you to vote in advance of the Annual Meeting of Shareholders by telephone, by Internet, or by signing, dating and returning your proxy card (or voting instruction form, if you hold shares through a broker)broker or other nominee) by mail. You may also vote in person atvirtually during the Annual Meeting.

Meeting of Shareholders by following the instructions included in Arcosa, Inc.’s 2022 Proxy Statement.

Thank you for being a stockholdershareholder and for your continued support and interest in Arcosa, Inc.

Best regards,

/s/ Rhys J. Best

Rhys J. Best
Chairman of the Board


i

TABLE OF CONTENTS


NOTICE OF 2019 ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS



Arcosa, Inc.
Notice of Annual Meeting
of Shareholders

DATE
Tuesday,
May 7, 20193, 2022
TIME
8:30 a.m., Central Daylight TimeCDT
VIRTUAL
Ross Tower, Lower Level Conference Center
www.virtualshareholder
500 N. Akard St. Dallas, Texas 75201

ToArcosa, Inc. Stockholders:

Please join us for

meeting.com/ACA2022
RECORD DATE
March 14, 2022
VOTING
Shareholders as
of the 2019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Arcosa, Inc. The meeting will be held at Ross Tower in the Lower Level Conference Center at 500 N. Akard St., Dallas, Texas 75201, on Tuesday, May 7, 2019, at 8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time.

At the meeting, the stockholders will act on the following matters:

(1)Election of three (3) Class I Directors, each to serve for a three-year term ending at the 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders;
(2)Advisory vote on named executive officer compensation;
(3)Advisory vote on the frequency of the advisory vote on named executive officer compensation;
(4)Ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2019; and
(5)Any other matters that may properly come before the meeting, or any adjournments or postponements thereof.

All stockholders of record at the close of business on March 11, 2019 date

are entitled to vote at the meeting or any postponement or adjournment of the meeting. A list of the stockholders is available at the Company’s offices in Dallas, Texas.

By Order of the Board of Directors,


YUKI P. WHITMIRE
Associate General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

March 26, 2019

YOUR VOTE
IS IMPORTANT!IMPORTANT
We urge you to cast your vote promptly, even if you plan to attend the virtual Annual Meeting in person.of Shareholders. You may vote in advance via the Internet, or by telephone or, if you have received or requested a printed version of these proxy materials, by mail.

To Our Shareholders:
Please join us for the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Arcosa, Inc. (“Arcosa” or the “Company”). The meeting will be held virtually at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/ACA2022 on Tuesday, May 3, 2022, at 8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time.
At the meeting, the shareholders will act on the following matters:
01
Election of the ten (10) Directors named in this Proxy Statement and nominated by the Board of Directors, each to serve for a one-year term ending at the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders;
02
Advisory vote on named executive officer compensation;
03
Ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as Arcosa’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2022; and
04
Any other matters that may properly come before the meeting, or any adjournments or postponements thereof.
All shareholders of record at the close of business on March 14, 2022 are entitled to vote during the virtual meeting or at any postponement or adjournment of the meeting. A list of the shareholders is available at Arcosa’s offices in Dallas, Texas, and will be made available to shareholders in secure electronic format during the shareholder meeting.
By Order of the Board of Directors,

Mark J. Elmore
Associate General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for theAnnual Meeting of StockholdersShareholders to be held on May 7, 2019:3, 2022: This Proxy Statement and the Annual Report to StockholdersShareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018,2021 are available for viewing, printing, and downloading at www.proxyvote.com.www.proxyvote.com.
ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS



TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 
 
 
 

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS



Arcosa, Inc.
Proxy Statement
Summary
DATE
Tuesday,
May 3, 2022
TIME
8:30 a.m., CDT
VIRTUAL
www.virtualshareholder
meeting.com/ACA2022
RECORD DATE
March 14, 2022
VOTING
Shareholders as
of the record date
are entitled to vote
This Proxy Statement is being provided to the shareholders of Arcosa in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors of Arcosa to be voted at the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the
“Annual Meeting”) to be held virtually at www.virtualshareholdermeeting
.com/ACA2022 on Tuesday, May 3, 2022, at 8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time, or at any postponement or adjournment thereof, for the purposes set forth in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Arcosa’s mailing address is 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201.
Agenda and Voting Recommendations
Proposal No.
Description
Board
Recommendation
Page
01
Election of ten (10) Directors
to serve on the Board
FOR
each nominee
02
Advisory vote to approve named
executive officer compensation
FOR
03
Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP
as Arcosa’s independent
registered public accounting firm
for the year ending
December 31, 2022
FOR
How to Vote
Advance Voting Methods




ONLINE
Go to www.proxyvote.com
You will need the 16-digit control
number provided in your proxy
materials.
MAIL
(if you received a paper copy of
the proxy materials by mail)
Mark, sign, date, and promptly mail
the enclosed Proxy Card in the
postage-paid envelope.



SMART PHONE
Scan the QR code on
your Notice Card to vote.
TOLL-FREE NUMBER
Use the toll-free number
on the Notice or Proxy Card.
01

TABLE OF CONTENTSPROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY   

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

This summary provides an overview and highlights of the information contained in this Proxy Statement. It does not contain all information you should consider, and you should read the entire Proxy Statement carefully before voting.

About Arcosa

Commitment to Build a Better World

Financial Highlights
We achieved healthy financial performance in line with the targets set by the board of directors (the “Board”) and the Separation

On November 1, 2018, Arcosa, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Arcosa” or the “Company”), launched as an independent, publicly-traded company upon its separation (the “Separation”) from Trinity Industries, Inc. (also known as “Former Parent” or “Trinity”). To effect the Separation, Trinity distributed all of the issued and outstanding shares of Arcosa common stock on the basis of one share of Arcosa common stock for every three shares of Trinity common stock held by Trinity stockholders as of the close of business on October 17, 2018, the record date for the distribution. Please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 (the “2018 Annual Report”) for additional information.

Annual Meeting of Stockholders

Time and Date
Place
Record Date
Voting
8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time, May 7, 2019
Ross Tower, Lower Level Conference Center,
500 N. Akard St.,
Dallas, TX 75201
March 11, 2019
Stockholders as of the record date are entitled to vote

Agenda and Voting Recommendations

Proposal
Description
Board Recommendation
Page
1
Election of Class I Directors
FOR each nominee
2
Advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation
FOR
3
Advisory vote to approve frequency of the advisory vote on named executive officer compensation
1 YEAR
4
Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for 2019
FOR

Class I Director Nominees

The following table provides summary information about each nominee for Class I director to serve for a term of three years. Each director is elected by a majority of votes cast.

Nominee
Age
Principal Occupation
Committees
Ronald J. Gafford
69
Retired Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President, Austin Industries, Inc.
Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee (Chair)
Douglas L. Rock
71
Retired Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President, Smith International, Inc.
Audit Committee (Chair)
Melanie Trent
54
Former EVP, General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer, Rowan Companies, plc
Audit Committee, Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS


PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS   

Date:
May 7, 2019
Time:
8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time
Location:
Ross Tower, Lower Level Conference Center
500 N. Akard St.
Dallas, Texas 75201

This Proxy Statement is being provided to the stockholders of Arcosa, Inc. (“Arcosa” or the “Company”) in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors of the Company to be voted at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held at Ross Tower in the Lower Level Conference Center, 500 N. Akard St., Dallas, Texas 75201 on Tuesday, May 7, 2019, at 8:30 a.m., Central Daylight Time (the “Annual Meeting”), or at any postponement or adjournment thereof, for the purposes set forth in the accompanying Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders. The Company’s mailing address is 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING

Who is entitled to vote and how many votes do I have?

The outstanding voting securities of the Company consist of shares of common stock, $0.01 par value per share (“Common Stock”). The record date for the determination of the stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting, or any postponement or adjournment thereof, has been established by the Board of Directors as the close of business on March 11, 2019. At that date, there were outstanding and entitled to vote 48,625,387 shares of Common Stock. A holder of Common Stock will be entitled to one vote per share on each matter properly brought before the meeting.

Why did I receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials?

In order to both save money and protect the environment, we have elected to provide access to our proxy materials and 2018 Annual Report on the Internet, instead of mailing the full set of printed proxy materials, in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) for the electronic distribution of proxy materials. Proxy materials or a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) are being first released or mailed to stockholders on or about March 26, 2019. If you received a Notice by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials in the mail unless you request it. Instead, the Notice instructs you on how to obtain and review all of the important information contained in the Proxy Statement and Annual Report. The Notice also instructs you on how you may submit your proxy over the Internet. If you received a Notice by mail and would like to receive a printed copy of our proxy materials, you should follow the instructions for requesting such materials included in the Notice.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

What is the difference between holding shares as a stockholder of record and as a beneficial owner of shares?

Stockholder of Record or Registered Stockholder. If your shares of Common Stock are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, you are considered a “stockholder of record” or a “registered stockholder” of those shares.

Beneficial Owner of Shares. If your shares are held in an account at a bank, brokerage firm, or other similar organization, then you are a beneficial owner of shares held in “street name.” In that case, you will have received these proxy materials from the bank, brokerage firm, or other similar organization holding your account and, as a beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your bank, brokerage firm, or similar organization as to how to vote the shares held in your account.

How do I vote if I am a stockholder of record?

By Telephone or Internet. All stockholders of record can vote by telephone using the toll-free telephone number on the Notice or proxy card, or through the Internet at the web address provided, and using the procedures and instructions described on the Notice or proxy card.

By Written Proxy. If you are a stockholder of record and receive a Notice card, you may request a written proxy card by following the instructions included in the Notice.

In Person. All stockholders of record may vote in person at the Annual Meeting.

Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, we encourage you to vote by proxy as soon as possible. Your shares will be voted in accordance with your instructions.

How do I vote if I am a beneficial owner of shares?

As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker on how to vote the shares in your account. Your broker should give you instructions for voting your shares by Internet, telephone or mail. As a beneficial owner, you are invited to attend the Annual Meeting, but you may not vote your shares in person at the Annual Meeting unless you request and obtain a valid legal proxy from your broker giving you the legal right to vote the shares at the Annual Meeting.

Who will vote my shares at the Annual Meeting and how will they vote my shares if I provide voting instructions and/or grant my proxy?

The persons named as proxies in the proxy card or electronic voting form will vote your shares according to your instructions. If you sign and return your proxy card but do not make any of the selections, the named proxies will vote your shares: (i) FOR election of the three nominees for Class I directors as set forth in this Proxy Statement; (ii) FOR approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers as disclosed in these materials; (iii) approval, on an advisory basis, for every 1 YEAR for the frequency of the advisory vote on the compensation of the Company’s named executive officers; and (iv) FOR ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of the Company for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019.

What is a Broker Non-Vote?

A “broker non-vote” occurs when a broker submits a proxy for the meeting with respect to a discretionary, or routine, matter but does not have the authority to vote on non-discretionary matters because the beneficial owner did not provide voting instructions on those matters.

Under New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules, the proposal to ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm for 2019 (Proposal 4) is considered a “discretionary” or “routine” item. This means that brokerage firms may vote in their discretion on behalf of clients (beneficial owners) who have not furnished voting instructions. In contrast, all of the other proposals set forth in this Proxy Statement are “non-discretionary” or “non-routine” items—brokerage firms that have not received voting instructions from their clients on these matters may not vote on these proposals.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Can I change or revoke my vote?

If you are a registered stockholder, any subsequent vote you cast will replace your earlier vote. This applies whether you cast your vote by executing a proxy card bearing a later date, vote by telephone or Internet, or by attending the Annual Meeting and voting in person. The proxy may be revoked at any time before it is exercised by filing with the Company a written revocation addressed to the Corporate Secretary.

If you hold your shares in street name, you must contact your broker, bank or other nominee for specific instructions on how to change or revoke your vote.

What constitutes a “quorum” for the meeting?

The presence, in person or by proxy, of the holders of record of a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting, but if a quorum should not be present, the meeting may be adjourned from time to time until a quorum is obtained.

What is the voting requirement to approve each of the proposals, and how are votes counted?

Proposal
Description
Votes Required for Approval
Effect of Abstention
1
Election of Class I Directors
Affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast for the election of directors at the Annual Meeting
An abstention will not count as a vote cast and therefore will not affect the outcome of the vote.

An incumbent director nominee who is not elected is required to tender his or her resignation, which will be accepted or rejected by the Board as more fully described in “Proposal 1 - Election of Class I Directors.”
2
Advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation
Affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting
An abstention will effectively count as a vote cast against this proposal.
3
Advisory vote to approve the frequency of the advisory vote on named executive officer compensation
Number of years (1, 2, or 3) receiving the highest number of votes cast
No effect.
4
Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for 2019
Affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at the meeting
An abstention will effectively count as a vote cast against this proposal.

Cumulative voting is not permitted in the election of directors. Shares of a stockholder who abstains from voting on any or all proposals will be included for the purpose of determining the presence of a quorum. Broker non-votes on any matter, as to which the broker has indicated on the proxy that it does not have discretionary authority to vote, will be treated as votes not cast or as shares not entitled to vote with respect to that matter and will not affect the outcome of the vote. However, such shares will be considered present and entitled to vote for quorum purposes so long as they are entitled to vote on other matters.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Who pays for the solicitation of proxies?

The cost of soliciting proxies will be borne by the Company. In addition to the use of postal services or the Internet, proxies may be solicited by directors, officers, and employees of the Company (none of whom will receive any additional compensation for any assistance they may provide in the solicitation of proxies) in person or by telephone. The Company has hired Georgeson, Inc. to assist in the solicitation of proxies at an estimated cost of $9,500 plus expenses.

What does it mean if I receive more than one Notice, proxy card, or voting instructions?

This means that you have multiple accounts in which you own our Common Stock. Please vote all Notice, proxy cards, or voting instructions from us to ensure that all of your shares of Common Stock are voted.

What is “householding”?

In order to reduce expenses, we are taking advantage of certain SEC rules, commonly known as “householding,” that permit us to deliver, in certain cases, only one Notice, Annual Report, or Proxy Statement, as applicable, to multiple stockholders sharing the same address, unless we have received contrary instructions from one or more of the stockholders. If you received a householded mailing this year and would like to have additional copies of the Notice, Annual Report, Proxy Statement, or other proxy materials sent to you, please submit your request directed to our Corporate Secretary, Arcosa, Inc., 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75201 or by telephone at 972-942-6500. If you hold your stock in street name, you may revoke your consent to householding at any time by notifying your broker.

If you are currently a stockholder sharing an address with another of our stockholders and wish to have your future proxy statements and annual reports householded, or your materials are currently householded and you would prefer to receive separate materials in the future, please contact our Corporate Secretary at the above address or telephone number.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The business affairs of the Company are managed under the direction of the Board of Directors (also referred to in this Proxy Statement as the “Board”) in accordance with the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware and the Company’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Amended and Restated Bylaws. The role of the Board of Directors is to oversee the management of the Company for the benefit of the stockholders. This responsibility includes monitoring senior management’s conduct of the Company’s business operations and affairs; reviewing and approving the Company’s financial objectives, strategies, and plans; risk management oversight; evaluating the performance of the Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers; and overseeing the Company’s policies and procedures regarding corporate governance, legal compliance, ethical conduct, and maintenance of financial and accounting controls.

The Board of Directors has adopted Corporate Governance Principles, which are reviewed annually by the Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee. The Company also has a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which is applicable to all employees of the Company, including the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer, and controller, as well as the Board of Directors. The Company intends to post any amendments to or waivers from its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics on the Company’s website at www.arcosa.com to the extent applicable to an executive officer, principal accounting officer, controller, or a director of the Company. The Corporate Governance Principles and the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics are available on the Company’s website at www.arcosa.com under the heading “Investors — Governance — Governance Documents.”

The directors hold regular and special meetings and spend such time on the affairs of the Company as their duties require. Since the Separation in November 2018, the Board of Directors held two meetings. The Board also meets regularly in non-management executive sessions. In 2018, all directors of the Company, except Mr. Craig, attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board of Directors and the committees on which they served. Due to a scheduling conflict before he came on the Board, Mr. Craig attended less than 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the Board and committees on which he serves. As we recently became a public company in November 2018, we held very few Board and committee meetings during 2018. It is Company policy that each director is expected to attend the Annual Meeting.

Independence of Directors

The Board of Directors makes all determinations with respect to director independence in accordance with the NYSE listing standards and the rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC. In addition, the Board of Directors established certain guidelines to assist it in making any such determinations regarding director independence (the “Independence Guidelines”), which are available on the Company’s website at www.arcosa.com under the heading “Investors — Governance — Governance Documents — Categorical Standards of Director Independence.” The Independence Guidelines set forth commercial and charitable relationships that may not rise to the level of material relationships that would impair a director’s independence as set forth in the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules and regulations. The determination of whether such relationships as described in the Independence Guidelines actually impair a director’s independence is made by the Board on a case-by-case basis.

The Board undertook its annual review of director independence and considered transactions and relationships between each director, or any member of his or her immediate family, and the Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates. In making its determination, the Board applied the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules and regulations together with the Independence Guidelines. In making such determinations, the Board, amongst other things, considered certain transactions that, pursuant to the Company’s Independence Guidelines, are not considered to be a material relationship that would impair independence.

As a result of its review, the Board affirmatively determined that the following directors are independent of the Company and its management under the standards set forth in the listing standards of the NYSE and the SEC rules and regulations: Joseph Alvarado, Rhys J. Best, David W. Biegler, Jeffrey A. Craig, Ronald J. Gafford, John W. Lindsay, Douglas L. Rock, and Melanie Trent. The Board determined that Antonio Carrillo is not independent because of his employment by the Company.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Board Leadership Structure

As our independent, non-executive Chairman of the Board, Mr. Best presides over all meetings of the Board and stockholders, reviews and approves meeting agendas, meeting schedules and other information, as appropriate, acts as a liaison between the outside directors and management, consults on stockholder engagement and governance matters, and performs such other duties as the Board requires from time to time. The Board believes that this structure allows our Chief Executive Officer to focus on operating and managing the Company and leverages our Chairman’s experience in guidance and oversight. While the Board believes that this structure is currently in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders, it does not have a policy with respect to separating the Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer roles and could adjust the structure in the future as it deems appropriate.

Our Audit, Human Resources, and Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committees are currently comprised entirely of independent directors. The Board believes that having an independent, non-executive chairman of the Board and independent Audit, Human Resources, and Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committees provides a structure for strong independent oversight of our management.

Board Meetings and Committees

The standing committees of the Board of Directors are the Audit Committee, Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee, and Human Resources Committee. Each of the committees is governed by a charter, current copies of which are available on the Company’s website at www.arcosa.com under the heading “Investors — Governance — Governance Documents.” Mr. Carrillo, Chief Executive Officer and President (“CEO”) of the Company, does not serve on any Board committee. Director membership of the committees and the number of committee meetings held in 2018 since the Separation are identified below. The Board held two meetings in 2018 since the Separation.

Director
Audit Committee
Corporate Governance &
Directors Nominating
Committee
Human Resources
Committee
Antonio Carrillo
 
 
 
Rhys J. Best
 
 
 
Joseph Alvarado
 
*
*
David W. Biegler
 
 
**
Jeffrey A. Craig
*
 
 
Ronald J. Gafford
 
**
 
John W. Lindsay
 
 
*
Douglas L. Rock
**
 
 
Melanie Trent
*
*
 
2018 Meetings
1
1
1
*Member
**Chair

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee’s function is to oversee, on behalf of the Board, (i) the integrity of the Company’s financial statements and related disclosures; (ii) the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; (iii) the qualifications, independence, and performance of the Company’s independent auditing firm; (iv) the performance of the Company’s internal audit function; (v) the Company’s internal accounting and disclosure control systems and practices; (vi) the Company’s procedures for monitoring compliance with its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics; and (vii) the Company’s policies and procedures with respect to risk assessment, management, and mitigation. In carrying out its function, the Audit Committee (a) reviews with management, our VP of Audit, and the independent auditors, the Company’s financial statements, the accounting principles applied in their preparation, the scope of the audit, any comments made by the independent auditors upon the financial condition of the Company and its accounting controls

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

and procedures; (b) reviews with management its processes and policies related to risk assessment, management, and mitigation, compliance with corporate policies, compliance programs, internal controls, and summaries of management’s travel and entertainment reports; and (c) performs such other matters as the Audit Committee deems appropriate.

The Audit Committee also pre-approves all auditing and all allowable non-audit services provided to the Company by the independent auditors. The Audit Committee selects and retains the independent auditors for the Company and approves audit fees. The Board of Directors has determined that all members of the Audit Committee are “independent” as defined by the rules of the SEC and the listing standards of the NYSE. The Board has determined that Mr. Rock, Chair of the Audit Committee, and Mr. Craig are each qualified as an audit committee financial expert within the meaning of SEC regulations.

Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee

The functions of the Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee (the “Governance Committee”) are to identify and recommend to the Board individuals qualified to be nominated for election to the Board; review the qualifications of the members of each committee (including the independence of directors) to ensure that each committee’s membership meets applicable criteria established by the SEC and NYSE; recommend to the Board the members and Chairperson for each Board committee; periodically review and assess the Company’s Corporate Governance Principles and the Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and make recommendations for changes thereto to the Board; periodically review the Company’s orientation program for new directors and the Company’s practices for continuing education of existing directors; annually review director compensation and benefits and make recommendations to the Board regarding director compensation and benefits; review, approve, and ratify all transactions with related persons that are required to be disclosed under the rules of the SEC; annually conduct an individual director performance review of each incumbent director; and oversee the annual self-evaluation of the performance of the Board. Each of the members of the Governance Committee is an independent director under the NYSE listing standards.

In performing its annual review of director compensation, the Governance Committee may utilize independent compensation consultants from time to time to assist in making its recommendations to the Board. Following the Separation, the Board reviewed the director compensation in 2018, considered benchmarking information provided by Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (the “Compensation Consultant”), and ratified director compensation that was approved by our Former Parent prior to the Separation.

The Governance Committee will consider director candidates recommended to it by stockholders. In considering candidates submitted by stockholders, the Governance Committee will take into consideration the needs of the Board and the qualifications of the candidate. To have a candidate considered by the Governance Committee, a stockholder must submit the recommendation in writing and must include the following information:

the name of the stockholder, evidence of the person’s ownership of Company stock, including the number of shares owned and the length of time of ownership, and a description of all arrangements or understandings regarding the submittal between the stockholder and the recommended candidate; and
the name, age, business and residence addresses of the candidate, the candidate’s resumé or a listing of his or her qualifications to be a director of the Company, and the person’s consent to be a director if selected by the Governance Committee, nominated by the Board, and elected by the stockholders.

The stockholder recommendation and information described above must be sent to the Corporate Secretary at 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201, and must be received by the Corporate Secretary not less than 120 days prior to the anniversary date of the date the Company’s proxy statement was released in connection with the previous year’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

The Governance Committee believes that the qualifications for serving as a director of the Company are that a nominee demonstrate depth of experience at the policy-making level in business, government, or education; possess the ability to make a meaningful contribution to the Board’s oversight of the business and affairs of the Company and a willingness to exercise independent judgment; and have an impeccable reputation for honest and ethical conduct in

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

both professional and personal activities. In addition, the Governance Committee examines a candidate’s time availability, the candidate’s ability to make analytical and probing inquiries, and financial independence to ensure he or she will not be financially dependent on director compensation.

The Governance Committee identifies potential nominees by asking, from time to time, current directors and executive officers for their recommendations of persons meeting the criteria described above who might be available to serve on the Board. The Governance Committee may also engage firms that specialize in identifying director candidates. As described above, the Governance Committee will also consider candidates recommended by stockholders.

Once a person has been identified as a potential candidate, the Governance Committee makes an initial determination regarding the need for additional Board members to fill vacancies or expand the size of the Board. If the Governance Committee determines that additional consideration is warranted, the Governance Committee will review such information and conduct interviews as it deems necessary to fully evaluate each director candidate. In addition to the qualifications of a candidate, the Governance Committee will consider such relevant factors as it deems appropriate, including the current composition of the Board, the evaluations of other prospective nominees, and the need for any required expertise on the Board or one of its committees. The Governance Committee considers potential candidates in light of the skills, experience, and attributes (i) possessed by current directors; and (ii) that the Board has identified as important for new directors to possess. The Governance Committee also contemplates multiple dynamics that promote and advance diversity among its members. Although the Governance Committee does not have a formal diversity policy, the Governance Committee considers a number of factors regarding diversity of personal and professional backgrounds (both domestic and international), national origins, specialized skills and acumen, and breadth of experience in industry, manufacturing, financing transactions, and business combinations. The Governance Committee’s evaluation process will not vary based on whether or not a candidate is recommended by a stockholder.

Human Resources Committee

The Human Resources Committee (the “HR Committee”) makes recommendationsfor 2021. Our financial highlights for 2021 include:

$2,036M
Total Revenue
$283M*
Adjusted EBITDA
18.8%*
Return on Capital
13.9%*
Adjusted EBITDA Margin
* See Annex A for a reconciliation of Non-GAAP measures to the independent membersmost comparable GAAP measures.
02

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Focus on ESG
We continued to integrate environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) into our business in our united efforts to build a better world through our strategic planning, ESG-focused initiatives, and innovative continuous improvement projects. We are proud of achieving the following milestones in our continuous efforts to integrate ESG into our daily practices and long-term strategies.
Major

ESG

Milestones
Increased female Board of Directors representation to three members (30% of the Board) with the appointment of Kimberly Lubel and Julie Piggott
Increased female leadership at the senior management level with the appointment of Gail Peck as CFO
Continued community impact initiatives at the Arcosa corporate level and at plants across the country
Continued integration of ESG into strategic and M&A decision making processes
Established ESG committees at multiple levels throughout the organization to further ESG culture and collaboration
Established WE~AR: Women of Arcosa, Arcosa’s first Employee Resource Group (ERG)
Published Arcosa’s first annual Sustainability Report (integrating TCFD framework and supporting SASB metrics, including safety, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and water consumption metrics)
Expect to publish Arcosa’s 2021 Sustainability Report during second quarter of 2022
Expanded our Diversity
We continued to enhance diversity at both the Board and leadership levels. 50% of DirectorsArcosa's Board (all of which are nominated for election this year) and its senior leaders are now comprised of diverse members.


* Reflects racial or gender diversity.
03

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Governance Highlights
We are committed to strong corporate governance practices, which we believe recognize shareholder interests and support the success of our enterprise. Our corporate governance practices are highlighted below:
Independent Board Chairman
9 of 10 Board members are independent
Continued focus on diversity - two new
female directors and new female CFO
Limits on other public company board service
Regularly-scheduled executive sessions of independent directors
100% Independent Audit, Human Resources, and Governance and Sustainability Committees
Majority voting policy for uncontested
director elections
Enterprise Risk Management program
with full Board and committee oversight
Annual Board and committee
self-performance evaluations
Shareholders’ ability to nominate directors through proxy access
Robust director and senior officer stock
ownership requirements
Policies prohibiting short sales, hedging, margin accounts, and pledging of Arcosa stock
Extensive shareholder engagement
program
Clawback policy in place
Culture that values ESG responsibility
Compensation Highlights
We continue to receive strong support from our shareholders on our pay-for-performance philosophy (receiving 98% of votes cast in its responsibilities relating tofavor of Arcosa’s compensation program during the competitive2021 Annual Meeting). We believe weighting a significant portion of our named executive officers’ compensation with performance-based compensation and value creation in the form of stock appreciation aligns with our shareholder’s expectations. With these expectations in mind, the Company’s CEO. The HR Committee has been delegated authority bydesigned a compensation package for the Board of Directors to make compensation decisions with respect toCEO that was 83% at risk and for the other named executive officers identified in this Proxy Statement. Each65% at risk.


*Charts above reflect an approximation of the members2021 annual target total compensation mix.
We encourage you to read the more fulsome description of the HR Committee is an independent director under the NYSE listing standards, including those standards applicable specifically to members ofour compensation committees.

The HR Committee reviews management succession planningprogram in “Compensation Discussion and approves awards under the Company’s incentive compensation and equity based plans. The HR Committee annually evaluates the leadership and performance of the Company’s CEO and recommends his compensation to the Company’s independent directors. The independent directors are responsible for approving the CEO’s compensation. The CEO provides to the HR Committee his assessment of the performance of the other named executive officers. The HR Committee also has direct access to the Company’s key leaders. The HR Committee reviews and approves compensation for the Chief Financial Officer (the “CFO”) and the other named executive officers.

The Role of the Compensation Consultant

Our Former Parent’s Human Resources Committee (“Former Parent Committee”) retained the services of the Compensation Consultant to assist in providing an independent assessment of its 2018 executive compensation programs. The Compensation Consultant was the Former Parent Committee’s sole compensation consultant in 2018. The Compensation Consultant reported directly to the Former Parent Committee for the purposes of advising itAnalysis” beginning on matters relating to 2018 executive compensation.

Our HR Committee also has retained the Compensation Consultant to advise it on compensation matters as an independent compensation consultant. The HR Committee retains the Compensation Consultant to provide an assessment of the Company’s executive compensation programs and to perform five key tasks. The Compensation Consultant (i) reviews and assists in the design of the Company’s executive compensation programs, (ii) provides insight into executive compensation practices used by other companies, (iii) benchmarks the Company’s executive

page 21.
04
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 9


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

compensation pay levels with relevant peer survey data, (iv) provides proxy disclosure

Director Nominees
The following chart sets forth information regarding our director nominees for comparator companies,election at the 2022 Annual Meeting.
Director Nominee Highlights
Director
Age
Tenure on Board*
Independence
Diversity**
Joseph Alvarado
69
4
Rhys J. Best
75
17
Antonio Carrillo
55
8
Jeffrey A. Craig
61
4
Ronald J. Gafford
72
23
John W. Lindsay
61
4
Kimberly S. Lubel
57
1
Julie A. Piggott
61
1
Douglas L. Rock
75
12
Melanie M. Trent
57
4
*Includes years of service combined on both boards of Arcosa and (v) provides input to the HR Committee on the risk assessment, structure, and overall competitivenessTrinity Industries, Inc., former parent company of the Company’s executive compensation programs.

The Compensation Consultant’s ownership structure, limited service lines, and policies and procedures are designed to ensure that the Compensation Consultant’s work for the HR Committee does not raise any conflicts of interest. The amount of fees paid in 2018 to the Compensation Consultant by the Company represented less than 1% of the Compensation Consultant’s total annual revenues for 2018. The internal policies of the Compensation Consultant prohibit its partners, consultants, and employees from engaging in conduct that could give rise to conflicts of interest and from buying, selling, and trading in the securities of client companies when that partner, consultant,Arcosa (“Former Parent”).

**Includes either racial or employee is providing consulting services to the client. The employees of the Compensation Consultant providing consulting services to the HR Committee have no other business or personal relationship with any member of the HR Committee or any executive officer of the Company. After a review of these factors and the considerations outlined in applicable SEC and NYSE rules, the HR Committee has concluded that the work of the Compensation Consultant has not raised any conflicts of interest and that the Compensation Consultant is independent from the Company and from management.

The HR Committee instructed the Compensation Consultant to provide analyses, insight, and benchmarking information post-Separation on the named executive officers and other key executives to determine whether the compensation packages for these executives were competitive with the market and met the Company’s objectives. The Compensation Consultant was instructed to:

review the total direct compensation (base salary, annual incentive, and long-term incentive);gender diversity.
help identify and confirm that the new Arcosa comparator companies selected by the HR Committee were appropriate; and
gather publicly-traded comparator company proxies and peer survey data to ascertain market competitive rates for the named executive officers.

The Compensation Consultant benchmarked all cash and equity components of compensation for 2018 and, for each position, determined certain percentile benchmarks.

The Role of Management

The CEO, the CFO, and the Chief Human Resources Officer (“CHRO”) work with the HR Committee and the Compensation Consultant to develop the framework and design the plans for all compensation components. The CEO and CFO recommend the financial performance measurements for the annual incentive awards and the long-term performance-based equity awards, subject to HR Committee approval. The CFO certifies the achievement of these financial performance measures. The HR Committee recommends the CEO’s compensation to the independent directors for their approval. The CEO makes recommendations to the HR Committee on compensation for each of the other named executive officers.

The Role of the HR Committee

Throughout the year, the CEO provides the HR Committee with his ongoing assessment of the performance of the other named executive officers. These assessments provide background information for any adjustment to base salary, annual incentive, or long-term incentive. Both annual incentives and long-term incentives are established with threshold, target, and maximum payout levels.

The HR Committee realizes that benchmarking and comparing peer group proxy disclosure data require certain levels of interpretation due to the complexities associated with executive compensation plans. The HR Committee uses the benchmarking information and the peer group proxy disclosure data provided by the Compensation Consultant as general guidelines and makes adjustments to compensation levels based on what the HR Committee believes is in the best interests of the Company’s stockholders. The HR Committee uses its judgment and bases its consideration of each executive’s compensation on performance in respect to the value of the executive’s contributions to the Company, the executive’s tenure, and peer survey data that establishes the ranges against which compensation is benchmarked.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1005


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Board’s Role in Risk Oversight

While management is responsible for

Board Skills Matrix
The following matrix highlights the day-to-day managementmix of skills, attributes, and mitigation of risk, our Board of Directors has ultimate responsibility for risk oversight. Management reviews and discusses risks with the Board of Directors as partexperiences of the businessten nominees that supported the Governance and operating review conducted at each of the regular meetings of the Board of Directors. While the Board of Directors has primary responsibility for overseeing the Company’s risk management, each committee of the Board of Directors also considers risk within its area of responsibility. Each committee regularly reports back to the Board of Directors on its risk oversight activities.

The Audit Committee assesses major financial risk exposures and steps taken by management to address the same, is responsible for the review and assessment of information technology and cybersecurity risk exposuresSustainability Committee’s recommendation and the steps taken to monitor and control those exposures, and reviews risks identified during the internal and external auditors’ risk assessment procedures. The HR Committee reviews risks arising from our executive compensation programs and management succession planning. The Governance Committee oversees risks related to our governance structure and director compensation programs.

Risk Assessment of Compensation Policies and Practices

Prior to the Separation, the Compensation Consultant performed a risk assessment at the request of the Former Parent Committee, with respect to the 2018 compensation policies and practices (the “Compensation Policies”) applicable to our Former Parent’s executive officers. The Compensation Consultant did not find any excessive risk in its review of the Compensation Policies applicable to our Former Parent’s executive officers.

The Company conducted a detailed risk assessment of its Compensation PoliciesBoard’s nomination for its employees, including its executive officers. Participants in the Compensation Policies risk assessment included the Company’s management, human resources group, internal audit group, and the HR Committee.

Following the Separation, representatives of the Company’s management, human resources group, and internal audit group reviewed the Company’s Compensation Policies and assessed the likelihood and potential impact of the risk presented by the Compensation Policies. Because the Company’s Compensation Policies following the Separation were substantially based on our Former Parent’s Compensation Policies, management also reviewed the Compensation Consultant’s risk assessment of the Former Parent’s Compensation Policies. Management has concluded that the Compensation Policies are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Messrs. Biegler, Alvarado, and Lindsay served on the HR Committee during the last completed fiscal year. None of the members of the HR Committee had ever served as an executive officer or employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries. There were no compensation committee interlocks during 2018.

Communications with Directors

The Board has established a process to receive communications by mail from stockholders and other interested parties. Stockholders and other interested parties may contact any member of the Board or the non-management directors as a group, any Board committee or any chair of any such committee. To communicate with the Board of Directors, any individual director, or any group or committee of directors, correspondence should be addressed to the Board of Directors or any such individual director or group or committee of directors by either name or title. All such correspondence should be sent “c/o Corporate Secretary” at 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201.

All communications received as set forth in the preceding paragraph will be opened by the office of the Corporate Secretary for the sole purpose of determining whether the contents represent a message to directors. Any contents that are not in the nature of advertising, promotions of a product or service, or offensive material will be forwarded promptly to the addressee. In the case of communications to the Board or any group or committee of directors, the Corporate Secretary will make sufficient copies of the contents to send to each director who is a member of the group or committee to which the envelope is addressed.

election.
Alvarado
Best
Carrillo
Craig
Gafford
Lindsay
Lubel
Piggott
Rock
Trent
Cyclical Industry
Multi-industry - Manufacturing, Energy, Construction, Minerals and Mining
Industrial Equipment Manufacturing
C-level Corporate Executive Position; Strategic Leadership
International
Broad Manager - In Scale Organization
IT/Cybersecurity
ESG Knowledge
Finance, Banks, Public Securities
Human Resources/Cultural
Legal/Regulatory
Mergers & Acquisitions
Technical Expertise Applicable to Arcosa Products
SOX/Financial Expert
Independent
Diversity
06
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 11


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

PROPOSAL 1 — ELECTION OF CLASS I DIRECTORS

The Board of Directors currently consists of nine members and is currently divided into three classes. The Class I directors have terms expiring at the Annual Meeting. The Class II directors will have terms expiring at the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders, and the Class III directors will have terms expiring at the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders. Class II directors will be elected to one-year terms at the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders, and Class III directors will be elected to one-year terms at the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders. Commencing with the 2022 annual meeting of stockholders, the Board of Directors will no longer be classified, and directors will no longer be divided into classes.

On the recommendation of the Governance Committee, the Board has nominated three candidates to be re-elected as Class I directors at the Annual Meeting. If re-elected, the Class I directors will serve for three-year terms expiring at the 2022 annual meeting of stockholders, or when their successors are duly elected and qualified.

All of the Class I nominees are incumbent directors and, pursuant to the Company’s Amended and Restated Bylaws, an incumbent director nominee who is not elected is required to tender his or her resignation for consideration by the Governance Committee and the Board (with the affected director recusing himself or herself from the deliberations). The Board will be free to accept or reject the resignation and will make its decision known publicly within 90 days of certification of the vote results. If a director’s resignation is accepted by the Board, then the Board may fill the resulting vacancy.

The Board is not seeking the election of Class II or Class III directors, whose terms have not yet expired. You may not vote for a greater number of persons than the nominees named in this Proxy Statement.

Each nominee has agreed to be named in this Proxy Statement and to serve if elected. We have no reason to believe that any of the nominees would be unable to serve if elected, but if any nominee is unavailable for election, the proxy holders may vote for another nominee proposed by the Board, in which case your shares will be voted for such other nominee.

The Board of Directors believes that each of the director nominees possesses the qualifications described above under “Board Meetings and Committees—Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee.”

The information provided below is biographical information about each of the Class I nominees, as well as the remaining incumbent directors, including a description of the experience, qualifications, attributes, or skills that led the Board to conclude that the individual should be nominated for election as a director of the Company.

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR each of the Nominees for Class I Director.

Director Nominee Biographies

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 12Age: 69
Independent Director Since: 2018
Committees: Governance & Sustainability; Human Resources (Chair)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Class I - Nominees for Election as Directors for Terms Expiring in 2022

Ronald J. Gafford, age 69. Director since 2018. Mr. Gafford served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Austin Industries, Inc., a U.S.-based construction company, from 2001 to 2012, and Chairman from 2008 to 2012, when he retired. Mr. Gafford is a member of the board of directors of publicly-traded Daseke, Inc., a transportation company, and is Chairman of the Board of Rees Architects, Inc., a privately-held architecture firm. From 1999 until the Separation in 2018, he was a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc. Mr. Gafford began his career as a Project Engineer/Estimator and later a Project Manager for the Henry C. Beck Company in Dallas, TX. He later joined the Trammell Crow Company and served as Partner for their Construction and Development.

Mr. Gafford has extensive experience in managing and leading a significant industrial enterprise. His service as the Chief Executive Officer of Austin Industries, Inc. provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations.

Douglas L. Rock, age 71. Director since 2018. From 1990 to 2010, Mr. Rock served as the Chairman of Smith International, Inc., a provider of products and services to oil and gas exploration and production companies. Mr. Rock joined Smith International, Inc. in 1974 and served as Chief Executive Officer, President, and Chief Operating Officer from 1989 to 2008. From 2010 until the Separation in 2018, he served as a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc.

Mr. Rock has broad experience in managing and leading a significant industrial enterprise. His service on the boards of other companies provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations.

Melanie M. Trent, age 54. Director since 2018. Ms. Trent previously served in various legal, administrative and compliance capacities for Rowan Companies plc, a global offshore contract drilling company, from 2005 until April 2017, including as an Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer from 2014 until April 2017, as Senior Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Company Secretary from 2011 until 2014, and as Vice President and Corporate Secretary from 2010 until 2011. Prior to her tenure at Rowan, Ms. Trent served in various legal, administrative and investor relations capacities for Reliant Energy Incorporated, served as counsel at Compaq Computer Corporation and as an associate at Andrews Kurth LLP. She serves as a director for Diamondback Energy, Inc., an oil and natural gas company, and Frank’s International N.V., a global tubular and oil and gas service provider.

Ms. Trent’s strong legal and executive management experience, diverse background and knowledge of oil and gas and energy industries, and experience as a director provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 13

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Class II - Continuing Directors Whose Terms Expire in 2020

Jeffrey “Jay” Craig, age 58. Director since 2018. Mr. Craig has served as Chief Executive Officer and President of Meritor, Inc., a global supplier for commercial vehicle manufacturers, since April 2015. Prior to this, from June 2014 to March 2015, Mr. Craig was President and Chief Operating Officer, with oversight of Meritor’s business segments – Commercial Truck & Industrial and Aftermarket & Trailer. He has been a member of the Meritor Board of Directors since April 2015. Prior to taking on the role of President and COO, Mr. Craig was Senior Vice President and President of Meritor’s Commercial Truck & Industrial segment from February 2013 to May 2014. He served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer at Meritor from February 2009 to January 2013 and has held various leadership positions at the company since 2006. Before joining Meritor, Mr. Craig served as President and CEO of General Motors Acceptance Corp.’s (“GMAC”) Commercial Finance organization from 2001 to 2006. Prior to that, Mr. Craig was President and CEO of GMAC’s Business Credit division from 1999 until 2001. He joined GMAC as a general auditor in 1997 from Deloitte & Touche, where he served as an audit partner.

Mr. Craig’s significant management experience provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations, including the Company’s transportation products businesses.

Joseph Alvaradoage 66. Director since 2018.

Background
Mr. Alvarado is the retired Chairman and CEO of Commercial Metals Company (“CMC”), a global manufacturer, recycler and marketer of steel and other metals. Mr. Alvarado joined CMC in April 2010, and prior to serving as Chairman from 2013 to 2018 and CEO from 2011 to 2017, he held the position of Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Prior to his tenure at CMC, Mr. Alvarado served as President, U.S. Steel Tubular Products for U.S. Steel Corp. after the completed acquisition of Lone Star Technologies, Inc. where he had served as President and Chief Operating Officer from 2004 to 2007. Prior to this, Mr. Alvarado served as a Vice President for Ispat North America Inc. (now Arcelor Mittal) in 1998 and as an Executive Vice President at Birmingham Steel Company in 1997. Mr. Alvarado began his career at Inland Steel Company in 1976, and in 1988 he was appointed Vice President and General Manager, Sales and Marketing for Inland Bar Company and was made President in 1995. Mr. Alvarado currently serves as a director of Trinseo, Kennametal, Inc., and PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., and he iswas a former director of Spectra Energy from 2011 until February 2017 when Spectra Energy merged with Enbridge, Inc. He has also served on the board of directors of various industry trade associations and community organizations.

Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Alvarado’sAlvarado's significant management experience provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’sArcosa's operations, including the Company’sits construction products and steel fabrication businesses.

Age: 75
Non-Executive Chairman and
Independent Director Since: 2018
Committees: None
Rhys J. Best
Background
Mr. Best is Non-Executive Chairman of MRC Global, Inc., a global industrial distributor of infrastructure products and services for the energy industry. From 1999 to 2004, Mr. Best served as Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Lone Star Technologies, Inc., a company engaged in producing and marketing casing, tubing, line pipe and couplings for the oil and natural gas, industrial, automotive, and power generation industries. He was also Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Lone Star Technologies, Inc. from 2004 until its acquisition by U.S. Steel Corp. in 2007. Mr. Best formerly served on the board of directors of Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation, an independent natural gas producer, from 2008 to 2021, and also served on the board of directors of Commercial Metals Corporation from 2010 to January 2022. From 2004 to 2014, he served on the board of directors of Crosstex Energy, L.P. and also served as Non-Executive Chairman of Crosstex from 2009 to 2014. From 2005 until November 2018, he was a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc., and from 2007 until December 2018, he served on the board of directors of Austin Industries, Inc. In 2014, Mr. Best was selected as 2014 Director of the Year by the National Association of Corporate Directors.
Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Best has extensive experience in managing and leading significant industrial enterprises. His executive experience and service on the boards of other significant companies provides the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations, including its construction products and engineered structures businesses, as well as its international operations and any future international opportunities.
07

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three


Age: 55
Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
None
Antonio Carrillo
Background
Mr. Carrillo serves as Arcosa’s President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as a member of its Board of Directors. From April 2018 until November 2018, Mr. Carrillo served as the Senior Vice President and Group President of Construction, Energy, Marine, and Components of Trinity Industries, Inc. From 2012 to February 2018, Mr. Carrillo served as the Chief Executive Officer of Orbia Advance Corporation (formerly known as Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V.) (“Orbia”), a publicly-traded global specialty chemical company. Prior to joining Orbia, Mr. Carrillo spent 16 years at Trinity Industries, Inc. where he served as Senior Vice President and Group President of Trinity Industries’ Energy Equipment Group and was responsible for Trinity Industries’ Mexico operations. Mr. Carrillo previously served as a director of Trinity Industries, Inc. from 2014 to November 2018 and as a director of Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. from 2015 to 2018. Mr. Carrillo currently serves as a director of NRG Energy, one of the leading integrated power companies in the U.S. and Canada.
Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Carrillo brings significant knowledge and understanding of Arcosa’s products, services, operations, and business environment. In addition, he has broad experience in managing and leading a significant industrial enterprise in Mexico, where Arcosa has a number of operations.

Age: 61
Independent Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
Audit (Financial Expert)
Jeffrey A. Craig
Background
Mr. Craig served as the Executive Chairman of Meritor, Inc. a global supplier for commercial vehicle manufacturers, from March 2021 to December 2021, and was the Chief Executive Officer and President of Meritor from April 2015 to February 2021. Prior to this, from June 2014 to March 2015, Mr. Craig was President and Chief Operating Officer, with oversight of Meritor’s business segments - Commercial Truck & Industrial and Aftermarket & Trailer. He was a member of the Meritor Board of Directors from April 2015 until December 2021. Prior to taking on the role of President and COO, Mr. Craig was Senior Vice President and President of Meritor’s Commercial Truck & Industrial segment from February 2013 to May 2014. He served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer at Meritor from February 2009 to January 2013 and has held various leadership positions at the company since 2006. Before joining Meritor, Mr. Craig served as President and CEO of General Motors Acceptance Corp.’s (“GMAC”) Commercial Finance organization from 2001 to 2006. Prior to that, Mr. Craig was President and CEO of GMAC’s Business Credit division from 1999 until 2001. He joined GMAC as a general auditor in 1997 from Deloitte & Touche, where he served as an audit partner. Mr. Craig currently serves as director of Hyliion, a leader in electrified powertrain solutions for Class 8 semi-trucks.
Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Craig's significant management experience provides the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations, including its transportation products businesses.
08

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Age: 72
Independent Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
Governance & Sustainability (Chair)
Ronald J. Gafford
Background
Mr. Gafford served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Austin Industries, Inc., a U.S.-based construction company, from 2001 to 2012, and Chairman from 2008 to 2012, when he retired. Mr. Gafford is the Chairman of the Board of Rees Architects, Inc., a privately-held architecture firm. Mr. Gafford previously served on the board of directors of Daseke, Inc. from 2015 until 2019, and from 1999 until November 2018, he was a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc. Mr. Gafford began his career as a Project Engineer/Estimator and later a Project Manager for the Henry C. Beck Company. He later joined the Trammell Crow Company and served as Partner for their Construction and Development.
Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Gafford has extensive experience in managing and leading a significant industrial enterprise. His service as the CEO of Austin Industries, Inc. provides the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations, including its construction products businesses.

Age: 61
Independent Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
Human Resources
John W. Lindsayage 58. Director since 2018.
Background
Mr. Lindsay has served as Chief Executive Officer of Helmerich & Payne, Inc., a provider of drilling services and technologies, since 2014 and President and Director since 2012. Mr. Lindsay joined Helmerich & Payne in 1987 and has served in various positions including Vice President, U.S. Land Operations from 1997 to 2006 for Helmerich & Payne International Drilling Co., Executive Vice President, U.S. and International Operations from 2006 to 2010, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from 2010 to 2012, and President and Chief Operating Officer of the CompanyHelmerich & Payne from 2012 to 2014.

Skills and Qualifications
Mr. Lindsay’sLindsay's significant management experience provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’sArcosa's operations, including the Company’s energy equipmentits engineered structures businesses.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1409


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Class III - Continuing Directors Whose Terms Expire in 2021

Rhys J. Best, age 72. Non-Executive Chairman since 2018. Mr. Best is Non-Executive Chairman of MRC Global, Inc., a global industrial distributor of infrastructure products and services for the energy industry. Beginning in 1999, Mr. Best


Age: 57
Independent Director
Since: 2021
Committees:
Human Resources
Kimberly S. Lubel
Background
Ms. Lubel served as the Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Lone Star Technologies,CST Brands, Inc., a company engaged from its spin-off from Valero Energy Corporation (“Valero”) in producing and marketing casing, tubing, line pipe and couplings for the oil and natural gas, industrial, automotive and power generation industries. He was also a director of, and remained in these positions with, Lone Star Technologies, Inc.,2013 until itsCST Brands’ acquisition by U.S. Steel Corp.Circle K in 2007. Mr. BestJune 2017. Ms. Lubel served as the Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Valero from 2006 to 2012 and served as its Vice President of Legal Services from 2003 to 2006. Ms. Lubel joined Valero in 1997. Ms. Lubel also serves on the boards of Westlake Corporation (formerly Westlake Chemical), where she is a member of the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and Governance and Corporate Risk and Sustainability Committees, and PBF Energy Inc., where she is Chair of the Health, Safety, and Environmental Committee and a member of the Compensation Committee. She previously served on the boards of WPX Energy, Inc., CST Brands, Inc., and CrossAmerica GP, LLC.
Skills and Qualifications
Ms. Lubel’s strong legal background, strategic leadership skills and experience as a public company CEO and independent board member provide the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations.

Age: 61
Independent Director
Since: 2021
Committees:
Audit (Financial Expert)
Julie A. Piggott
Background
Ms. Piggott served as the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of directorsBNSF Railway Company (“BNSF”), one of Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation,North America’s leading freight transportation companies, from 2014 until her retirement in 2021. Ms. Piggott held various other finance and commercial roles with BNSF since joining the company in 1991, including Vice President Planning and Studies, and Controller and Vice President Finance and Treasurer. Prior to her tenure at BNSF, Ms. Piggott’s experience included finance, accounting, and audit roles at a private investment management company and a public accounting firm. Ms. Piggott holds an independent natural gas producer, and Commercial Metals Corporation. From 2004 to 2014, he servedinactive CPA license from the state of Minnesota. Ms. Piggott currently serves on the board of directors of Crosstex Energy, L.P.a non-profit charity.
Skills and alsoQualifications
Ms. Piggott’s strategic leadership skills and financial expertise provide the Board with invaluable knowledge regarding the financial aspect of business operations.
10

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Age: 75
Independent Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
Audit (Chair; Financial Expert)
Douglas L. Rock
Background
Mr. Rock served as Non-Executivethe Chairman of CrosstexSmith International, Inc., a provider of products and services to oil and gas exploration and production companies, from 20091990 to 2014.2010. Mr. Rock joined Smith International, Inc. in 1974 and served as Chief Executive Officer, President, and Chief Operating Officer from 1989 to 2008. From 20052010 until the Separation inNovember 2018, he wasserved as a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc.,
Skills and from 2007 until December 2018, he served on the board of directors of Austin Industries, Inc.

Qualifications

Mr. Best has extensive experience in managing and leading significant industrial enterprises. His service on the boards of other significant companies provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations, including its international operations and future international opportunities.

David W. Biegler, age 72. Director since 2018. Mr. Biegler serves as a director of Southcross Energy Partners GP, LLC (“Southcross GP”), and served from March 2018 to September 2018 as acting Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer, served as Chairman since 2015, as Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer from 2012 to 2015, and as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer from 2011 to 2012. Southcross GP is the general partner of Southcross Energy Partners, L.P. (“Southcross LP”), a company engaged in natural gas transportation and processing. Mr. Biegler served as Chairman of Southcross Holdings LP, which is currently the sole owner of Southcross GP, from August 2014 to January 2017, and served as its Chief Executive Officer from August 2014 to December 2014. Mr. Biegler also served as a director of Dynegy, Inc., a provider of wholesale power, capacity and ancillary services, from 2003 to 2011, and interim President and Chief Executive Officer of Dynegy, Inc. from March 2011 to April 2011. From 1992 until the Separation in 2018, he was a member of the board of directors of Trinity Industries, Inc. He retired as Vice Chairman of TXU Corp. in 2001, having served TXU Corp. as President and Chief Operating Officer from 1997 to 2001. Mr. Biegler is also a director of Southwest Airlines, Inc. and Austin Industries, Inc. In November 2011, after Mr. Biegler had resigned from the Dynegy, Inc. board of directors, certain subsidiaries of Dynegy, Inc. filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Southcross Holdings filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in March 2016.

Mr. Biegler has broad experience in managing and leading significant industrial enterprises. His service on the boards of other significant companies provides the Board with additional perspective on the Company’s operations.

Antonio Carrillo, age 52. Antonio Carrillo serves as Arcosa’s President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as a member of its Board of Directors. From April 2018 until the Separation, Mr. Carrillo served as the Senior Vice President and Group President of Construction, Energy, Marine and Components of Trinity. From 2012 to February 2018, Mr. Carrillo served as the Chief Executive Officer of Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V., a publicly-traded global specialty chemical company. Prior to joining Mexichem, Mr. Carrillo spent 16 years at Trinity where he served as Senior Vice President and Group President of Trinity’s Energy Equipment Group and was responsible for Trinity’s Mexico operations. Mr. Carrillo previously served as a director of Trinity from 2014 until the Separation in 2018 and a director of Dr. Pepper Snapple Group, Inc. from 2015 to 2018.

As a result of his employment with Trinity and as a member of Trinity’s Board of Directors, Mr. Carrillo brings significant knowledge and understanding of Arcosa’s products, services, operations, and business environment. In addition, heRock has broad experience in managing and leading a significant industrial enterpriseenterprise. His executive experience and service on the boards of other companies provides the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations, including its engineered structures businesses.


Age: 57
Independent Director
Since: 2018
Committees:
Audit; Governance & Sustainability
Melanie M. Trent
Background
Ms. Trent previously served in Mexico, where Arcosa hasvarious legal, administrative, and compliance capacities for Rowan Companies plc (now known as Valaris plc), a numberglobal offshore contract drilling company, from 2005 until April 2017, including as an Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Chief Administrative Officer from 2014 until April 2017, as Senior Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Company Secretary from 2011 until 2014, and as Vice President and Corporate Secretary from 2010 until 2011. Prior to her tenure at Rowan, Ms. Trent served in various legal, administrative and investor relations capacities for Reliant Energy Incorporated. Ms. Trent previously served on the board of directors of Frank’s International N.V. (now known as Expro Group Holdings N.V.). She currently serves as a director for Diamondback Energy, Inc., an oil and natural gas company, and Noble Corporation, an offshore drilling company.
Skills and Qualifications
Ms. Trent’s strong legal and executive management experience, diverse background, and knowledge of oil and gas industry provide the Board with additional perspective on Arcosa’s operations.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1511


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

PROPOSAL 2 — ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATIONDirector Nomination Process

The Company seeks approval, on an advisory basis, from its stockholdersGovernance and Sustainability Committee (the “G&S Committee”) is responsible for recommending qualified candidates to the Board for nomination. The G&S Committee believes that the qualifications for serving as a director of Arcosa are that a nominee (i) demonstrate depth of experience at the policy-making level in business, government, or education; (ii) possess the ability to make a meaningful contribution to the Board’s oversight of the compensationbusiness and affairs of its named executive officers as describedArcosa and a willingness to exercise independent judgment; and (iii) have an impeccable reputation for honest and ethical conduct in this Proxy Statement.

As described inboth professional and personal activities. In addition, the Compensation DiscussionG&S Committee examines a candidate’s time availability, the candidate’s ability to make analytical and Analysis, the Company’s executive compensation program (i) encourages high levels of performanceprobing inquiries, and accountability, (ii) aligns the interests of executives with those of stockholders, (iii) links compensationfinancial independence to business objectives and strategies, and (iv) takes into account, as appropriate, the cyclical nature of certain of the Company’s businesses.

This proposal provides stockholders the opportunity to approveensure he or not approve the Company’s executive compensation program through the following resolution:

“RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and the related narrative discussion, is hereby approved.”

Because this is an advisory vote, itshe will not be binding uponfinancially dependent on director compensation.

The G&S Committee identifies potential nominees by asking, from time to time, current directors and executive officers for their recommendations of persons meeting the criteria described above who might be available to serve on the Board. The G&S Committee may also engage qualified firms that specialize in identifying director candidates. As described above, the G&S Committee will also consider candidates recommended by shareholders.
Once a person has been identified as a potential candidate, the G&S Committee makes an initial determination regarding the need for additional Board members to fill vacancies or expand the size of the Board. If the G&S Committee determines that additional consideration is warranted, the G&S Committee will review such information and conduct interviews as it deems necessary to fully evaluate each director candidate. In addition to the qualifications of a candidate, the G&S Committee will consider such relevant factors as it deems appropriate, including the current composition of the Board, the evaluations of Directors. However,other prospective nominees, and the HRneed for any required expertise on the Board or one of its committees. The G&S Committee considers potential candidates in light of the skills, experience, and attributes (i) possessed by current directors; and (ii) that the Board has identified as important for new directors to possess. The G&S Committee also contemplates multiple dynamics that promote and advance diversity among its members. Although the G&S Committee does not have a formal diversity policy, the G&S Committee considers a number of factors regarding diversity of personal and professional backgrounds (both domestic and international), national origins, specialized skills and acumen, and breadth of experience in industry, manufacturing, financing transactions, and business combinations. The G&S Committee’s evaluation process will not vary based on whether or not a candidate is recommended by a shareholder.
The G&S Committee will consider director candidates recommended by shareholders. In considering candidates submitted by shareholders, the G&S Committee will take into accountconsideration the outcomeneeds of the vote when considering future executive compensation arrangements. AfterBoard and the 2019 Annual Meeting, the next advisory vote to approve the compensationqualifications of the named executive officers will occurcandidate. To have a candidate considered by the G&S Committee, a shareholder must submit the recommendation in writing and must include the following information:
the name of the shareholder, evidence of the person’s ownership of Arcosa stock, including the number of shares owned and the length of time of ownership, and a description of all arrangements or understandings regarding the submittal between the shareholder and the recommended candidate; and
the name, age, business and residence addresses of the candidate, the candidate’s resumé or a listing of his or her qualifications to be a director of Arcosa, and the person’s consent to be a director if selected by the G&S Committee, nominated by the Board, and elected by the shareholders.
The shareholder recommendation and information described above must be sent to the Corporate Secretary at 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201, and must be received by the 2020Corporate Secretary not less than 120 days prior to the anniversary date of the date that Arcosa’s proxy statement was released in connection with the previous year’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders unless the Board modifies its policy on the frequency of holding such advisory votes.

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR approval of this resolution.

Shareholders.
12
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 16


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

PROPOSAL 3 — ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE FREQUENCY OF THE ADVISORY VOTE ON NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICER COMPENSATIONProposal One
Election of Nominated Directors
10
Current
Members
10
Candidates
for re-election
1 year
term expiring
in 2023
The Board of Directors currently consists of ten members. On the recommendation of the G&S Committee, the Board has nominated the ten incumbent candidates to be re-elected at the Annual Meeting. If elected, each of the directors will serve for a one-year term expiring at the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, or when their successors are duly elected and qualified or earlier upon death, resignation, retirement, disqualification or removal.

In addition

All of the nominees are incumbent directors, and, pursuant to providing stockholders withArcosa's Amended and Restated Bylaws, an incumbent director nominee who is not elected is required to tender his or her resignation for consideration by the opportunity to cast a “Say on Pay” advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers, in accordance with SEC rules, we are also providing our stockholders with the opportunity to indicate how frequently we should seek an advisory vote on the compensation of our named executive officers in the future. This non-binding advisory vote is commonly referred to as a “Say on Frequency” vote. Under this proposal, our stockholders may indicate whether they would prefer to have an advisory vote on executive compensation every one year, every two years, or every three years.

The HRG&S Committee and the Board believe that(with the advisoryaffected director recusing himself or herself from the deliberations). The Board will be free to accept or reject the resignation and will make its decision known publicly within 90 days of certification of the vote on executive compensation shouldresults. If a director’s resignation is accepted by the Board, then the Board may fill the resulting vacancy.

Each nominee has agreed to be conducted every year because we believenamed in this frequency will enable our stockholders to vote, on an advisory basis, on the most recent executive compensation information that is presented in our Proxy Statement leadingand to more meaningful and timely communication between the Company and our stockholders on the compensation of our named executive officers.

Stockholders are not votingserve if elected. We have no reason to approve or disapprove the Board’s recommendation. Instead, you may cast your vote on your preferred voting frequency by choosingbelieve that any of the following four options with respectnominees would be unable to this proposal: every “1 year,” “2 years,” “3 years,” or “abstain.”

Forserve if elected, but if any nominee is unavailable for election, the reasons discussed above, we are asking our stockholders toproxy holders may vote for a frequency of every “1 year.”

The Say on Frequency vote is advisory, and therefore is not binding on the Company,another nominee proposed by the Board, or the HR Committee. However, the Board and the HR Committee value the opinions expressed by stockholders in their vote on this proposal andwhich case your shares will consider the option that receives the most votes in determining the frequency of future advisory votes on compensation of our named executive officers.

be voted for such other nominee.

The Board of Directors recommends approvalbelieves that each of the following resolution:

RESOLVED,director nominees possesses the qualifications described in the “Director Nomination Process” section.

The “Director Nominees” section contains biographical information about each of the director nominees, including a description of the experience, qualifications, attributes, and skills that led the Board to conclude that the advisory vote relating to compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers,individual should be nominated for election as disclosed pursuant to Item 402a director of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the executive compensation tables and the related narrative discussion, shall be conducted every 1 YEAR.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote for the option of every “1 YEAR,” on an advisory basis, relating to the frequency of the advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation, as stated in the above resolution.

Arcosa.
"FOR"
The Board of Directors recommends that you
vote FOR each of the Nominees for Director.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1713


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

PROPOSAL 4 — RATIFICATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLPCorporate Governance

Arcosa's business affairs are managed under the direction of the Board in accordance with the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, Arcosa’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation, and its Amended and Restated Bylaws. The Audit Committeerole of the Board is to oversee the management of Arcosa for the benefit of the shareholders. This responsibility includes monitoring senior management’s conduct of Arcosa’s business operations and affairs; reviewing and approving Arcosa’s financial objectives, strategies, and plans; risk management oversight; evaluating the performance of the Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers; and overseeing Arcosa’s policies and procedures regarding corporate governance, legal compliance, ethical conduct, and maintenance of financial and accounting controls.

The Board has appointed Ernst & Young LLP (“Ernst & Young”)adopted Corporate Governance Principles, which are reviewed annually by the G&S Committee. Arcosa also has a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which is applicable to all employees of Arcosa, including the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, principal accounting officer, and controller, as well as the independent registered publicBoard. Arcosa intends to post any amendments to or waivers from its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics on Arcosa’s website at ir.arcosa.com to the extent applicable to an executive officer, principal accounting firmofficer, controller, or a director of Arcosa. The Corporate Governance Principles and the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics are available on Arcosa’s website at ir.arcosa.com under the heading “Corporate Governance — Additional Governance Documents.”
Independence of Directors
The Board makes all determinations with respect to director independence in accordance with the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) listing standards and the rules and regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). In addition, the Board established certain guidelines to assist it in making any such determinations regarding director independence (the “Independence Guidelines”), which are available on Arcosa’s website at ir.arcosa.com under the heading “Corporate Governance — Additional Governance Documents — Arcosa Categorical Standards of Director Independence.” The Independence Guidelines set forth commercial and charitable relationships that may not rise to the level of material relationships that would impair a director’s independence as set forth in the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules and regulations. The determination of whether such relationships as described in the Independence Guidelines actually impair a director’s independence is made by the Board on a case-by-case basis.
The Board undertook its annual review of director independence and considered transactions and relationships between each director, or any member of his or her immediate family, and Arcosa and its subsidiaries and affiliates. In making its determination, the Board applied the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules and regulations, together with the Independence Guidelines.
The Board considered the disclosure by Julie Piggott that she was the Chief Financial Officer of BNSF prior to her retirement from BNSF in October of 2021. From time to time, Arcosa sells components to BNSF, and BNSF provides transportation services to Arcosa and certain of its subsidiaries. These transactions involved less than two percent (2%)  of the Companyconsolidated gross revenues of each of Arcosa and BNSF for theeach fiscal year ending December 31,since January 1, 2019. AlthoughFor the Bylaws do2019-2021 period, Arcosa received revenue from BNSF totaling $3,530,717, with $616,953 received in 2021, and paid BNSF a total of $3,997,018, with $304,173 paid in 2021. These transactions were conducted in the ordinary course of business, at arms-length. The Board determined that these limited transactions did not requirepreclude a finding of independence with respect to Ms. Piggott.
As a result of its review, the Board affirmatively determined that we seek stockholder ratificationthe following directors are independent of Arcosa and its management under the standards set forth in the listing standards of the appointmentNYSE and the SEC rules and regulations: Joseph Alvarado, Rhys J. Best, David W. Biegler (now retired), Jeffrey A. Craig, Ronald J. Gafford, John W. Lindsay, Douglas L. Rock, Melanie M. Trent, Kimberly S. Lubel and Julie A. Piggott. The Board determined that Antonio Carrillo is not independent because of Ernst & Young ashis employment by Arcosa.
14

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Board Leadership Structure
As our independent, registered public accounting firm, we are doing sonon-executive Chairman of the Board, Mr. Best (i) presides over all meetings of the Board and shareholders, (ii) reviews and approves meeting agendas, meeting schedules and other information, as appropriate, (iii) acts as a matter of good corporate governance. Ifliaison between the stockholders do not ratifyoutside directors and management, (iv) consults on shareholder engagement and governance matters, (v) has the appointment,right to call special board or shareholder meetings, and (vi) performs such other duties as the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or notBoard requires from time to retain Ernst & Young. Even iftime. The Board believes that this structure allows our Chief Executive Officer to focus on operating and managing Arcosa and leverages our Chairman’s experience in guidance and oversight. While the appointmentBoard believes that this structure is ratified, the Audit Committee in its discretion may change the appointment at any time during the year if it determines that a change would becurrently in the best interests of the CompanyArcosa and its stockholders.

shareholders, it does not have a policy with respect to separating the Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer roles and could adjust the structure in the future as it deems appropriate.

Our Audit, G&S, and HR Committees are currently comprised entirely of independent directors. The Company has been advised by Ernst & YoungBoard believes that having an independent, non-executive Chairman of the firm has no relationship withBoard and independent committees provides a structure for strong independent oversight of our management.
Board Succession
The G&S Committee and the Company or its subsidiaries other thanfull Board regularly discuss board succession. Board composition is one of the most critical areas of focus for the Board. Having the right mix of directors who bring diverse perspectives, business and professional experiences, and skills, provides a foundation for robust dialogue, informed advice, and collaboration. The Board considers current Board skills, composition, tenure, and anticipated retirements to identify gaps that arisingmay need to be filled through Board succession planning and the Board refreshment process. The Board strives to ensure an environment that encourages diverse critical thinking and values innovative, strategic discussions to achieve a higher level of success for Arcosa.
On September 21, 2021, David Biegler announced his retirement from the firm’s engagementBoard after a combined 29 years of service with both the boards of Arcosa and the Former Parent. As part of its succession planning, the G&S Committee retained a search firm specializing in board placements to assist in identifying potential candidates meeting the Board’s criteria for membership. After a thorough search and vetting process, Arcosa identified two highly qualified candidates that increased the overall diversity of the Board. On November 1, 2021, Arcosa announced the election of Kimberly Lubel to the Board and her appointment to serve on the HR Committee. Additionally, on December 9, 2021, Arcosa announced the election of Julie Piggott to the Board and her appointment to serve as auditors, tax advisers,a financial expert on the Audit Committee.
Board Meetings and consultants.

Committees

The Company hasdirectors hold regular and special meetings and spend such time on the affairs of Arcosa as their duties require. The Board of Directors held six meetings and a total of 16 committee meetings in 2021. The Board also been advised that representativesmeets regularly in non-management executive sessions. In 2021, all directors of Ernst & Young will be presentArcosa attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board and the committees on which they served. Each director also attended the 2021 Annual Meeting where they will have an opportunityof Shareholders, which is required pursuant to make a statement if they desire to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

Fees of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for Fiscal Year 2018

The following table presents fees for professional audit services rendered by Ernst & Young for the audits of the Company’s annual financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2018, and fees for other non-audit services rendered by Ernst & Young during the period. Fees billed by Ernst & Young to our Former Parent for periods prior to the November 1, 2018 date of Separation are not included in the table below.

 
2018
Audit fees
$
1,060,000
 
Audit-related fees
 
3,000
 
Tax fees
 
5,000
 
Arcosa's Corporate Governance Principles.

Services rendered by Ernst & Young in connection with fees presented above were as follows:

Audit Fees

Audit fees include fees associated with the annual audit of the Company’s consolidated and combined financial statements; incremental audit procedures related to the acquisition of ACG Materials; and statutory audits in Mexico and Europe.

Audit-Related Fees

Audit related fees are for the use of online research tools.

Tax Fees

Tax fees include fees for tax advice related to the work opportunity tax credit.

Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policy and Procedures

The Audit Committee has a policy for the pre-approval of all audit and permissible non-audit services provided by Ernst & Young. These services may include audit services, audit-related services, tax services, and other services. Under this policy, pre-approval is generally provided for up to one year, and any pre-approval is detailed as to the services or category of services and includes an anticipated budget. In addition, the Audit Committee also may pre-approve services on a case-by-case basis. The Audit Committee has delegated pre-approval authority to the Chair of the Audit Committee. Pursuant to this delegation, the Chair must report any pre-approval decision to the Audit Committee at its first meeting after the pre-approval was obtained. All services set forth in the table above were pre-approved by the Audit Committee before being rendered.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1815


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Report

The standing committees of the Board are the Audit Committee, G&S Committee, and HR Committee. Each of the committees is governed by a charter, current copies of which are available on Arcosa’s website at ir.arcosa.com under the heading “Corporate Governance — Board Committees & Charters.” Mr. Carrillo, Chief Executive Officer and President (“CEO”) of Arcosa, and Mr. Best, our non-executive Chairman of the Board, do not serve on any Board committees. Director membership of the committees and the number of committee meetings held in 2021 are identified below.
Director
Audit Committee
Governance and
Sustainability
Committee
Human Resources
Committee
Joseph Alvarado
Rhys J. Best
Antonio Carrillo
Jeffrey A. Craig
Ronald J. Gafford
John W. Lindsay
Kimberly S. Lubel(1)
Julie A. Piggott(2)
Douglas L. Rock
Melanie M. Trent
2021 Meetings
6
5
5

Member

Chair
(1)
Ms. Lubel was elected to the Board on November 1, 2021.
(2)
Ms. Piggott was elected to the Board on December 9, 2021.
Audit Committee
The Audit Committee’s function is to oversee, on behalf of the Board, (i) the integrity of Arcosa’s financial statements and related disclosures; (ii) Arcosa’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; (iii) the qualifications, independence, and performance of Arcosa’s independent auditing firm; (iv) the performance of Arcosa’s internal audit function; (v) Arcosa’s internal accounting and disclosure control systems and practices; (vi) Arcosa’s procedures for monitoring compliance with its Code of Business Conduct and Ethics; and (vii) Arcosa’s policies and procedures with respect to risk assessment, management, and mitigation. In carrying out its function, the Audit Committee (a) reviews with management, our Vice President of Audit, and the independent auditors, Arcosa’s financial statements, the accounting principles applied in their preparation, the scope of the audit, any comments made by the independent auditors upon the financial condition of Arcosa and its accounting controls and procedures; (b) reviews with management its processes and policies related to risk assessment, management, and mitigation, compliance with corporate policies, compliance programs, internal controls, and summaries of management’s travel and entertainment reports; and (c) performs such other matters as the Audit Committee deems appropriate.
The Audit Committee also pre-approves all auditing and all allowable non-audit services provided to Arcosa by the independent auditors. The Audit Committee selects and retains the independent auditors for Arcosa and approves audit fees. The Board of Directors has determined that all members of the Audit Committee

We are a standing committee comprised of independent directors“independent” as “independence” is currently defined by the rules of the SEC regulations and the applicable listing standards of the NYSE. The Board of Directors has determined that twoMr. Rock, Chair of the Audit Committee, Ms. Piggott and Mr. Craig are each qualified as an audit committee financial expert within the meaning of SEC regulations.

16

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Governance and Sustainability Committee
The G&S Committee has oversight responsibilities with respect to Arcosa’s governance and ESG activities and initiatives. The functions of the G&S Committee are to (i) identify and recommend to the Board individuals qualified to be nominated for election to the Board; (ii) review the qualifications of the members of each committee (including the independence of directors) to ensure that each committee’s membership meets applicable criteria established by the SEC and NYSE; (iii) recommend to the Board the members and chairperson for each Board committee; (iv) periodically review and assess Arcosa’s Corporate Governance Principles and Arcosa’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and make recommendations for changes thereto to the Board; (v) periodically review Arcosa’s orientation program for new directors and Arcosa’s practices for continuing education of existing directors; (vi) annually review director compensation and benefits and make recommendations to the Board regarding director compensation and benefits; (vii) review, approve, and ratify all transactions with related persons that are required to be disclosed under the rules of the SEC; (viii) annually conduct an individual director performance review of each incumbent director; oversee the annual self-evaluation of the performance of the Board and its committees; and (ix) review and assess Arcosa’s activities and practices regarding sustainability and ESG matters that are significant to Arcosa. Each of the members of the AuditG&S Committee are “audit committee financial experts” as defined by applicable SEC rules. We operateis an independent director under a written charter adoptedthe NYSE listing standards. In performing its annual review of director compensation, the G&S Committee may utilize independent compensation consultants from time to time to assist in making its recommendations to the Board.
Human Resources Committee
The HR Committee makes recommendations to the independent members of the Board in its responsibilities relating to the competitive compensation of Arcosa’s CEO. The HR Committee has been delegated authority by the Board of Directors. A copyto make compensation decisions with respect to the other named executive officers identified in this Proxy Statement. Each of the chartermembers of the HR Committee is available free of charge on the Company’s website at www.arcosa.coman independent director under the heading “Investors — Governance — Governance Documents — AuditNYSE listing standards, including those standards applicable specifically to members of compensation committees.
The HR Committee Charter.”

Wereviews management succession planning and approves awards under Arcosa’s incentive compensation and equity-based plans. The HR Committee annually selectevaluates the Company’sleadership and performance of Arcosa’s CEO and recommends his compensation to Arcosa’s independent auditors. That recommendation is subject to ratification by the Company’s stockholders.

Management is responsible for the Company’s financial statements, internal controls and the financial reporting process.directors. The independent auditorsdirectors are responsible for performingapproving the CEO’s compensation. The CEO provides to the HR Committee his assessment of the performance of the other named executive officers. The HR Committee also has direct access to Arcosa’s key leaders. The HR Committee reviews and approves compensation for the Chief Financial Officer (the “CFO”) and the other named executive officers.

The Role of the Compensation Consultant
In 2021, the HR Committee retained Pay Governance LLC (the “Compensation Consultant”) to provide a variety of executive compensation consultant services as an independent auditcompensation consultant. The services provided by the Compensation Consultant in 2021 included: (i) review and assist in the design of Arcosa’s executive compensation programs, (ii) provide insight into executive compensation practices used by other companies, (iii) benchmark Arcosa’s executive compensation pay levels with relevant peer survey data, (iv) provide proxy disclosure information for comparator companies, and (v) provide input to the HR Committee on the risk assessment, structure, and overall competitiveness of Arcosa’s executive compensation programs.
The Compensation Consultant’s ownership structure, limited service lines, and policies and procedures are designed to ensure that such Compensation Consultant’s work for the HR Committee does not raise any conflicts of interest. The amount of fees paid in 2021 to the Compensation Consultant by Arcosa represented less than one percent (1%)  of such Compensation Consultant’s total annual revenues for 2021. The internal policies of the Company’s consolidatedCompensation Consultant prohibit its members, partners, consultants, and combined financial statementsemployees from engaging in accordanceconduct that could give rise to conflicts of interest and from acquiring securities in their client organizations. The employees of the Compensation Consultant providing consulting services to the HR Committee have no other business or personal relationship with auditing standards generally accepted inany member of the United StatesHR Committee or any executive officer of America and issuingArcosa. After a report thereon. As provided in our charter, our responsibilities include the monitoring and oversightreview of these processes.

Consistent with our charter responsibilities, we metfactors and held discussions with management and the independent auditors. In this context, management and the independent auditors represented to us that the Company’s consolidated and combined financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 were prepared in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. We reviewed and discussed the consolidated and combined financial statements with management and the independent auditors and discussed with the independent auditors matters required to be discussed by Auditing Standard No. 1301, “Communications with Audit Committees,” issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.

The Company’s independent auditors have also provided to us the written disclosures and the letter required by applicable requirements of The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent auditors’ communications with the Audit Committee, and we discussed with the independent auditors that firm’s independence. We also considered whether the provision of non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the independent auditors’ independence and concluded that such services have not impaired the auditors’ independence.

Based upon our reviews and discussions with management, the Company’s internal auditors, and the independent auditors, and our review of the representation of management and the report of the independent auditors to the Audit Committee, we recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited consolidated and combined financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Audit Committee

Douglas L. Rock, Chair
Jeffrey A. Craig
Melanie Trent

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR ratification of the appointment of
Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for
the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 1917


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
considerations outlined in applicable SEC and NYSE rules, the HR Committee has concluded that the work of the Compensation Consultant has not raised any conflicts of interest and that the Compensation Consultant is independent from Arcosa and from management.
The Role of Management
The CEO, the CFO, and Chief Human Resources Officer work with the HR Committee and the Compensation Consultant to develop the framework and to design the plans for all compensation components. The CEO and CFO recommend the financial performance measurements for the annual incentive awards and the long-term performance-based equity awards, subject to HR Committee approval. The CFO certifies the achievement of these financial performance measures. The HR Committee recommends the CEO's compensation to the independent directors for their approval. The CEO makes recommendations to the HR Committee on compensation for each of the other named executive officers.
The Role of the HR Committee
Throughout the year, the CEO provides the HR Committee with his ongoing assessment of the performance of the other named executive officers. These assessments provide background information for any adjustment to base salary, annual incentives, or long-term incentives. Both annual incentives and long-term incentives are established with threshold, target, and maximum payout levels.
The HR Committee realizes that benchmarking and comparing peer group proxy disclosure data require certain levels of interpretation due to the complexities associated with executive compensation plans. The HR Committee uses the benchmarking information and the peer group proxy disclosure data provided by the Compensation Consultant as general guidelines and makes adjustments to compensation levels based on what the HR Committee believes is in the best interests of Arcosa’s shareholders. The HR Committee uses its judgment and bases its consideration of each executive’s compensation on performance in respect to the value of the executive’s contributions to Arcosa, the executive’s tenure, and peer survey data that establishes the ranges against which compensation is benchmarked.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
Messrs. Biegler (before his retirement), Alvarado, and Lindsay and Ms. Lubel served on the HR Committee during the last completed fiscal year. None of the members of the HR Committee had ever served as an executive officer or employee of Arcosa or any of its subsidiaries. There were no compensation committee interlocks during 2021.
Board’s Role in Risk Oversight
While management is responsible for the day-to-day management and mitigation of risk, our Board has ultimate responsibility for risk oversight. Management reviews and discusses risks with the Board as part of the business and operating review conducted at each of the regular meetings of the Board. While the Board has primary responsibility for overseeing Arcosa’s risk management, each committee of the Board also considers risk within its area of responsibility. Each committee regularly reports back to the Board on its risk oversight activities.
The Audit Committee assesses major financial risk exposures and steps taken by management to address the same, is responsible for the review and assessment of information technology and cybersecurity risk exposures and the steps taken to monitor and control those exposures, and reviews risks identified during the internal and external auditors’ risk assessment procedures. The HR Committee reviews risks arising from our executive compensation programs and management succession planning. The G&S Committee oversees risks related to our governance structure and director compensation programs.
18

TABLE OF CONTENTSEXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Risk Assessment of Compensation Policies and Practices
The Compensation Consultant performed a risk assessment with respect to our 2021 incentive compensation plans applicable to our executive officers. Based on this review, the Compensation Consultant concluded that Arcosa's executive incentive programs do not encourage excessive risk-taking behaviors. Arcosa also conducted a detailed risk assessment of our 2021 compensation policies and practices (the “Compensation Policies”) for our employees, including our executive officers, and assessed the likelihood and potential impact of the risk presented by the Compensation Policies. Participants in the risk assessment included Arcosa’s management, human resources group, internal audit group, and the HR Committee. Based on this review, management has concluded that sufficient controls exist to mitigate the risks related to the Compensation Policies.
Communications with Directors
The Board has established a process to receive communications by mail from shareholders and other interested parties. Shareholders and other interested parties may contact any member of the Board or the non-management directors as a group, any Board committee, or any chair of any such committee. All such correspondence should be sent to the Corporate Secretary of Arcosa at 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201.
All communications received as set forth in the preceding paragraph will be opened by the office of the Corporate Secretary for the sole purpose of determining whether the contents represent a message to directors. Any contents that are not in the nature of advertising, promotions of a product or service, or offensive material will be forwarded promptly to the addressee. In the case of communications to the Board or any group or committee of directors, the Corporate Secretary will make sufficient copies of the contents to send to each director, group, or committee to which the envelope is addressed.
Employee, Officer, and Director Pledging and Hedging Policy
Arcosa has adopted a policy prohibiting pledging and hedging. The policy prohibits officers, directors, and employees of Arcosa and their respective related persons from (i) selling Arcosa securities short, (ii) pledging or hypothecating any Arcosa securities (e.g. using Arcosa securities for margin loans or to collateralize other indebtedness), or (iii) engaging in derivative transactions, including without limitation hedging, puts and calls, or other transactions involving Arcosa securities.
19

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Transactions with Related Persons
Review, Approval, and Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons
The G&S Committee has adopted a Policy and Procedures for the Review, Approval, and Ratification of Related Person Transactions. In accordance with the written policy, the G&S Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, is responsible for the review, approval, and ratification of all transactions with related persons that are required to be disclosed under the rules of the SEC. Under the policy, a related person includes any of Arcosa’s directors, executive officers, certain shareholders, and any of their respective immediate family members. The policy applies to “Related Person Transactions,” which are transactions in which Arcosa participates, a related person has a direct or indirect material interest, and the amount exceeds $120,000. Under the policy, the Chief Legal Officer (the “CLO”) will review potential transactions and, in consultation with the CEO and CFO, will assess whether the proposed transaction would be a Related Person Transaction. If the CLO determines the proposed transaction would be a Related Person Transaction, the proposed transaction is submitted to the G&S Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, for review and consideration. In reviewing Related Person Transactions, the G&S Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances available, including, but not limited to the following:
the benefits to Arcosa of the Related Person Transaction;
the impact of a director’s independence if the related person is a director, an immediate family member of a director or an entity in which a director is a partner, shareholder, or executive officer;
the availability of other sources for comparable products and services;
the terms of the transaction; and
the terms available to unrelated third parties or employees generally.
After reviewing such information, the G&S Committee, or its chair, as applicable, may approve the Related Person Transaction if the G&S Committee or the G&S Committee chair concludes in good faith that the Related Person Transaction is in, or is not inconsistent with, the best interests of Arcosa and its shareholders.
Under the policy, the HR Committee must approve hiring of immediate family members of executive officers or directors and any subsequent material changes in employment or compensation. In 2021, Arcosa did not enter into any Related Person Transaction of the type required to be disclosed under Item 404 of Regulation S-K under the Exchange Act.
20

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Executive Compensation
Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) describes the Company’sArcosa’s executive compensation philosophy and the pay programs applicablein 2021.
2021 Compensation Program Philosophy
Our executive compensation program reflects our pay-for-performance philosophy. The HR Committee utilizes a combination of fixed and variable pay elements in order to achieve the below-referencedfollowing objectives:

Support Arcosa’s overall business strategy and results to drive long-term shareholder value creation without incentivizing excessive risk taking.


Attract, retain, and motivate key executives by providing market competitive total compensation opportunities.

Emphasize a strong link between
pay and performance with predefined short- and long-term performance
goals that place the majority of total compensation at risk.



Align executive and investor interests
by establishing market-relevant
metrics, including focus on strategic
ESG initiatives that drive shareholder value creation and address
shareholder expectations.
2021 Named Executive Officers
For 2021, the named executive officers (“NEOs” or “NamedNamed Executive Officers”) of Arcosa and their titles were:
Name
Principal Position
Antonio Carrillo
President and Chief Executive Officer
Scott C. Beasley*
Chief Financial Officer
Gail M. Peck*
Chief Financial Officer
Kerry S. Cole
Group President
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
Group President
Reid S. Essl
Group President
Bryan P. Stevenson
Chief Legal Officer
*With Mr. Beasley’s departure and Ms. Peck’s appointment as Chief Financial Officer in 2018. On November 1, 2018, the Company became an independent publicly traded companyJune 2021, we have included both Mr. Beasley and Ms. Peck as a result of the Separation. Prior to the Separation, compensation decisions were made by our Former Parent. Accordingly, this CD&A and the related compensation tables include information regarding compensation awarded by, and executive compensation policies and practices of, our Former Parent as they relate to our Named Executive Officers priorin this CD&A.
21

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
2021 Program Highlights
Payouts to the Separation, as well as certainNamed Executive Officers and other key executives under our 2021 Annual Incentive Program (“AIP”) reinforced our strong pay-for-performance philosophy. In designing the AIP for 2021, the HR Committee approved performance metrics that were in furtherance of our goals and in line with our 2021 earnings guidance. The HR Committee linked a significant portion of each of the Company’sNamed Executive Officer’s AIP awards to the performance of the business, both at the enterprise level and the group level of businesses, as applicable.
In 2021, the HR Committee approved the following Corporate and Group President AIP plans, which Group President Plans were comprised of the business units reporting to the Group Presidents:
CORPORATE PLAN
(CEO, CFO, CLO)
Enterprise

REID ESSL GROUP PLAN
Natural Aggregates
Recycled Aggregates
Specialty Materials
KERRY COLE GROUP PLAN
Utility Structures
Traffic and Telecom Structures
Marine Products
Storage Tanks
JESSE COLLINS GROUP PLAN
Steel Components
Wind Towers
Shoring Products
Updates for these plans included:
Linked Group Presidents' payouts to the performance of the businesses reporting to each of the Group Presidents;
Included an enterprise-wide adjusted EBITDA performance metric to each plan to create and foster cohesive company focus; and
Modified the execution of strategic initiatives objective to encompass a holistic focus on (i) improvements in ESG (including safety), (ii) growth of the enterprise, and (iii) progress on working capital.
With these updates, the HR Committee approved the 2021 AIP with the following performance metrics and weighting:
Corporate Plan
(CEO, CFO, CLO)
Performance Metric
Weighting
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
80%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives
20%
Group President Plans
(3 Group Presidents)
Performance Metric
Weighting
Group Adjusted EBITDA
60%
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
20%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives
20%
22

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
2021 Performance Highlights
In 2021, our highest priority continued to be the health and safety of our employees and communities as we faced the COVID-19 pandemic. We continued our safety and health protocols while operating as an essential business that supports critical infrastructure sectors. We remain proud of our employees' performance and resilience in facing the continued challenges from the COVID-19 pandemic.
We achieved healthy financial performance in line with the targets set by the Board and the HR Committee for 2021. Our $283.3 million in Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA was fueled by our continued efforts to transform our portfolio, including 30% growth in Adjusted Segment EBITDA year-over-year in Construction Products.
Adjusted EBITDA*

* See Annex A for a reconciliation of NON-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measures.
In addition to our 2021 financial performance, we continued to execute on the four strategic pillars of our long-term vision.

23

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Highlights for our execution of these strategies, which the HR Committee considered in connection with the evaluation of the execution of the strategic initiatives component in the payout of the 2021 AIP, include:
CORE INFRASTRUCTURE
Continued our strategic repositioning around core infrastructure products through the acquisitions of StonePoint Materials and Southwest Rock Products, expanding our existing natural aggregates platforms and adding new attractive metropolitan areas.
+30%*
Enhanced the resiliency of our portfolio by growing our higher-margin, more stable Construction Products’ Adjusted Segment EBITDA by 30% in 2021 to represent 55% of our Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA excluding corporate costs, up from 33% at the time of separation in 2018 from Former Parent.
$400M
Closed our inaugural bond offering of $400 million in
long-term unsecured senior notes deploying proceeds to fund growth initiatives.
18.8%*
Delivered Pre-Tax Return on Capital of 18.8%, down
from 2020 but remaining at a healthy level despite significant headwinds from our cyclically depressed businesses.
ESGContinued progress of our ESG journey, highlighting initiatives through the
publishing of our first full-year Sustainability Report.
* See Annex A for a reconciliation of Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measures.
Impact of COVID-19 on Compensation Programs or Metrics
The HR Committee did not make any adjustments to its pay for performance philosophy to compensate or offset for any continued impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Shareholder Engagement and Say-on-Pay Results
2021 compensation programs followingwill be subject of the Separation.advisory, non-binding say-on-pay vote at the 2022 Annual Meeting. The HR Committee considered our 2020 say-on-pay vote (98% voting in favor at the 2021 Annual Meeting) as a sign of our shareholders’ support of Arcosa’s executive compensation philosophy and plans. The Board and the HR Committee value the benefits of maintaining a dialogue with Arcosa’s shareholders and understanding their views. The HR Committee will continue to review and determineconsider the outcome of future say-on-pay votes as it evaluates the design of ourthe executive compensation programs policies and practices in the context of our business needs on a going-forward basis.

For 2018, the Named Executive Officers of the Company were:

Mr. Antonio Carrillo, President and Chief Executive Officer
Mr. Scott C. Beasley, Chief Financial Officer
Mr. Kerry S. Cole, President of Energy Equipment
Mr. Jesse E. Collins, Jr., President of Transportation Products
Mr. Reid S. Essl, President of Construction Products

As discussed above, until the consummation of the Separation, the Company was part of our Former Parent and was not an independent company. The Named Executive Officers’ respective 2018 compensation relates to (i) our Former Parent from January 1, 2018 through October 31, 2018, and (ii) the Company from November 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. Other than with regard to Mr. Carrillo, who joined our Former Parent in April 2018 in anticipation of becoming our Chief Executive Officer, decisions regarding the establishment of the 2018 compensation of the Named Executive Officers were made in the normal course by our Former Parent management in accordance with the applicable plan or program and, with respect to Messrs. Cole and Collins, were also reviewed by the Former Parent Committee, as described in further detail below. In anticipation of the Separation and in connection with their appointments to senior officer roles with Arcosa, the Former Parent Committee reviewed and approved certain additional or revised terms of compensation for each of Messrs. Beasley, Collins, and Essl. Mr. Carrillo was hired on April 23, 2018 as an officer of our Former Parent and the future Chief Executive Officer of the Company. Hisrelated specific compensation included incentives for his agreeing to leave his prior employment as Chief Executive Officer of Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V. The Former Parent Committee approved his compensation in connection with his appointment. Executive compensation decisions following the Separation are made by the Company’s HR Committee.

decisions.
24

The contents of this CD&A are organized into the following sections:TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Our Executive Compensation Policies and Practices
We have adopted the following compensation practices, which are intended to promote strong governance and alignment with shareholder interests:
What We Do:

Pay for Performance.
We believe in a “pay for performance” philosophy, in which a majority of our Named Executive Officers’ compensation, as well as a significant portion for other employees throughout the organization, is linked to achievement of specific annual and long-term strategic and financial goals and the realization of increased shareholder value. Approximately 83% of our CEO’s compensation and 65% of the average of all other Named Executive Officers’ compensation is “at risk” compensation, comprised of incentive and equity-based compensation.

Maintain Stock Ownership Guidelines.
To further align the interests of our executives and directors with those of our shareholders and to assure that our executives and directors own meaningful levels of Common Stock throughout their tenures with Arcosa, the HR Committee has adopted stock ownership guidelines for our non-employee directors, Named Executive Officers, and other senior officers as designated by the HR Committee. The directors, Named Executive Officers, and other senior officers have five years from the date of adoption of the policy, or from the date such director or senior officer become subject to the policy, to meet their required stock ownership levels. Each of our directors, Named Executive Officers, and senior officers has either met or is on track to achieve these ownership guidelines within the five-year compliance period. The required level of stock ownership is determined by the number of shares of Common Stock equal in value to the following multiples:
Title
Ownership Level
Chief Executive Officer
5 times base salary
Chief Financial Officer
3 times base salary
Other Senior Officers
2 times base salary
Board of Directors
5 times annual board cash retainer

Require Double Trigger for Receipt of Severance Payments.
Our Named Executive Officers participate in the 2022 Arcosa, Inc. Change in Control Severance Plan (the “2022 CIC Plan”), which contains a “double trigger” provision that requires both a change in control of Arcosa and a qualifying termination of the participating executive in order for such executive to receive severance payments and accelerated vesting of equity awards, except for those certain awards granted prior to December 6, 2018 by our Former Parent. We believe that the 2022 CIC Plan provides a mechanism for retaining our Named Executive Officers services and eliminating the distractions inherent in change in control events.

Maintain a Clawback Policy.
The Board has adopted a clawback policy which allows the HR Committee to recover amounts pursuant to short-term or long-term incentive compensation plans when subsequent to any such payment Arcosa's financial statements are required to be restated as a result of errors, omissions, fraud or other misconduct.

Retain an Independent Compensation Consultant.
The HR Committee directly retains an independent compensation consultant each year to provide guidance on executive compensation-related matters, to perform an annual total compensation study including compensation benchmarking information from peer group companies, and to advise on matters relating to executive and director compensation.

Prohibit Hedging and Pledging Our Shares.
Our insider trading policy prohibits executive officers, employees, and directors from pledging our securities or engaging in hedging or short-term trading of our securities, including, without limitation, short sales or transactions in puts, calls, or other derivative transactions. See “Corporate Governance—Employee, Officer, and Director Pledging and Hedging Policy.”
2018 Former Parent Compensation Program Philosophy
25

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
What We Don’t Do:
X
No Dividends on Unvested Restricted Stock Units.
During the vesting period, recipients do not earn dividends on time-based or performance-based restricted stock units issued by Arcosa. Unvested performance-based restricted stock units also do not accrue dividend equivalents. Unvested awards of time-based restricted stock units accrue dividend equivalents, which will be paid in cash only if and when such awards vest.
X
No Excise Tax Gross-Ups for Participants in the 2022 CIC Plan.
The 2022 CIC Plan provides that no excise or other tax gross-ups will be paid under the plan, and that severance benefits will be available only upon voluntary termination of employment for “good reason” by a participating officer or for termination without “cause” by Arcosa within six months prior to and in connection with a “change in control” or within two years following a “change in control.” For a discussion of the 2022 CIC Plan, see “Other Compensation Plans” and “Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control.”
X
No Employment Contracts.
None of the Named Executive Officers have employment contracts.
Compensation Approach and Benchmarking
Compensation Approach
Components of Compensation
Other Compensation Plans
Tax and Accounting Implications of Executive Compensation

This CD&A will be subject to an advisory say-on-pay vote at the Annual Meeting, and we will also conduct an advisory say-on-frequency vote at the Annual Meeting. Our Board and the HR Committee value the benefits of maintaining a dialogue with our stockholders and understanding their views. The HR Committee, intends to consider the outcome of future say-on-pay votes as it evaluates the design ofin consultation with management and its Compensation Consultant, oversees our executive compensation programs and the specific compensation decisions for each of our Named Executive Officers.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 20

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Our Executive Compensation Policies and Practices

We have adopted the following compensation practices, which are intended to promote strong governance and alignment with stockholder interests:

What We Do:

Pay for Performance. We believe in a “pay for performance” philosophy. Our Former Parent historically linked executive compensation to measured performance in key financial and nonfinancial areas, and our practices are consistent with this philosophy.
Maintain Stock Ownership Guidelines. To further align the interests of our executives and directors with those of our stockholders and to assure that our executives and directors own meaningful levels of Common Stock throughout their tenures with Arcosa, in December 2018, the HR Committee adopted stock ownership guidelines for our non-employee directors and other senior officers of the Company as designated by the HR Committee. The directors and senior officers have five years from the date of adoption of the policy to meet their required stock ownership levels. The required level of stock ownership is determined by the number of shares of Common Stock equal to the following multiples:
Title
Ownership Level
Chief Executive Officer
5 times base salary
Chief Financial Officer
3 times base salary
Other Senior Officers
2 times base salary
Board of Directors
5 times annual board cash retainer
Require Double Trigger for Receipt of Severance Payments. The Arcosa, Inc. Change in Control Severance Plan (the “CIC Plan”) contains a “double trigger” in that there must be present both a change in control and a qualifying termination of the executive in order to trigger severance payments and acceleration of equity awards granted after the effective date of the CIC Plan. We believe that the CIC Plan provides a mechanism for eliminating the distraction to the executives that is inherent in change in control events.
Maintain a Clawback Policy. The Board of Directors has adopted a clawback policy which allows the HR Committee, to the extent legally permitted, to recover incentive compensation if the payment or award was predicated upon achieving financial results that were subsequently the subject of restated financial statements and a lower payment or award would have been made to the executive based upon the restated financial statements.
Retain an Independent Compensation Consultant. The Former Parent Committee directly retained the Compensation Consultant as an independent compensation consultant to provide guidance on executive compensation-related matters and to perform an annual total compensation study including compensation benchmarking information from peer group companies. Our HR Committee has retained the Compensation Consultant to advise it on matters relating to executive and director compensation.
Prohibit Hedging and Pledging Our Shares. Our insider trading policy prohibits executive officers and directors from pledging our securities or engaging in hedging or short-term or speculative trading of our securities, including, without limitation, short sales or transactions in puts, calls, forwards, futures or other derivative securities.

What We Don’t Do:

No Dividends on Unvested Restricted Stock Units. During the vesting period, recipients do not earn dividends on time-based or performance-based restricted stock units. Unvested awards of time-based restricted stock units accrue dividend equivalents, which will be paid in cash only if and when such awards vest.
No Excise Tax Gross-Ups for Participants in the Arcosa, Inc. Change in Control Severance Plan. The CIC Plan provides that no excise or other tax gross-ups will be paid, and that severance benefits will be available only upon termination of employment for “good reason” by an officer or without “cause” by Arcosa. For a discussion of the CIC Plan, see “Other Compensation Plans” and “Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control.”
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 21

TABLE OF CONTENTS

No Employment Contracts. None of the Named Executive Officers have employment contracts.
No Significant Perquisites. Consistent with our executive compensation philosophy, we limit the perquisites provided to executive officers to those that serve reasonable business purposes.

2018 Former Parent Compensation Program Philosophy

The following section describes our Former Parent’s compensation program philosophy and objectives as they related to setting 2018reviews and approves compensation for our Named Executive Officers. Our executiveOfficers and other key executives, with the exception of the CEO. The independent directors of the Board approve the CEO’s compensation philosophy will continue to emphasize pay for performance, including separate performance metrics for short-term and long-term incentive opportunities and weightingfollowing a majority of long-term incentive compensation on performance objectives. The HR Committee expects to continue to review and define our executive compensation program to align with our business needs, including to attract and retain key executive talent, support achievement of our business strategy, and supportrecommendation by the creation of stockholder value.

Pay for Performance Philosophy

Our Former Parent’s executive compensation philosophy was based on pay for performance. Target performance-based incentive compensation, including both annual and performance-based long-term compensation was generally within a range of 50 percent to 59 percent of our Former Parent’s named executive officer’s total target compensation. HR Committee.

The Former Parent Committee believed that by having a significant amount of an executive’s compensation based on performance, and therefore at risk of non-payment, the executive would be properly motivated to bring added value to our Former Parent. Our Former Parent’s executive compensation program was also designed to provide significant upside opportunity for exceptional performance and conversely, reduce compensation when Trinity performance was lower than expected.

Objectives of the Executive Compensation Program

The primary emphasis of our Former Parent’s executive compensation program was to encourage and reward progress toward our Former Parent’s strategic and financial objectives. These objectives were recommended by its management, with oversight by our Former Parent’s Board of Directors, and were designed to promote the long-term interests of our Former Parent’s stockholders. As stockholders themselves, our Former Parent’s leaders were keenly focused on achieving these objectives. Our Former Parent’s executive compensation program reflected its pay for performance philosophy. Table 1 below provides a summary of our Former Parent’s executive compensation program design and alignment with its executive compensation program objectives.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 22

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table 1: Executive Compensation Program Summary

2018 ExecutiveCompensation
Program Objectives
2018 Executive Compensation
Program Design
*   Provided an incentive for long-term value creation
     for stockholders

*   Encouraged the highest level of performance and
     accountability for optimizing the shared characteristics
     between our Former Parent’s businesses for its
     overall success

*   Aligned compensation with annual and long-term
     business objectives, strategies, and financial targets

*   Motivated senior executives to successfully guide our
     Former Parent through changing economic cycles
     and business climates, and lead rapid production
     capacity adjustments to meet market demands

*   Attracted, motivated and retained the key executives
     needed to enhance the performance and profitability
     of our Former Parent throughout its business cycles
     and meet its objective for long tenure among its
     senior executives

*   Encouraged executives to enhance our Former
     Parent’s position as a premier, diversified industrial
     company

*   Be transparent and easy to understand by the
     programs’ participants and our Former Parent’s
     stockholders
*   Used equity-based awards and executive stock
     ownership requirements to align with stockholder
     interests

*   Provided compensation opportunity commensurate
     with the Former Parent’s performance and annual
     and long-term incentives that were linked to
     stockholder interests

*   Provided a reasonable mix of fixed and incentive
     compensation

*   Provided a reasonable balance between annual and
     long-term compensation

*   Maintained competitive pay levels based on the Peer
     Survey Data (as defined below) and peer group proxy
     disclosure data (targeted range for total target
     compensation was generally within 10 percent above
     or below the 50th percentile of the Peer Survey Data)

*   Provided compensation levels that were aligned with
     performance and addressed both industry
     competitiveness and recruiting/retention
     competitiveness

*   Incorporated enterprise-wide performance metrics to
     encourage executives to integrate operations and
     leverage expertise throughout our Former Parent

Compensation Approach and Benchmarking

Compensation Approach

Our Former Parent’s executive compensation was designed to drive executive accountability for performance of our Former Parent as a whole. This approach was reflected in our Former Parent’s compensation program and contributed to a performance-driven culture where executives were expected to deliver results that promoted our Former Parent’s position as a premier, diversified industrial company.

The Former ParentHR Committee retained the Compensation Consultant to provide the Former Parent Committee withwho provides guidance on executive compensation-related matters and to performwho performs an annual total compensation study, the product of which wasstudy. The Compensation Consultant provides compensation benchmarking information (the “Peer Survey Data”) for our Named Executive Officers and other key executives from peer group companies for certain of our Former Parent’s key senior executives (the “Peer Survey Data”Group”). At the direction of the Former Parent Committee, our Former Parent’s management, including the CEO, met with the Compensation Consultant to discuss the scope and complexity of responsibilities, level of revenue responsibility, and internal reporting relationships for our Former Parent’s key senior executives. Following these discussions, the Compensation Consultant determined the reference points fromAfter evaluating the Peer Survey Data, for base salary, target annual incentive compensation, target long-term incentive compensation, and total target compensation for each of its key senior executives as compared to the 50th percentile of the Peer Survey Data.

After discussionsour CEO discusses with the Former Parent Committee, our Former Parent’s management, and a review of the Peer Survey Data, the Compensation Consultant provided comparative information for certain key senior executive positions. After evaluating the market compensation data, our Former Parent’s CEO discussed with the Former ParentHR Committee his evaluation of each Named Executive Officer and other key senior executive,executives, excluding himself. The discussion included performance for the past year; specific achievements he believed should be highlighted; changes in the breadth, complexity, or scope of responsibilities; operating results; organizational improvements; and relative pay equity among the Former Parent’s named executive officers. The Compensation Consultant’s analyses, along with the CEO’s compensation recommendations for each Named Executive Officer and other key senior executive, wereexecutives, are presented to the Former Parent Committee.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 23

TABLE OF CONTENTS

HR Committee for consideration and approval in determining Named Executive Officer and other key executive compensation. The Former ParentHR Committee, considered compensation for each of our Former Parent’s key senior executives based on the overall objectives of our Former Parent’s executive compensation program, andfollowing a review and in consultation with the Compensation Consultant, recommends the CEO’s compensation to the independent directors of the followingBoard for each executive:

the breadth, complexity, and scope of each executive’s responsibilities within our Former Parent;their approval.
the executive’s performance in optimizing our Former Parent’s overall success in providing leadership support of operational and financial flexibility that directed resources to those products in greatest demand and capitalized on investment opportunities;
past performance through changing economic cycles and business climates with respect to specific financial, strategic, and operating objectives; and
Peer Survey Data against which executive compensation was compared.

Our Former ParentThe HR Committee generally targetedtargets the total target compensation of itsthe Named Executive Officers and other key senior executives between 10 percent above or belowwithin a competitive range around the 50th percentilemedian of the Peer Survey Data. The Former ParentHR Committee consideredconsiders the targeted range and developeddevelops a total target compensation amount for each Named Executive Officer and other key senior executiveexecutives using the objectives described above and the Peer Survey Data as general guidelines. The HR Committee considers additional internal and external factors when making individual compensation decisions, including overall experience and future potential, individual performance, internal reporting structure, internal equity, and our overall pay objectives. This approach supportedsupports our Former Parent’s philosophy of driving performance and accountability. For further explanation of the Peer Survey Data, see “Benchmarking and Peer Survey Data for 2018 Compensation” below.

26

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Benchmarking and Peer Survey Data for 20182021 Compensation

Arcosa engaged the Compensation Consultant to assist in designing Arcosa’s executive compensation program, including review of Arcosa's compensation benchmarking Peer Group. In setting 2018 compensation,September 2020, the HR Committee, with the assistance of the Compensation Consultant, reviewed Arcosa’s Peer Group for use in benchmarking 2021 compensation. The Compensation Consultant used regression analysis to provide size-adjusted market data for a company of our revenue size to the HR Committee. The Peer Group was developed based on the following attributes:

Based on these attributes, in September 2020, the HR Committee with the advice of the Compensation Consultant approved the following Peer Group of 27 companies (with such companies having a median revenue of $1.6 Billion):
Arcosa Peer Companies
Astec Industries, Inc.
Flowserve Corporation
Nordson Corporation
AZZ Inc.
Forterra, Inc.
SPX FLOW, Inc.
Barnes Group, Inc.
Gibraltar Industries, Inc.
Summit Materials, Inc.
Carpenter Technology Corporation
Graco Inc.
The Greenbriar Companies, Inc.
Chart Industries, Inc.
Granite Construction Incorporated
TriMas Corporation
Commercial Metals Company
Harsco Corporation
U.S. Concrete, Inc.
Eagle Materials Inc.
ITT Inc.
Valmont Industries, Inc.
Enerpac Tool Group Corp.
Kirby Corporation
Vulcan Materials Company
EnPro Industries, Inc.
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.
27

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
The Peer Survey Data includedincludes data from each company named in the peer group shown below. The Former Parent Committee considered Peer Survey Data provided by the Compensation Consultant when developing 2018 base salaries, annual incentive compensation, long-term incentive compensation, and total target compensation for our Former Parent’s key senior executives.

The Former Parent Committee performed an annual review to determine whether to make any changes to the peer companies. For the November 2017 compensation study used to establish 2018 compensation, the peer companies were the same as the peer group companies used to establish 2017 compensation. The Former Parent peer group was comprised of industrial companies with similar size (measured by revenue and market capitalization), span of operation, and business complexity that our Former Parent could potentially compete with for executive talent. Prior to the Separation, the Former Parent Committee compared its compensation program with the following peer companies for 2018:

American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc.
Joy Global Inc.
Roper Technologies, Inc.
AMETEK, Inc.
Kennametal Inc.
Ryder System, Inc.
Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V.
The Manitowoc Company, Inc.
SPX Corporation
Crane Co.
Meritor, Inc.
Terex Corporation
Cummins Inc.
Navistar International Corporation
The Timken Company
Danaher Corporation
Oshkosh Corporation
United Rentals, Inc.
Dover Corporation
PACCAR Inc.
Valmont Industries, Inc.
Flowserve Corporation
Pentair plc
Worthington Industries, Inc.
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
Rockwell Automation, Inc.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 24

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Peer Survey Data is size-adjusted to reflect pay levels for a company of our Former Parent’s revenue size and includes dataGroup for base salary, target annual and long-term incentive compensation, and total target compensation obtained from the Aon Hewitt Total Compensation Measurement Survey. as well as public filings.

In December 2020, the HR Committee reviewed benchmarking analysis for each Named Executive Officer and other key executives based on the Peer Survey Data in developing 2021 total compensation consisting of base salaries, annual incentive compensation, and long-term incentive compensation. As a point of reference, when available for its executive officers, the Former ParentNamed Executive Officers, the Compensation Consultant also provided the HR Committee also reviewedwith the most recently available peer group proxy disclosure data for the 2018 peer companies above.

The Former Parent Committee realized2021 Peer Group.

Components of Compensation
In 2021, the three primary components of an executive's total target direct compensation were base salary, annual incentive compensation, and long-term incentive compensation, each as described below:

2021 Annual Target Total Compensation Mix
Consistent with our pay-for-performance philosophy, a significant portion of an executive’s total compensation opportunity (including that benchmarking againstof each of the Peer Survey Data requires interpretation due toNamed Executive Officers) is weighted toward performance-based pay and components we believe align with the potential differences in position scope. The Former Parent Committee used the Peer Survey Data benchmarking informationinterests of shareholders. Our annual incentive awards and the peer group proxy disclosure data provided byperformance-based restricted stock unit component of the Compensation ConsultantLTI award opportunities are considered performance-based pay because the payout of these awards is dependent on the achievement of specified performance goals. The time-based restricted stock unit awards are retentive while also aligning with Arcosa’s performance as general guidance, making adjustments to compensation levelsthe final value realized is based on such interpretationsArcosa’s share price.
28

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
For our CEO and whatour other Named Executive Officers, on average, the Former Parent Committee believedcharts below show the percentage of 2021 target total direct compensation allocated to each compensation element as well as the amount of target compensation that is at risk. We consider compensation to be consistent withat risk if the overallaward or vesting is subject to achievement of performance goals and/or the value received is dependent on our stock price.

2021 Annual Target Total Compensation Opportunities
The following table depicts 2021 target total compensation objectives ofopportunities for the Former Parent in the best long-term interests of its stockholders.

In anticipation of the Separation, our Former Parent engaged the Compensation Consultant to assist in designing Arcosa’s executive compensation program. The Compensation Consultant developed a new compensation benchmarking peer group for Arcosa to be more reflective of Arcosa as a stand-alone company post-Separation. The new Arcosa peer group was developedNamed Executive Officers based on the following attributes:

their target compensation in effect at December 31, 2021:
Named Executive Officer
Annual Base
Salary Rate
Annual
Incentive Plan
Target Award
Long-Term
Incentive Plan
Target Award
Total(1)(2)
​Antonio Carrillo
$925,000
$925,000
$3,700,000
$5,550,000
Scott C. Beasley
495,000
330,000
742,500
1,567,500
Gail M. Peck
425,000
284,750
500,000
1,209,750
Kerry S. Cole
463,500
309,000
602,550
1,375,050
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
391,400
257,500
469,680
1,118,580
Reid S. Essl
463,500
304,934
543,400
1,311,834
Bryan P. Stevenson
414,750
236,250
414,750
1,065,750
(1)
similar revenue size (Ms. Peck’s compensation reflects her new compensation with her appointment as Chief Financial Officer as of June 1,2 to 3 times 2021. Her total 2021 compensation earned, as detailed in the sizeSummary Compensation Table, reflects a proration of Arcosa);the new compensation from her time in that position.
(2)
Mr. Essl’s compensation reflects a salary adjustment and increase in AIP target award in June 2021. His total 2021 compensation earned, as detailed in the Summary Compensation Table, reflects a proration of this salary adjustment and increase in the AIP target award.
representative companies that include heavy equipment
29

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
2021 Annual Compensation Determination
Individual base salaries and agricultural machinery manufacturers, marine equipment manufacturers, constructionincentive targets for the Named Executive Officers and building materials companies, oil and gas equipment and services companies, and steel companies;
executive positions similar inother key executives are established based on the breadth, complexity, and scope of responsibility;each Named Executive Officer’s responsibilities, individual prior performance, experience, internal equity considerations, and market pay data.
competitionIn December 2020, the HR Committee, working with management and the Compensation Consultant, reviewed market compensation data, including the Peer Survey Data, to determine 2021 compensation for executive talent.

The resulting peer group consists of 33 companies with median revenues of approximately $2.068 billion. The new Arcosa peer group shown in Table 2 below was approved by the Former Parent Committee prior to the Separation.

Table 2: New Arcosa Peer Companies

New Arcosa Peer Companies
Actuant Corporation
Fortune Brands Home & Security, Inc.
Nordson Corporation
AZZ Inc.
Global Brass and Copper Holdings, Inc.
Owens Corning
AK Steel Holding Corporation
Graco Inc.
Park-Ohio Holdings Corp.
Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc.
Harsco Corporation
SPX FLOW, Inc.
Chart Industries, Inc.
IDEX Corporation
Summit Materials, Inc.
Commercial Metals Company
ITT Inc.
Terex Corporation
Crane Co.
KBR, Inc.
TriMas Corporation
Eagle Materials Inc.
Kirby Corporation
Valmont Industries, Inc.
EnPro Industries, Inc.
Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
Vulcan Materials Company
Flowserve Corporation
MasTec, Inc.
Wabash National Corporation
Forterra, Inc.
Matson, Inc.
Watts Water Technologies, Inc.

For each of Arcosa’sthe Named Executive Officers in connection with their appointments as senior executives of the Company, the Compensation Consultant provided the Former Parent Committee with a benchmarking analysis for their new roles using data for the new Arcosa peer group.and other key executives. The Compensation Consultant used regression analysis to provide size-adjusted market data to the Former Parent Committee.

Following the Separation, our HR Committee approved the continued retention of the Compensation Consultant to advise it in its compensation planning decisions.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 25

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Components of Compensation

Our Former Parent annually provided the following four key components of compensation to its executives, including our Named Executive Officers:

base salary;
annual incentive compensation;
long-term incentive compensation; and
other compensation.

Set forth below are the components of total target compensation how these components were applied to each Named Executive Officer, and an analysis of why such amounts werefor 2021 set or paid.

forth below reflect Arcosa's pay-for-performance philosophy.

Base Salary

Base salary was intended

The HR Committee establishes base salaries to attract, motivate and retain key executives by providing a consistent level of pay that appropriately compensatedcompensates the executive for the breadth, complexity, and scope of responsibility inherent in the position. After evaluating
The HR Committee reviewed and adjusted the market compensation data, our Former Parent’s management approved 2018 base salaries forof the Named Executive Officers as follows: Mr. Beasley, $288,900; Mr. Cole, $420,000; Mr. Collins, $315,000; Mr. Essl, $304,500. for 2021 after consideration of the median of the Peer Group for their respective positions, performance, previous salary changes, experience, and other factors.
The following chart reflects the adjustments made to each Named Executive Officer’s base salary for 2021:
Named Executive Officer
2020 Annual Base Salary
Rate(1)
% Change
2021 Annual Base Salary
Rate(2)
Antonio Carrillo
$875,000
6%
$925,000
Scott C. Beasley
450,000
10%
495,000
Gail M. Peck
325,000
​31%
425,000
Kerry S. Cole
450,000
3%
463,500
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
380,000
3%
391,400
Reid S. Essl
380,000
​22%
463,500
Bryan P. Stevenson
395,000
5%
414,750
(1)
Reflects annual base salary rate in effect as of January 1, 2020.
(2)
Reflects annual base salary rate in effect as of January 1, 2021, except Ms. Peck's and Mr. Essl's salaries that became effective on June 7, 2021.
In connection with Mr. Carrillo’s appointment asJune 2021, the future CEO of Arcosa,HR Committee adjusted the Former Parent Committee approved an annual base salary of $850,000.

In connectionMr. Essl from $418,000 to $463,500 to align his salary with the Separation,growth of the Former Parent Committee reviewed market compensation dataConstruction Products businesses and the resulting increase in Adjusted EBITDA for Arcosa and made changes to the annual base salariesbusinesses over the two-year period of Messrs. Beasley, Collins and Esslgrowth. Additionally, Ms. Peck’s salary was adjusted in June 2021 to reflect their promotionsher promotion to Chief Financial Officer. Ms. Peck’s and Mr. Essl's salary adjustments were not retroactive and went into senior executive roleseffect on June 7, 2021.

Annual Incentive Compensation
The HR Committee selects performance metrics, performance goals, and other elements of annual incentive compensation with the Company.objective of placing management’s focus on appropriate operational and financial objectives and consistent with Arcosa's annual operating plan. The annual base salaries of Messrs. Beasley, Collins, and Essl increased to $400,000, $350,000, and $350,000, respectively, effective November 1, 2018. Mr. Cole’s base salary remained the same, as he continued in substantially the same role following the Separation.

Incentive Compensation Overview

Our Former Parent approached annual and long-term goal setting throughout its typical business cycle by considering its business plan forecast over the relevant performance period and our Former Parent’s historical incentive plan payouts to strike a balance amongst motivational goalsHR Committee believes that support creation of stockholder value. To set the 2018 annual and long-term performance levels, each business unit developed a forecast that included both upside and downside business projectionsthere should be clear accountability for the performance of one’s business group. As a result, under our AIP, the group president Named Executive Officers are compensated primarily upon the results of their respective incentive plan performance period. These business unit projections were consolidated atgroup of businesses, whereas the corporate level to obtain company-wide forecasts. Incentive targets for 2018 were established by the Former Parent Committee based on several important factors, including:

the industrial downturn that began in 2015;
current and historical industry performance;
an evaluation of our Former Parent’s current placement in its multi-year business cycle;
a review of Peer Survey Data in support of the Former Parent Committee’s objective of delivering competitive pay throughout our Former Parent’s business cycle;
the volatile nature of earnings of our Former Parent, common within the industries in which our Former Parent operates; and
recognition of the individual performance factors.

Because our Former Parent was a cyclical business, its goal setting philosophy for the annual incentive program was based on the annual operating plan, while the long-term goal setting process encouraged growth over a longer period. The annual goal setting process sought strong performance throughout our Former Parent’s normal business cycle. The long-term goal setting process was focused on long-term company growth that rewarded stockholders and aligned annual decisions to the long-term business plan. This goal setting philosophy has been in place for many years, and has served to drive effective results for stockholders as illustrated by our Former Parent’s long-term performance.

30
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 26


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

The Former Parent Committee believed that (i) the threshold performance level should be set such that a participant will not earn incentive compensation until a significant portion of target performance is attained; (ii) the target performance level should represent a considerable but reasonable level of performance; and (iii) the maximum performance level should represent an aggressive level of performance that will be difficult to achieve. The amount of incentive compensation earned was linearly interpolated for performance falling between the specified performance levels.

Once the Former Parent Committee established performance levels for incentive compensation, it received regular updates throughout the year regarding our Former Parent’s progress with respect to the performance levels and potential payouts under the incentive compensation programs. The Former Parent Committee also continually assessed whether it believed the programs were producing the desired results. At the end of each year, the Former Parent Committee reviewed

corporate Named Executive Officers are compensated primarily upon the results of the programsenterprise. At the same time, the HR Committee recognized the importance of creating and further assessedfostering a cohesive overall company focus and introduced the effectiveness ofenterprise performance metric to the programs over the preceding year. This review formed the foundation for the incentive compensation programs for the coming year.

2018 Annual Incentive Compensation

For 2018, the Former Parent Committee selected the performance metrics, performance levels and other elements of the annual incentive compensation program (referred to as “Former Parent AIP”) with the objective of assuring management’s focus on appropriate performance metrics. Upon the Separation, the Company adopted its own annual incentive compensation plan (the “Company AIP”). Group President Plans.

Under the Companyour AIP, the HR Committee also may choose to, among other things, (i) modify or discontinue the Company AIPannual incentive compensation at any time; (ii) increase or decrease a named executive officer’sNamed Executive Officer’s annual incentive compensation on a discretionary basis; and (iii) recoup all or any portion of annual incentive compensation under circumstances where the CompanyArcosa restates its financial statements. The HR Committee may remove any unusual or infrequently occurring or non-recurring items of income or expense from the calculation of financial goal attainment and incentive compensation.

For 2018,

The HR Committee approved the Former Parentfollowing financial metrics and performance targets for 2021 annual incentive compensation for each of the Named Executive Officers to incentivize performance:
Corporate Plan
(CEO, CFO, CLO)
Performance Metric
Weighting
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
80%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives
20%
Group President Plans
(3 Group Presidents)
Performance Metric
Weighting
Group Adjusted EBITDA
60%
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
20%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives
20%
2021 Payouts are calculated from the actual performance of Arcosa, both at the enterprise level and at the Group level, with respect to measurement of the Adjusted EBITDA. In determining the Execution of Strategic Initiatives metric, the HR Committee considered the holistic evaluation of management in the overall performance of the enterprise with respect to the execution of Arcosa’s goals of (i) progressing ESG initiatives, including safety, (ii) advancing growth initiatives, including acquisitions and product development, and (iii) maintaining focus on Arcosa's cash culture with attention to working capital.
The HR Committee approved the following 2021 target annual incentive opportunities for each Named Executive Officer based on his then-current position, except for Mr. Carrillo, whose target incentive opportunity was set in April 2018 in connection with his appointment as our future Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Carrillo’s annual incentive opportunity for 2018 was pro-rated based on his date of hire. In anticipation of the Separation, the Former Parent Committee approved an increase in the 2018 target annual incentive opportunity effective as of the Separation date for each Named Executive Officer, other than Messrs. Carrillo and Cole, in connection with his assumption of a senior executive role with Arcosa (and related increases to base salary amounts).such officer’s position. These target opportunities are set forth in Table 3 below.

Table 3: 2018 Target Annual Incentive Opportunities

Named Executive Officer
Target Annual
Incentive
Opportunity
Pre-Separation
($)
Target Annual
Incentive
Opportunity
Post-Separation
($)
Pro-rated Annual
Incentive
Opportunity
for 2018(1)
($)
Antonio Carrillo
$
850,000
 
$
850,000
 
$
586,282
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
180,000
 
 
250,000
 
 
191,667
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
280,000
 
 
280,000
 
 
280,000
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
180,000
 
 
225,000
 
 
187,500
 
Reid S. Essl
 
180,000
 
 
225,000
 
 
187,500
 
the table below:
2020
2021
Named Executive Officer
Target Annual
Incentive
Opportunity
($)
% of Annual Base
Salary Rate
Target Annual
Incentive
Opportunity
($)(1) (2) (3)
% of Annual Base Salary Rate
Antonio Carrillo
$875,000
​100%
$925,000
100%
Scott C. Beasley
300,000
67%
330,000
67%
Gail M. Peck
170,000
52%
284,750
67%
Kerry S. Cole
300,000
67%
309,000
67%
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
250,000
66%
257,500
66%
Reid S. Essl
250,000
66%
304,934
66%
Bryan P. Stevenson
225,000
57%
236,250
57%
(1)
(1)Mr. Beasley forfeited his AIP opportunity with his departure from Arcosa.
(2)
ReflectsMs. Peck’s AIP target opportunity was adjusted in 2021 with her promotion to CFO with the pro-rated annual target incentive opportunity in 2018 for Mr. Carrillopayout being made on a pro-rata basis from the date of his employment on April 23, 2018. For the Named Executive Officers other than Mr. Carrillo, the amounts reflect the annualized annual target incentive opportunity based on their respective pre-Separation opportunity applied for the ten months ended October 31, 2018 and the post-Separation opportunity applied for the remaining two months of 2018.adjustment.
(3)
Mr. Essl's AIP target opportunity was adjusted from the January 1, 2021 target as a result of his salary increase in June 2021 with the payout being made on a pro-rata basis from the date of adjustment.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 2731


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

The Former Parentfollowing sets forth the financial metrics and actual results that the HR Committee approved Operating Profit asfor Messrs. Carrillo, Beasley, and Stevenson and Ms. Peck for 2021, whose performances were evaluated at an enterprise level:
Corporate AIP
Metric
Weight
Threshold
Target
Maximum
2021
Actual
2021 Payout
%
Weighted Payout
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA ($M)
80%
​$207.0
$276.0
$345.0
$283.3
111%
89%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives(1)
20%
0%
100%
150%
100%
100%
20%
​109%
(1)
Execution of Strategic Initiatives is evaluated at the discretion of the HR Committee.
The following sets forth the exclusive financial metrics and actual results that the HR Committee approved for Mr. Cole for 2021, whose performance metric for 2018, concluding that Operating Profit (excluding costs associated withwas evaluated primarily based on the Separation) should comprise 80%performance of the Utility Structures, Traffic and Telecom Structures, Marine Products, and Storage Tanks businesses:
Kerry Cole Group Plan
Metric
Weight
Threshold
Target
Maximum
2021
Actual
2021
Payout
%
Weighted
Payout
Group Adjusted EBITDA ($M)
60%
$83.2
$110.9
$138.6
$106.1
83%
​50%
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
20%
$207.0
$276.0
$345.0
$283.3
111%
​22%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives(1)
20%
0%
100%
150%
100%
100%
20%
​92%
(1)
Execution of Strategic Initiatives is evaluated at the discretion of the HR Committee.
The following sets forth the financial metrics and actual results that the HR Committee approved for Mr. Collins for 2021, whose performance was evaluated primarily based on the performance of the Steel Components, Wind Towers, and Shoring Products businesses:
Jesse Collins Group Plan
Metric
Weight
Threshold
Target
Maximum
2021
Actual
2021
Payout
%
Weighted
Payout
Group Adjusted EBITDA ($M)
​60%
$ 35.3
$47.0
$58.8
$ 47.7
​106%
64%
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
20%
$207.0
$276.0
$345.0
$283.3
111%
22%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives(1)
20%
0%
100%
150%
100%
100%
20%
​106%
(1)
Execution of Strategic Initiatives is evaluated at the discretion of the HR Committee.
The following sets forth the financial metrics and actual results that the HR Committee approved for Mr. Essl for 2021, whose performance was evaluated primarily based on the performance of the Natural Aggregates, Recycled Aggregates, and Specialty Materials businesses:
32

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Reid Essl Group Plan
Metric
Weight
Threshold
Target
Maximum
2021
Actual
2021
Payout
%
Weighted
Payout
Group Adjusted EBITDA ($M)
60%
$116.3
$155.0
$193.8
$160.5
114%
69%
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
20%
$207.0
$276.0
$345.0
$283.3
111%
22%
Execution of Strategic Initiatives(1)
20%
0%
100%
150%
100%
100%
20%
​111%
(1)
Execution of Strategic Initiatives is evaluated at the discretion of the HR Committee.
For the Adjusted EBITDA component, performance at the target level resulted in 100% payout of the target award at the respective metric weighted percentage, performance below the minimum threshold resulted in no payout, and performance above the maximum level was capped at a maximum total payout of 200% of the target annualaward at the respective metric weighted percentage. The amount of incentive opportunity for 2018. Costs associated with the Separation were excluded from the calculation of Operating Profit due to uncertaintycompensation earned with respect to costs associated withthese components was linearly interpolated for performance falling between the Separationspecified performance levels. With respect to the Execution of Strategic Initiatives component, performance was evaluated holistically at the enterprise level at the discretion of the HR Committee. For the Execution of Strategic Initiatives component, performance at the target level resulted in 100% payout of the target award at the metric weighted percentage, and our Former Parent’s capital structure prior to and afterperformance above the Separation. Our Former Parent anticipated the mixed product demand conditions in certain markets would continue throughout 2018, and the Former Parent Committee established the Operating Profit performance levels reflective of such market conditions. The Former Parent Committee established the 2018 Operating Profit performance levels as set forth in Table 4 below.

Table 4: 2018 Annual Incentive Operating Profit Performance Levels and Payout Opportunities ($’s in millions)

 
Threshold
Target
Maximum
Operating Profit performance levels
$
370.9
 
$
463.7
 
$
625.0
 
NEO payout opportunity as a percentage of target
 
40
%
 
100
%
 
200
%

The target Operating Profitmaximum level was selected because it was expected to result in 2018 EPS that was equal to our Former Parent’s 2017 adjusted EPS and was greater than the high endcapped at a maximum total payout of 150% of the full year 2018 EPS guidance released in February 2018.

Additionally,target award at the remaining 20% ofmetric weighted percentage. When combining each participant’s total target annual incentive opportunity for 2018 was based on the successful Separation, evaluated subjectively based on timely execution, overall cost, thorough documentation and completion, accuracy, and minimal disruption to the daily operations of the businesses.

At the timecomponents of the Separation, our Former Parent agreed to fund the 2018 annual incentive payout through the Separation dateAIP, actual payouts for the Arcosa Named Executive Officers at 110%2021 can range from 0%-190% of the Operating Profit target, which was our Former Parent’s then-accrued performance level as oftarget.

In February 2022, the Separation date, and at 100% of the successful Separation target amount.

In March 2019, our HR Committee evaluated Arcosa’s performance and certified 2021 actual results in accordance with the predefined performance metrics and targets under the AIP. With respect to the Execution of our Former ParentStrategic Initiatives, management recommended and Arcosa against the performance metrics. The HR Committee considered our Former Parent’s then-accrued performance level achievement of 110% as of the Separation date and Arcosa’s performance exceeding internal projections for the two months following Separation. Given that the Separation occurred near the end of the year, consistent with and as contemplated by our Former Parent’s 2018 AIP, our HR Committee applied the then-accrued performance level for the full year.

Based on this review, our HR Committee recommended a payout at 110% of each Named Executive Officer’s incentive opportunity with respect to Operating Profit performance. Our HR Committee also determined that the Separation was executed successfully, resulting inapproved a payout of 100% as a result of, among other considerations, (i) the successful closing and integration of the Separation target opportunity. Accordingly, ourStonePoint Materials and Southwest Rock Products acquisitions, (ii) the closing of Arcosa's inaugural bond offering, (iii) advancement in safety programs enterprise-wide, and (iv) furtherance of Arcosa’s ESG initiatives, including the publishing of the 2020 Sustainability Report. Based on Arcosa's actual performance and the review of strategic initiatives, the HR Committee approved a total payout of 108% of the Named Executive Officers’ total annual incentive opportunity, resulting in the following 2018 annual incentive2021 award payouts for the Named Executive Officers:

Table 5: 2018 Annual Incentive Payout

Named Executive Officer
2018 Annual Incentive
Total Payout ($)
Antonio Carrillo
$
633,185
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
207,000
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
302,400
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
202,500
 
Reid S. Essl
 
202,500
 

In addition to the 2018 Company AIP, Mr. Beasley received a Separation success bonus in the amount of $125,000 in recognition of his significant efforts and performance in support of the Separation, contingent on his continued employment through the date of payment. Half of the bonus was paid 30 days following the effective date of the Separation in November 2018, and the other half was paid 90 days following the effective date of the Separation in January 2019.

2021 Annual
Incentive
Compensation
Total Payout(1)(2)
Named Executive Officer
%
($)
Antonio Carrillo
​109%
$1,008,250
Scott C. Beasley
0%
Gail M. Peck
​109%
258,262
Kerry S. Cole
92%
284,280
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
​106%
272,950
Reid S. Essl
111%
324,632
Bryan P. Stevenson
​109%
257,513
(1)
Mr. Beasley forfeited his receipt of the 2021 AIP payment upon his departure from Arcosa.
(2)
Ms. Peck's and Mr. Essl's 2021 AIP awards were prorated to reflect compensation changes in June 2021.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 2833


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

2021 Long-Term Incentive Compensation

Long-term incentive

LTI compensation (referred to as “LTI”) wasopportunities are a key part of the total target compensation for our Former Parent’s executives.Named Executive Officers. The overarching purpose of LTI was to alignprogram key objectives are to:
Support a strong performance-based culture;
Align executives’ interests with those of stockholdersshareholders;
Attract and motivate executivesretain key leaders and other participants through the use of equity programs; and
Maintain a well-defined line of sight between performance and award.
For 2021, the HR Committee awarded the Named Executive Officers LTI compensation opportunity, consisting of 60% performance-based restricted stock units for the performance period January 1, 2021 through December 31, 2023 and 40% time-based restricted stock units. The detail of 2021 LTI award opportunity follows.
Time-Based Restricted Stock Units. 40% of the target 2021 LTI grant opportunity was made in the form of time-based restricted stock units to createpromote long-term stockholder valueexecutive retention and alignment with shareholders. The time-based restricted stock units vest 3313% on each of May 15, 2022, 2023, and 2024 if the Named Executive Officer remains continuously employed by improving earnings and returnsArcosa through a variety of strategic and operational initiatives.

The Former Parent Committee made time-based awards to its named executive officers and senior officers when it determined that such awards were helpful in retaining the officers. In making this determination, the Former Parent Committee considered a number of factors, including historical time-based awards provided, the officer’s tenure with our Former Parent, and the officer’s performance in his or her respective roles.date. All time-based restricted stock unit awards are non-voting and provide for dividend equivalent units payable in cash, which will vest on the same schedule as the corresponding time-based restricted stock unit awards.

Our Former Parent also issued

Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units. The remaining 60% of each Named Executive Officer’s target 2021 LTI grant opportunity is made in the form of performance-based restricted stock units, forwhich will not vest unless the performance-based component of its named executive officers’ target LTI grants.performance metric is met. This program wasis designed to (i) increase the visibility of the long-term incentive performance goals for the program’s participants, (ii) align their efforts toward achieving these goals, and (iii) reinforce pay for performance linkagephilosophy through settlement of awards following the end of the relevant performance period.

Our Former Parent’s attainment These units are non-voting and do not receive dividends or dividend equivalents during the performance period. The HR Committee approves performance targets and payout ranges at the beginning of the 3-year performance levelsperiod. Arcosa's actual performance during the performance period determineddetermines the number of performance-based restricted stock units that werewill be ultimately earned following the end of the performance period. These units are non-voting and do not receive dividends duringAfter the HR Committee certifies the actual results of the performance period.

For 2018,period, the target LTI for each Named Executive Officer was set as a specified dollar amount that was used to calculate the Named Executive Officer’s target LTI grant. The target LTI grant was calculated by dividing the target LTI dollar amount for each Named Executive Officer by the closing stock price on the date of grant. The 2018 target LTI grants made to the Named Executive Officers were comprised of 60%earned performance-based restricted stock units are settled in shares of Common Stock upon the vesting date.

For the 2021-2023 performance period, the HR Committee approved the following company-wide performance metrics and weighting for the performance period 2018-2020 and 40% time-basedperformance-based restricted stock units. This was a change from 2017 and was madeunits to improve key executive retention during the Separationincentivize long-term growth of Arcosa and for long-term retentionshareholder value:
Weighting of Total
Performance-Based
Equity Award
Average Pre-Tax Return on Capital
50%
Cumulative Adjusted Earnings per Share
50%
The awards will settle in May 2024 following determination of results of the key executives2021-2023 performance period. Each Named Executive Officer may receive from 0% to build stockholder value. In 2018, in consideration200% of the planned Separation andtarget performance-based restricted stock unit award based on actual performance against the desire to identify a metric that drove performance and was measurable through the Separation, the Former Parent Committee approved relative Total Stockholder Return, as definedtarget levels set by the Former Parent Committee, as the performance metric for the three-year performance period from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020. Relative Total Stockholder Return is measured against the companies in the S&P MidCap 400 Index as of January 1, 2018. The Former Parent Committee established the 2018-2020 Total Stockholder Return performance levels as follows:

Table 6: 2018-2020 Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Performance Levels and Payout Opportunities

 
Threshold
Target
Maximum
Total Stockholder Return
25th percentile
50th percentile
75th percentile
NEO payout opportunity as a percentage of target
30%
100%
200%

HR Committee. The Named Executive Officers will earn 0% of the target if the threshold performance level is not achieved. For performance falling between the specified levels, the amount of performance-based restricted stock units earned will be interpolated accordingly.

accordingly between the specified performance levels.
34
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 29


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

The remaining 40% of the Named Executive Officer’s2021 target LTI grant was made in the form of time-based restricted stock units to promote long-term executive retention and alignment with stockholders. The time-based restricted stock units vest 50% on the third anniversary of the grant date (May 2021) and 50% on the fourth anniversary of the grant date (May 2022) if theaward opportunity for each Named Executive Officer remains continuously employed by Arcosa and an employee in good standing on such dates. The 2018was set as a specified target values of LTI awards for our Named Executive Officers aredollar value as set forth in Table 7 below:

Table 7: 2018 Target Value of Annual LTI Awards

Named Executive Officer
Target Value of
Time-Based
Restricted
Stock Units ($)(1)
Target Value of
Performance-Based
Restricted
Stock Units
($)(1)
Total Target Value
of LTI Award ($)
Antonio Carrillo
$
1,360,000
 
$
2,040,000
 
$
3,400,000
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
90,000
 
 
135,000
 
 
225,000
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
140,000
 
 
210,000
 
 
350,000
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
90,000
 
 
135,000
 
 
225,000
 
Reid S. Essl
 
90,000
 
 
135,000
 
 
225,000
 
Named Executive Officer
​Target Value of
Time-Based
Restricted
Stock Units
($)(1)(2)(3)
Target Value of
Performance-Based
Restricted
Stock Units
($)(1)(2)(3)
Total Target Value
of LTI Award
($)(1)(2)(3)
Antonio Carrillo
$1,480,000
$2,220,000
$3,700,000
Scott C. Beasley
297,000
445,500
742,500
Gail M. Peck
80,000
120,000
200,000
70,000
105,000
175,000
Kerry S. Cole
241,020
361,530
602,550
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
187,872
281,808
469,680
Reid S. Essl
217,360
326,040
543,400
Bryan P. Stevenson
165,900
248,850
414,750
(1)
Reflects the target value of the Named Executive Officer’s 20182021 time-based restricted stock unit award and 2018-20202021-2023 performance-based restricted stock unit award. The number of time-based restricted stock units and performance-based restricted stock units granted forto the Named Executive Officers isin May 2021 was calculated by dividing the target value for each Named Executive Officer by our Former Parent’s closing stock price on the grant date of May 7, 2018,4, 2021, which was $32.78$64.47 per share.

In addition, in connection with Mr. Carrillo’s appointment in April 2018 as an officer of our Former Parent and future CEO of Arcosa, the Former Parent Committee approved a one-time LTI grant to Mr. Carrillo in the amount of $3.5 million in Arcosa time-based restricted stock units as an incentive for Mr. Carrillo agreeing to leave his prior employment as CEO of Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V. and to create further alignment with stockholders post-Separation. These time-based restricted stock units vest on the fourth year anniversary of the award if he is employed by Arcosa on such date. This award was ratified and granted by our HR Committee on November 12, 2018. The 115,474 restricted stock units received on the date of grant was calculated by the amount of the award divided by the closing stock price of $30.31 on the date of grant.

In consideration of their increased responsibilities, the Former Parent Committee approved adjusted total target compensation, effective November 1, 2018, including target LTI for future LTI awards for each of Messrs. Beasley, Collins, and Essl of $400,000, $350,000, and $350,000, respectively.

The treatment of the 2018 Former Parent equity awards in connection with the Separation is discussed below.

Treatment of Outstanding Trinity Equity Awards in the Separation

Trinity Awards Granted in 2018. Arcosa adopted the 2018 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “Incentive Plan”) in connection with the Separation, and Arcosa employees received Arcosa equity awards under the Incentive Plan in respect of Trinity equity awards held by them. Trinity time-based restricted stock units and performance-based restricted stock units granted in 2018 were converted to Arcosa time-based restricted stock units and performance-based restricted stock units, as applicable, using a formula that was intended to cover an adjusted number of Arcosa stock units so as to preserve the value that existed with respect to such awards immediately prior to the Separation. The conversion ratio was 1.0110 Arcosa shares for every 1 Trinity share. Generally, the conversion of the 2018 Trinity equity awards held by Arcosa employees resulted in Arcosa equity awards being subject to the same terms and conditions as were in effect prior to the Separation other than payouts in respect of the 2018-2020 performance-based restricted stock units will be based on Arcosa’s Total Stockholder Return as measured against the companies in the S&P MidCap 400 Index, with the baseline stock price adjusted to reflect the Separation.

(2)
Mr. Beasley forfeited his eligibility to receive the 2021 LTI payment upon his departure from Arcosa.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 30(3)
Upon Ms. Peck's appointment as the Chief Financial Officer, the HR Committee approved a one-time promotional grant to Ms. Peck with a target value of $175,000. The one-time promotional grant was comprised of 60% performance-based restricted stock units, which will not vest until the performance metric is met, and 40% time-based restricted stock units that vest 33 1/3% on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date (June 2022, 2023, and 2024). The number of time-based restricted stock units and performance-based restricted stock units granted to Ms. Peck for the promotional grant was calculated by dividing the target value by our closing stock price on the grant date of June 7, 2021, which was $59.38 per share. The promotional grant combined with her previous grant of $200,000 provided the prorated equivalent of Ms. Peck’s target LTI award level of $500,000 with her promotion on June 1, 2021.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table 8 shows the number of as-converted 2018 Trinity equity awards (reflecting the conversion into Arcosa equity awards) for each Named Executive Officer following the Separation.

Table 8: 2018 Trinity Equity Awards As-Converted to 2018 Arcosa Equity Awards

Named Executive Officer
Arcosa 2018-2020 Performance-
Based Restricted Stock Units
(at target) (#)
Arcosa Time-Based Restricted
Stock Units (#)
Antonio Carrillo
 
62,919
 
 
41,945
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
4,164
 
 
2,776
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
6,477
 
 
4,317
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
4,164
 
 
2,776
 
Reid S. Essl
 
4,164
 
 
2,776
 

Restricted Shares, Time-Based Restricted Stock Units, and2019-2021 Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units Granted Prior to 2018. Outstanding Trinity restricted shares and time-based restricted stock units that were granted prior to 2018 were treated in the same manner as outstanding shares of Trinity common stock. Accordingly, effective with the Separation, the Named Executive Officers retained such Trinity restricted shares and time-based restricted stock units and also received Arcosa restricted shares and time-based restricted stock units in an amount as determined by applying the Separation distribution ratio of one Arcosa share for every three Trinity shares.

The Trinity 2016-2018 and 2017-2019 performance-based restricted stock units held by the Named Executive Officers were converted to Arcosa time-based restricted stock units at 22% of target and 158% of target, respectively, which was the then-accrued performance level achievement as of the Separation date determined by the Former Parent Committee. The Arcosa time-based restricted stock units vest on the same vesting schedule as the original Trinity performance-based restricted stock units.

Table 9 shows the aggregate number of Arcosa restricted shares and time-based restricted stock units received in respect of Trinity (i) restricted shares and time-based restricted stock units granted prior to 2018; (ii) 2016-2018 performance-based restricted stock units; and (iii) 2017-2019 performance-based restricted stock units for each Named Executive Officer following the Separation. For a full list of outstanding equity awards held byUnit Awards

In 2019, each of the Named Executive Officers see “Outstanding Equity Awards at Year-End.”

Table 9: Pre-2018 Trinity Equity Awards As-Converted to Arcosa Equity Awards

received an annual LTI award opportunity, which included a 2019-2021 performance-based restricted stock unit award. The awards are based on Arcosa’s Average Pre-Tax Return on Capital and Cumulative Adjusted Earnings Per Share. The following table sets forth the target number of outstanding 2019-2021 performance-based restricted stock unit awards for each of the Named Executive Officers:
Named Executive Officer
Arcosa Equity Awards2019-2021 Performance-
Based Restricted Stock Units
(at target) (#)(1)
Antonio Carrillo
55,738
5,736
Scott C. Beasley
6,558
17,006Gail M. Peck
3,279
Kerry S. Cole
��5,738
30,202
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
5,738
17,589
Reid S. Essl
5,738
22,453Bryan P. Stevenson
5,328
(1)
Ms. Peck's 2019 LTI Award was awarded prior to her becoming a Named Executive Officer.

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 3135


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

In March 2022, the HR Committee approved the 2019-2021 performance period.

* See Annex A for a reconciliation of Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP measures.
These awards will settle upon vesting in May 2022 resulting in a payout of 175% of target as illustrated below.
Arcosa 2019-2021
Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units(1)
Named Executive Officer
Target Units
Payout
Percentage
Final Unit
Payout
Antonio Carrillo
55,738
×
​175%
=
​97,542
Scott C. Beasley
6,558
×
0%
=
Gail M. Peck
3,279
×
​175%
���
=
5,738
Kerry S. Cole
5,738
×
​175%
=
​10,042
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
5,738
×
​175%
=
​10,042
Reid S. Essl
5,738
×
​175%
=
​10,042
Bryan P. Stevenson
5,328
×
​175%
=
9,324
(1)
Mr. Beasley forfeited his right to receive these units upon his departure from Arcosa.
Other Compensation Plans

Executive Perquisites

Our Former Parent maintained an executive perquisites plan for certain executives. Mr. Cole was the only Named Executive Officer who participated in the perquisites plan. The amount of the executive perquisite allowance was determined annually by the Former Parent Committee based on our Former Parent’s current and potential future performance. In establishing the percentage, the Former Parent Committee reviewed and considered our Former Parent’s performance in the past year and the business plan for the coming year. Pursuant to the perquisite plan, the perquisite allowance replaced certain traditional job-related benefits for executives. Each participant in the perquisites plan was required to use $6,000 of the amount received under the executive perquisite allowance to maintain a four-door sedan that would be used for business purposes, Trinity-approved levels of automobile insurance and other maintenance, and to forego expense reimbursement for the first 10,000 business miles annually. In addition to the perquisite allowance, our Former Parent named executive officers were encouraged to have a physical examination each year that is paid for by our Former Parent. Messrs. Collins and Essl did not participate in the perquisites plan but each was provided with a company car.

Following the Separation, Arcosa terminated the executive perquisites plan, effective January 1, 2019.

Post-employment

Post-Employment Benefits

Arcosa’s retirement and savings compensation plans are designed to assist executives in the transition from active employment. The HR Committee believes these plans assist in recruiting and retaining senior executives and facilitate employment transition. Arcosa’s retirement and savings compensation plans, as amended, consist of the following:

Arcosa, Inc. Profit Sharing 401(k) Plan (the “401(k) Plan”) - a voluntary, tax qualified, defined contribution plan that covers most of Arcosa’s employees, including the Named Executive Officers and includes a potential annual Arcosa match for a portion of each employee’s contribution. The 401(k) Plan (i) provides for potential annual contributions by Arcosa to the participating employee’s accountdollar-for-dollar Company matching contribution of up to an additional threesix percent of an employee’s basethe participant’s eligible pay subject to the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”) limit for 401(k) plans, depending upon years of service (the “Annual Retirement Contribution”); and (ii) requires Board approval for Arcosa to make the 401(k) Arcosa match and the Annual Retirement Contribution.
each payroll period, consistent with market terms.
Arcosa, Inc. Supplemental Profit SharingDeferred Compensation Plan (the “Supplemental“Deferred Compensation Plan”) - a supplemental deferred profit sharing plan for highly compensated employees, including the Named Executive Officers, that allows them to defer a portion of their base pay and annual incentive and includes an Arcosa match of up to six percent of pay, first to the maximum extent under the 401(k) Plan and then to the SupplementalDeferred Compensation Plan.
36

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Change in Control Severance Plan

Previously, our Former Parent entered into a change in control agreement with each of Messrs. Carrillo, Beasley and Cole that provided for certain vesting of equity awards upon a change in control and

On March 3, 2022, the payment of certain compensation if the Named Executive Officer’s employment with our Former Parent was terminated under one of the circumstances described in the agreement in connection with a change in control of our Former Parent (as defined in the agreement). These agreements were assumed by Arcosa in connection with the Separation.

On December 6, 2018, our HR Committee recommended for approval, and our Board of Directors approved, the 2022 CIC Plan. The 2022 CIC Plan replaced the 2018 CIC Plan that expired under its own terms on December 6, 2021. By entry into the 2022 CIC Plan, Arcosa’s Board of Directors has determined thatcontinues to believe it is appropriate to reinforce and encourage the continued attention and dedication of members of Arcosa’s senior management to the interests of stockholdersshareholders without distraction in potential circumstances arising from the possibility of a change in control of Arcosa.

Each of the Named Executive Officers entered into a participation agreement under the 2022 CIC Plan upon which such officer became subject to the 2022 CIC Plan and any prior individual change in control agreements were terminated. The 2022 CIC Plan has a three-year term that automatically renews with one-year extensions unless notice of termination is effective through the third anniversary of the effective date of the CIC Plan, provided that the Company has the right to renew the CIC Plan for additional one-year terms.

otherwise provided.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 32

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The 2022 CIC Plan contains a “double trigger” provision that requires both a change in control of the CompanyArcosa and a qualifying termination of the Named Executive Officer’s employment before compensation will be paid under the 2022 CIC Plan or for acceleration of equity awards that are granted on or after the date of the CIC Plan.December 6, 2018. Pursuant to the 2022 CIC Plan, if a Named Executive Officer’s employment is terminated by the CompanyArcosa without “Cause” or by the participant for “Good Reason,” in each case, within six months prior to and in connection with a "Change in Control" or within two years following a “Change in Control” (each, as defined in the 2022 CIC Plan), then:

the Named Executive Officer will receive a lump-sum cash severance payment equal to (i)(x) the sum of the Named Executive Officer’s annual base salary and target annual incentive bonus, or, if higher and the Change in Control or date of termination occurs more than six months into a fiscal year, the annual incentive bonus payable on actual performance multiplied by (y) three for the Chief Executive Officer, two for the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Legal Officer, and business segmentgroup presidents, and 1.5 for all other participants; plus (ii) a prorated annual incentive bonus for the year in which the termination occurs based on target performance;
all then-outstanding and unvested stock awards that were granted on or after the effective date of the CIC PlanDecember 6, 2018 will become 100% vested;
all benefits under any then-outstanding deferred compensation arrangements will become 100% vested; and
for 24 months following the Named Executive Officer’s termination, (i) the Named Executive OfficersOfficer will continue to receive medical, dental, vision, health, and life insurance benefits no less favorable than were provided prior to termination, provided that such coverage will cease if the Named Executive OfficersOfficer obtains comparable coverage under a subsequent employer’s benefit plan; and (ii) the Named Executive OfficersOfficer will receive executive level outplacement services, up to a maximum of $15,000.

With respect to equity awards outstanding prior to the effective date of the CIC Plan, such awards will become 100% vested following a Change in Control. The Named Executive Officers are required to execute a release in favor of the CompanyArcosa in exchange for receiving 2022 CIC Plan benefits. Pursuant to the 2022 CIC Plan, each Named Executive Officer is subject to non-competition, non-solicitation, and non-recruitment covenants for 12 months following termination of employment as well as confidentiality obligations and non-disparagement covenants that survive indefinitely.

The 2022 CIC Plan does not include excise tax gross ups. In the event payments under the 2022 CIC Plan would trigger the “golden parachute” excise tax under Sections 280G and 4999 of the Code, such payments will be reduced if such reduction would result in a greater after-tax benefit to the Named Executive Officer.

Arcosa considers the compensation payable under the 2022 CIC Plan upon specified events of termination following a Change in Control to be appropriate in light of the unique mix of the industries in which it is engaged, the limited number of companies in many of those industries and the uncertain length of time necessary to find new employment. The level of payments and benefits provided under the 2022 CIC Plan are considered appropriate. These benefits are recognized as part of the total compensation package and are reviewed periodically, but may not be specifically considered by the HR Committee when making changes in base salary, annual incentive compensation or long-term incentive compensation.
37

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
The Change in Control severance benefits are discussed in the Compensation of Executives section under “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.” Arcosa does not have severance agreements with Named Executive Officers other than in connection with the 2022 CIC Plan.

Health and Welfare Benefits

The Arcosa-supported medical plan, life insurance, and long-term disability plan, and employee-paid dental, vision, critical illness insurance, and supplemental life insurance are substantially similar for the Named Executive Officers as for all full-time employees. Arcosa does not provide health benefits to retirees.

Tax and Accounting Implications of Executive Compensation

Section 162(m) of the Code limits to $1.0 million per year the federal income tax deduction to public corporations for compensation paid for any fiscal year to the Named Executive Officers. The HR Committee may consider tax deductibility in structuring executive compensation arrangements. However, the HR Committee will establish executive compensation arrangements that it believes are in the best interests of the CompanyArcosa and our stockholders, including performance-based compensation,shareholders, even if those arrangements are not fully deductible under Section 162(m).

Arcosa recognizes the compensation expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees and directors, including stock options, stock appreciation rights and other awards, in our financial statements based on the principles of ASC Topic 718.
Definition of Non-GAAP and Other Performance Measures Used in the CD&A
The following sets forth the definitions of the non-GAAP and other performance measures that were approved by the HR Committee in establishing performance levels under our incentive plans. In determining final awards, the HR Committee retains the discretion to make adjustments for incentive plan purposes to eliminate the impact (positive or negative) of items that the HR Committee deems are appropriate:
Adjusted Earnings Per Share: defined as reported diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations before extraordinary adjustments to asset values (gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gain or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate.
Cumulative Adjusted Earnings Per Share: defined as the sum of the Adjusted Earnings Per Share for each year in the three-year performance period.
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA: defined as enterprise operating income (loss) from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, depreciation, depletion, and amortization, extraordinary adjustments to asset values (gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gains or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, any changes to federal, state, or local tax laws that impact the Company's tax liability, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate.
Execution of Strategic Initiatives: measured holistically by progress in ESG/Safety initiatives, growth, and progress with respect to working capital initiatives.
Pre-Tax Return on Capital: defined as Adjusted EBITDA (as defined above) Divided by ((Current Assets – Current Liabilities + Current Portion of Long-Term Debt) + Net Plant, Property and Equipment). Balance Sheet items will be calculated using an average of 5 points (Beginning of Q1, End of Q1, End of Q2, End of Q3, End of Q4).
Group Adjusted EBITDA: defined as group operating income (loss) from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, depreciation, depletion, and amortization, extraordinary adjustments to asset values
38
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 33


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

(gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gains or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, any changes to federal, state or local tax laws that impact the Company's tax liability, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate.
Human Resources Committee Report

We have reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K and based on such review and discussions, we recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this Proxy Statement.

Human Resources Committee

David Biegler, Chair

Joseph Alvarado,Chair
John W. Lindsay


Kimberly S. Lubel
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 3439


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Compensation of Executives

Summary Compensation Table

The following table and accompanying narrative disclosure should be read in conjunction with the Compensation“Compensation Discussion and Analysis,Analysis” above, which sets forth the objectives of the Company’sArcosa’s executive compensation programs.

The “Summary Compensation Table” below summarizes the total compensation paid to or earned by each of the Named Executive Officers for the fiscal years ended December 31, 20182021, 2020, and 2017. The amounts paid and compensation granted2019, other than Ms. Peck, who became a Named Executive Officer in 2017 and during the period in 2018 before Separation were paid or provided by our Former Parent.

Summary Compensation Table

Name and
Principal Position
Year
Salary(2)
($)
Bonus(3)
($)
Stock
Awards(4)
($)
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation(5)
($)
Change in
Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(6)
($)
All Other
Compensation(7)
($)
Total
($)
Antonio Carrillo
President and Chief
Executive Officer(1)
 
2018
 
$
585,985
 
$
 
$
7,461,408
 
$
633,185
 
$
561
 
$
95,726
 
$
8,776,865
 
 
2017
 
 
 
 
 
 
130,023
 
 
 
 
713
 
 
113,205
 
 
243,941
 
Scott C. Beasley
Chief Financial Officer
 
2018
 
 
307,417
 
 
62,500
 
 
262,188
 
 
207,000
 
 
 
 
16,825
 
 
855,930
 
 
2017
 
 
270,000
 
 
 
 
440,193
 
 
213,000
 
 
 
 
11,714
 
 
934,907
 
Kerry S. Cole
President, Energy
Equipment
 
2018
 
 
420,000
 
 
 
 
407,816
 
 
302,400
 
 
 
 
55,447
 
 
1,185,663
 
 
2017
 
 
400,000
 
 
 
 
311,235
 
 
355,000
 
 
21,000
 
 
49,967
 
 
1,137,202
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr. President,
Transportation Products
 
2018
 
 
320,833
 
 
 
 
262,188
 
 
202,500
 
 
 
 
17,271
 
 
802,792
 
 
2017
 
 
300,000
 
 
 
 
511,945
 
 
177,500
 
 
37,000
 
 
16,200
 
 
1,042,645
 
Reid S. Essl
President,
Construction Products
 
2018
 
 
312,141
 
 
 
 
262,188
 
 
202,500
 
 
 
 
23,551
 
 
800,380
 
 
2017
 
 
290,000
 
 
 
 
440,470
 
 
213,000
 
 
1,000
 
 
19,536
 
 
964,006
 
2021.
Name and
Principal Position
​Year
Salary(1)
($)
Bonus(2)
($)
Stock
Awards(3)
($)
Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation(4)
($)
Change in Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(5)
($)
All Other
Compensation(6)
($)
Total
($)
Antonio Carrillo
President and Chief
Executive Officer
​2021
$925,000
$
$3,679,401
$1,008,250
​$1,340
$18,363
$5,632,354
2020
875,000
3,463,309
1,058,750
1,552
43,492
5,442,103
2019
850,000
3,367,702
1,479,000
879
75,501
5,773,082
Scott C. Beasley
Chief Financial Officer
2021
244,644
14,679
259,323
2020
450,000
556,604
363,000
17,100
1,386,704
2019
400,000
62,500
396,234
435,000
13,150
1,306,884
Gail M. Peck
Chief Financial Officer
2021
386,817
372,924
258,262
17,400
1,035,403
Kerry S. Cole
Group President
2021
463,500
599,236
284,280
17,400
1,364,416
2020
450,000
489,839
363,000
17,100
1,319,939
2019
440,000
346,714
582,000
21,244
1,389,958
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
Group President
2021
391,400
467,170
272,950
17,400
1,148,920
2020
380,000
413,633
232,500
17,100
1,043,233
2019
355,844
346,714
178,172
16,800
897,530
Reid S. Essl
Group President
2021
444,250
540,447
324,632
17,400
1,326,729
2020
380,000
583,654
312,500
17,100
1,293,254
2019
350,000
346,714
24,975
721,689
Bryan P. Stevenson
Chief Legal Officer
2021
414,750
412,484
257,513
28,813
1,113,560
2020
395,000
380,997
272,250
17,100
1,065,347
2019
385,000
62,500
321,918
382,800
11,760
1,163,978
(1)
(1)Mr. Carrillo was appointed as an officer of our Former Parent and the future CEO of the Company in April 2018. Prior to his appointment, Mr. Carrillo received compensation as a non-employee director of our Former Parent. Mr. Carrillo’s 2018 stock award includes a one-time sign-on grant of time-based restricted stock units in connection with his appointment as an incentive for his agreeing to leave his prior employment as Chief Executive Officer of Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V. He does not receive additional compensation for his services as a director of the Company.
(2)This column includes amountsAmounts deferred pursuant to the SupplementalDeferred Compensation Plan in 2021 for Messrs. Beasley, Cole, andMr. Essl and 2018 amounts areis also reported in the “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Table” below.
(2)
(3)ReflectsAmounts reported reflect the half of Mr. Beasley’s Separation success bonus thatearned by each of Messrs. Beasley and Stevenson, half of which was earned in January 2019, and the other half of which was earned in November 2018. The remaining half of his Separation bonus was earned in January 2019.
(4)
(3)
Amounts reflect the grant date fair value of awards of time-based restricted stock units and performance-based restricted stock units granted in the fiscal year computed in accordance with ASC Topic 718. The policy and assumptions made in the valuation of share-based payments are contained in Note 1213 of Item 8 of the 20182021 Annual Report. Amounts for 2018 include grants of the 2018-2020 performance-based restricted stock units are included at target value. The potential maximum values (200% of target) for the 2018-20202021-2023 performance-based restricted stock units are for Messrs. Carrillo, $5,203,401; Beasley, $344,363;$4,398,727; Cole, $535,648;$716,366; Collins, $344,363;$558,479; Essl, $646,109; and Essl, $344,363.Stevenson, $493,076; and Ms. Peck, $445,816.
40
(5)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
(4)
Non-equity incentive plan compensation represents cash awards earned under the Company AIP (or the Trinity AIP, as applicable) based on specified performance goal achievements.
(5)
(6)This column represents the increase in the actuarial present value of benefits for Messrs. Cole, Collins, and Essl under our Former Parent’s pension plan. During 2018, total pension values under our Former Parent’s pension plan for Messrs. Cole, Collins, and Essl decreased $5,000; $8,000; and $1,000, respectively. In accordance with SEC rules, these negative amounts have been reported at $0 in this table. Messrs. Cole, Collins, and Essl will retain benefits with our Former Parent under its pension plan, which is frozen and pursuant to which no future benefits will accrue. The CompanyArcosa does not have a pension plan for its NEOs.Named Executive Officers. For Mr. Carrillo, amounts represent the above market earnings from the interest rate equivalent on director fees previously earned as a non-employee director of our Former Parent and deferred under our Former Parent’sParent's deferred plan for director fees. See “Director Compensation Discussion.”
(6)
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 35

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(7)The following table isBeginning in 2020, Arcosa’s 401(k) Plan included a breakdowndollar-for-dollar Company matching contribution of all other compensation for 2018 included in the “Summary Compensation Table” forup to six percent of the Named Executive Officers:

All Other Compensation

Name
Year
Executive
Perquisite
Allowance(1)
($)
Perquisites
and Other
Personal
Benefits(2)
($)
Company
Contributions
to Defined
Contribution
Plans (3)
($)
Former Parent
Director
Fees(4)
($)
Total All
Other
Compensation
($)
Antonio Carrillo
 
2018
 
$
 
$
51,964
 
$
9,837
 
$
33,925
 
$
95,726
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
16,825
 
 
 
 
16,825
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
2018
 
 
30,000
 
 
2,483
 
 
22,964
 
 
 
 
55,447
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
17,271
 
 
 
 
17,271
 
Reid S. Essl
 
2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
23,551
 
 
 
 
23,551
 
(1)RepresentsOfficers' eligible pay for each payroll period, with the amounts payable pursuant to our Former Parent’s executive perquisite plan, which was discontinued by the Company effective January 1, 2019.
(2)total amount of such matching contribution capped at $17,400. For Mr. Carrillo, this amount includes paymentamounts in 2021 also include dividend equivalents on phantom stock units accrued in respect of relocation expenses of $44,302, of which $10,787 consists of a tax gross-up payment, payment for tax preparationdeferred director fees including a $558 tax gross-up payment, which were paid while an employee of our Former Parent, and a matching contribution by the Company in his name pursuant to the Company’s program of matching charitable contributions. For Mr. Cole, includes amounts for a physical examination.
(3)Represents the Company’s matching amounts and the Annual Retirement Contribution under the Company’s 401(k) Plan for 2018 for Messrs. Carrillo, $9,837; Beasley, $8,505; Cole, $14,914; Collins, $17,271; and Essl, $12,883 and under the Company’s Supplemental Plan for 2018 for Messrs. Beasley, $8,320; Cole, $8,050; and Essl, $10,668.
(4)Includes the following amounts related to Mr. Carrillo’s compensationpreviously earned as a director of our Former Parent prior to his April 2018 appointment as an officer of our Former Parent and future CEO of Arcosa: (i) director feesArcosa. For Mr. Stevenson, amounts in 2021 also include a physical examination and a matching contribution by Arcosa in his name pursuant to Arcosa's program of $31,500; and (ii) dividend equivalents of $2,425 on phantom stock units accrued in respect of deferred director fees.matching charitable contributions.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 3641


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table summarizes the 2018 grants of2021 equity and non-equity plan-based awards granted by our Former Parent to the Named Executive Officers. The amounts that represent equity awards granted prior to the Separation (which amounts were made in shares of our Former Parent’s common stock) were adjusted and converted into Arcosa equity awards in connection with the Separation. In general, the adjusted and converted equity awards are subject to substantially the same terms and conditions as the original equity awards, including the original vesting schedule. Please refer to “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Components of Compensation—Long-Term Incentive Compensation—Treatment of Outstanding Trinity Equity Awards in the Separation” for additional information, including a presentation of the post-Separation 2018 equity awards.

Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table

 
 
Estimated Possible
Payouts Under Non-
Equity
Incentive Plan Awards (2)
Estimated Future
Payouts Under
Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards (3)
All Other
Stock
Awards
Number
of Shares of
Stock or
Awards(4)
(#)
Grant
Date Fair
Value of
Stock
Awards(5)
($)
Name
Grant
Date(1)
Threshold
($)
Target
($)
Maximum
($)
Threshold
(#)
Target
(#)
Maximum
(#)
Antonio Carrillo
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AIP
 
 
 
$
187,610
 
$
586,282
 
$
1,055,308
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performance-Based RSUs
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
18,876
 
 
62,919
 
 
125,838
 
 
 
 
$
2,601,381
 
RSU
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
41,945
 
 
1,360,009
 
RSU
 
11/12/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
115,474
 
 
3,500,017
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AIP
 
 
 
 
61,333
 
 
191,667
 
 
341,001
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performance-Based RSUs
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,249
 
 
4,164
 
 
8,328
 
 
 
 
 
172,174
 
RSU
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,776
 
 
90,014
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AIP
 
 
 
 
89,600
 
 
280,000
 
 
504,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performance-Based RSUs
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,943
 
 
6,477
 
 
12,954
 
 
 
 
 
267,813
 
RSU
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4,317
 
 
140,003
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AIP
 
 
 
 
60,000
 
 
187,500
 
 
337,500
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performance-Based RSUs
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,249
 
 
4,164
 
 
8,328
 
 
 
 
 
172,174
 
RSU
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,776
 
 
90,014
 
Reid S. Essl
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
AIP
 
 
 
 
60,000
 
 
187,500
 
 
337,500
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performance-Based RSUs
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,249
 
 
4,164
 
 
8,328
 
 
 
 
 
172,174
 
RSU
 
5/7/2018
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,776
 
 
90,014
 
Estimated Possible
Payouts Under
Non- Equity Incentive
Plan Awards(2)
Estimated Future
Payouts Under
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards (3)
All Other
Stock
Awards
Number
of
Shares of
Stock or
Awards (4)
(#)
Grant
Date Fair
Value of
Stock
Awards(5)
($)
Name
Grant
Date(1)
Threshold
($)
Target
($)
Maximum
($)
Threshold
(#)
Target
(#)
Maximum
(#)
Antonio Carrillo
AIP
​$—
$925,000
$1,757,500
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
34,435
68,870
$2,199,363
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
22,957
1,480,038
Scott C. Beasley
AIP
330,000
627,000
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
6,911
13,822
441,406
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
4,607
297,013
Gail M. Peck
AIP
236,938
450,182
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
1,862
3,724
118,926
Performance-Based RSUs
6/7/2021
1,769
3,538
103,982
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
1,241
80,007
Time-Based RSUs
6/7/2021
1,179
70,009
Kerry S. Cole
AIP
309,000
587,100
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
5,608
11,216
358,183
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
3,739
241,053
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
AIP
257,500
489,250
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
4,372
8,744
279,240
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
2,915
187,930
Reid S. Essl
AIP
292,462
555,677
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
5,058
10,116
323,054
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
3,372
217,393
Bryan P. Stevenson
AIP
236,250
448,875
Performance-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
3,860
7,720
246,538
Time-Based RSUs
5/4/2021
2,574
165,946
(1)
The grant date of all stock awards is the date of the Former ParentHR Committee meeting or Board meeting at which such award was approved.
(2)
Represents the potential amounts payable under the 2018 Company2021 AIP for attainment of specified performance goalsgoals. Actual amounts earned were paid in March 2022 and successful Separation.are disclosed in the 2021 Summary Compensation Table. Threshold, amounts assume the threshold operating profit performance goal was met and no achievement of successful Separation,target, and maximum amounts each assume achievementthat the performance level was met for all applicable financial metrics. Performance below the minimum threshold results in no payout and performance above the maximum level is capped at a maximum total payout of 190% of the maximum operating profittarget award. For performance goalfalling between the specified levels, the amount earned will be interpolated accordingly. The performance metrics and achievementtargets used to determine the amounts of successful Separation. As previously noted, actual payouts were earned at 108% of targetthe awards paid are described above under “Compensation Discussion and are reflected in the Summary Compensation Table.Analysis.”
(3)
(3)Represents the potential number of performance-based restricted stock units of Arcosa that could be earned based on financial performance for 20182021 through 2020. In connection with the Separation, these awards were converted from performance-based restricted stock units originally issued by our Former Parent in May 2018 to each of the NEOs as performance-based awards.2023. Actual amounts of performance-based restricted stock units will vest and settle in shares of Common Stock at the end of the 2018-2020 performance periodon May 15, 2024 based on attainment of performance goals. Awards will pay out between 0% to 200% of the target performance-based restricted stock unit award based on actual performance against the performance levels set by the HR Committee. For performance falling between the specified levels, the amount of performance-based restricted stock units earned will be interpolated accordingly. The performance metrics and targets used to determine the amounts of the awards paid are described above under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”
42
(4)Includes

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
(4)
Represents time-based restricted stock units of Arcosa, of which were converted from time-based33 1/3% will vest on each of May 15, 2022, 2023, and 2024 (except with respect to the one-time promotional award for Ms. Peck, which will vest over three years with 33 1/3% on each anniversary of the grant date in June 2022, 2023, and 2024) if the Named Executive Officer remains an employee on such date. Time-based restricted stock units originally issued by our Former Parentaccrue dividend equivalent units payable in May 2018 to each ofcash, which vest on the Named Executive Officers. These awards vest 50% in May 2021 andsame vesting schedule as the underlying award.
(5)
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 37

TABLE OF CONTENTS

50% in May 2022 if the Named Executive Officer remains an employee in good standing on such dates. Also includes the one-time sign-on grant of time-based restricted stock units in November 2018 to Mr. Carrillo in connection with his appointment as CEO of Arcosa. This award will cliff vest on the fourth year anniversary of the award if he is employed by Arcosa on such date. Time-based restricted stock units accrue dividend equivalent units payable in cash, which vest on the same vesting schedule as the underlying award.

(5)The grant date fair value of the stock awards is calculated in accordance with ASC Topic 718.

Discussion Regarding Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan-Based AwardsTable

In 2018,2021, the Named Executive Officers were granted 40% of their respective target LTI compensation opportunity as time-based restricted stock units. These awards were granted to reflect the Former ParentHR Committee’s desire to ensureincentivize the long-term commitment of key executives to build stockholdershareholder value. These time-based restricted stock units vest over three years with 33 1/3% on each of May 15, 2022, 2023, and 2024 (except with respect to the one-time promotional award for Ms. Peck, which will vest over three years with 33 1/3% on each anniversary of the grant date in equal installments on May 15, 2021June 2022, 2023, and 20222024) if the Named Executive Officer remains an employee on such dates. During the vesting period, recipients do not earn dividends on, and are not entitled to vote with respect to, thedate. All time-based restricted stock units.

unit awards are non-voting and provide for dividend equivalent units payable in cash, which will vest on the same schedule as the corresponding time-based restricted stock unit awards.

The remaining 60% of the Named Executive Officer’sOfficer's target LTI compensation opportunity was granted in the form of performance-based restricted stock units for the 2018-20202021-2023 performance period based on Total Stockholder Return. Relative Total Stockholder Return is measured against the companies in the S&P MidCap 400 Index as of January 1, 2018.three-year average pre-tax return on capital and cumulative adjusted earnings per share. Each performance-based restricted stock unit earned will convert into either one share of Common Stock or at the Company’s election the cash value of one share of Common Stock and vest on May 15, 2021.2024. During the vesting period, recipients do not earn dividends on, and are not entitled to vote with respect to, the performance-based restricted stock units.

In addition, in connection with Mr. Carrillo’s appointment in April 2018 as an officer of our Former Parent and future CEO of Arcosa, the Former Parent Committee approved a one-time LTI grant to Mr. Carrillo in the amount of $3.5 million in Arcosa time-based restricted stock units as an incentive for Mr. Carrillo agreeing to leave his prior employment as CEO of Mexichem S.A.B. de C.V. These time-based restricted stock units vest on the fourth year anniversary of the award if he is employed by Arcosa on such date. This award was ratified and granted by our HR Committee on November 12, 2018.

See “Long-Term“2021 Annual Compensation Determination—2021 Long-Term Incentive Compensation” under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” above and “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” below for a description of the terms of 20182021 LTI compensation.

In the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” table, the estimates for future payouts under the 2018 Company2021 AIP awards represent potential payments of annual incentive compensation for 20182021 based on achievement of operating profitspecified performance levels and successful Separation.metrics. See “2018 “2021 Annual Compensation Determination—Annual Incentive Compensation” under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” above for a description of the 2018 Company AIP.

The Former Parent had an executive perquisite plan pursuant to which Mr. Cole participated in 2018. The Company discontinued this plan effective January 1, 2019. The Former Parent had2021 AIP awards.

We have a 401(k) plan that permittedpermits employees to elect to set aside a portion of their compensation (subject to the maximum limit on the amount of compensation permitted by the Code to be deferred for this purpose) in a trust to pay future retirement benefits. Depending upon years of service, the Former ParentFor 2021, we matched up to 50% of no more than 6% of the employee’s eligible compensation set aside for this purpose. The Former Parent contributed up to an additional 3% of the employee’s base salary (subject to the maximum limit permitted by the Code) depending upon years of service as an annual retirement contribution. In connectionpurpose with the Separation, we adopted a similar 401(k) Plan.cumulative amount of our match capped at $17,400. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Compensation Plans—Post-Employment Benefits.”

43

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Outstanding Equity Awards at Year-End

The following table summarizes as of December 31, 2018,2021, for each Named Executive Officer, the number of shares of unvested stock awards held in both Arcosa and Trinity.Former Parent. The market value of the stock awards was based on the closing price of the common stockCommon Stock as of December 31, 2018,2021, which was $27.69$52.70 for Arcosa (stock ticker “ACA”) and $20.59$30.20 for our Former Parent (stock ticker “TRN”).

Name
Stock Awards
Number of Shares
or Units of
Stock That
Have Not Vested
(#)
Market Value of
Shares or Units of
Stock That Have
Not Vested
($)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested
(#)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or Payout
Value of Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested
($)
Antonio Carrillo
246,707(1)
$12,614,144(1)
61,189(3)
$3,224,660(3)
97,542(2)
5,140,463(2)
34,435(4)
1,814,725(4)
Gail M. Peck
34,946(1)
1,376,669(1)
3,497(3)
184,292(3)
5,739(2)
302,445(2)
3,631(4)
191,354(4)
Kerry S. Cole
36,234(1)
1,527,032(1)
8,654(3)
456,066(3)
10,042(2)
529,213(2)
5,608(4)
295,542(4)
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
11,377(1)
599,568(1)
7,308(3)
385,132(3)
10,042(2)
529,213(2)
4,372(4)
230,404(4)
Reid S. Essl
36,465(1)
1,561,728(1)
7,308(3)
385,132(3)
10,042(2)
529,213(2)
5,058(4)
266,557(4)
Bryan P. Stevenson
10,259(1)
540,649(1)
6,731(3)
354,724(3)
9,324(2)
491,375(2)
3,860(4)
203,422(4)
(1)
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 38

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table

Name
Stock Awards
Number of Shares
or Units of
Stock That
Have Not Vested
(#)(1)
Market Value of
Shares or Units of
Stock That Have
Not Vested
($)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested
(#)(2)
Equity Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or Payout
Value of Unearned
Shares, Units or
Other Rights That
Have Not Vested
($)(2)
Antonio Carrillo
 
180,369
 
$
4,872,198
 
 
18,876
 
$
522,676
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
42,895
 
 
1,023,660
 
 
1,249
 
 
34,585
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
74,622
 
 
1,781,552
 
 
1,943
 
 
53,802
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
37,229
 
 
904,037
 
 
1,249
 
 
34,585
 
Reid S. Essl
 
64,957
 
 
1,516,591
 
 
1,249
 
 
34,585
 
(1)The following table providesRepresents the vesting dateactual number of unvested restricted shares and time-based restricted stock unit awards. Except as otherwise indicated below, all Former Parent awards reflected in the tableand market value. Includes TRN awards that were granted by our Former Parent prior to the Separation, and allcorresponding Arcosa awards reflected in the table were received in respect of Former Parentsuch TRN awards in connection withthrough the Separation. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Long-Term Incentive Compensation—Treatment of Outstanding Trinity Equity Awards inThe following table provides the Separation” for a descriptionvesting date of the treatment of equity awards of our Former Parent and receipt of Arcosa equity awards in respect of such awards in the Separation.awards:
Vesting
Date
Antonio Carrillo
Scott C. Beasley
Kerry S. Cole
Jesse E.
Collins, Jr.
Reid S. Essl
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
5/15/2019
 
 
 
 
 
4,817
 
 
10,450
 
 
6,698
 
 
12,750
 
 
3,556
 
 
5,333
 
 
4,729
 
 
10,450
 
12/31/2019
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,000
 
 
3,000
 
 
 
 
 
5/15/2020
 
 
 
 
 
9,690
 
 
5,166
 
 
16,672
 
 
6,852
 
 
9,614
 
 
2,274
 
 
9,784
 
 
5,449
 
12/31/2020
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,000
 
 
3,000
 
 
 
 
 
5/15/2021
 
20,973
 
 
 
 
3,887
 
 
7,497
 
 
3,326
 
 
3,501
 
 
2,807
 
 
4,257
 
 
3,998
 
 
7,830
 
5/15/2022
 
20,972
 
 
 
 
1,388
 
 
 
 
2,158
 
 
 
 
1,388
 
 
 
 
1,610
 
 
667
 
11/12/2022
 
115,474
(a) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5/15/2023
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
667
 
 
2,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
667
 
 
2,000
 
3/28/2024
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5/15/2024
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,000
 
 
3,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,333
 
 
4,000
 
5/15/2025
 
 
 
 
 
 
��
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
111
 
 
333
 
5/15/2026
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
111
 
 
333
 
5/15/2027
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
222
 
 
666
 
5/15/2028
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
5/15/2029
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
4/3/2033
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
4/3/2046
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
666
 
 
2,000
 
Qualifying termination(b)
 
5,736
 
 
17,214
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Retirement(c)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,000
 
 
6,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Vesting
Date
Antonio
Carrillo
Gail M.
Peck
Kerry S.
Cole
Jesse E.
Collins, Jr.
Reid S.
Essl
Bryan P.
Stevenson
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
ACA
(#)
TRN
(#)
5/15/2022
79,382
5,277
​2,000
9,154
7,810
9,835
667
7,047
6/7/2022
393
11/12/2022
115,474
5/15/2023
21,249
2,524
​4,000
3,836
2,000
2,596
5,066
2,000
2,354
6/7/2023
393
3/28/2024
666
2,000
5/15/2024
7,652
1,302
​2,667
2,246
3,000
971
2,457
4,000
858
6/7/2024
393
5/15/2025
111
333
5/15/2026
1,111
​3,333
666
2,000
111
333
5/15/2027
666
​2,000
222
666
5/15/2028
1,333
​4,000
666
2,000
666
2,000
5/15/2029
888
​2,666
666
2,000
4/3/2033
666
2,000
4/3/2046
666
2,000
Qualifying termination(a)
5,736
17,214
Retirement (b)
2,000
6,000
(a)
Represents time-based restricted stock units granted after the Separation under the Incentive Plan.

(b)Outstanding deferred time-based restricted stock units that have vested but will be converted to shares of common stockCommon Stock upon a qualifying termination event.
(c)
(b)
Outstanding deferredtime-based restricted stock that will vest at retirement in accordance with the grant.
44

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
(2)
Represents the actual number of 2019-2021 performance-based restricted stock units that will vest and settle in shares of Common Stock on May 15, 2022 as definedcertified by the Incentive Plan.HR Committee based on Arcosa's average pre-tax return on capital and cumulative adjusted earnings per share for the performance period and the corresponding market value of such shares. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—2021 Annual Compensation Determination—2019-2021 Performance-Based Restricted Stock Unit Awards.”
(3)
(2)
Represents the thresholdtarget number or value, as applicable, of 2020-2022 performance-based restricted stock units that could be earned if thresholdtarget financial performance goals are achieved. Actual amounts of performance-based restricted stock units will vest and settle in shares of Common Stock followingon May 15, 2023 based on Arcosa's average pre-tax return on capital and cumulative adjusted earnings per share for the endperformance period. Awards will pay out between 0% to 200% of the 2018-2020 performance periodtarget performance-based restricted stock unit award based on actual performance against the annualized Total Shareholder Return (as defined)performance levels set by the HR Committee. For performance falling between the specified levels, the amount of performance-based restricted stock units earned will be interpolated accordingly.
(4)
Represents the target number or value, as applicable, of 2021-2023 performance-based restricted stock units that could be earned if target financial performance goals are achieved. Actual amounts of performance-based restricted stock units will vest and settle in shares of Common Stock on May 15, 2024 based on Arcosa's average pre-tax return on capital and cumulative adjusted earnings per share for the performance period. Awards will pay out between 0% to 200% of the Company as compared totarget performance-based restricted stock unit award based on actual performance against the average 3-year Annualized Returnperformance levels set by the HR Committee. For performance falling between the specified levels, the amount of the companies comprising the S&P Mid-Cap 400 Index.performance-based restricted stock units earned will be interpolated accordingly. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Long TermAnalysis—2021 Annual Compensation Determination—2021 Long-Term Incentive Compensation.Compensation.

Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 2018

2021

The following table summarizes for the Named Executive Officers in 2018 (i) the number of shares acquired upon exercise of stock options and the value realized, and (ii)2021 the number of shares acquired upon the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units and the value realized, each before payout of any applicable withholding tax.

No stock options were exercised in 2021. As of December 31, 2021, Arcosa had no stock options outstanding.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 39

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table

Name
 
Option Awards
Stock Awards
Stock
Ticker
Number of
Shares
Acquired on
Exercise
(#)
Value
Realized
on
Exercise
($)(1)
Number of
Shares
Acquired on
Vesting
(#)
Value
Realized
on Vesting
($)(1)
Antonio Carrillo
 
 
 
 
 
$
 
 
 
$
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
TRN
 
 
 
 
 
 
11,450
 
 
404,300
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
TRN
 
 
7,893
 
 
206,086
 
 
9,900
 
 
349,569
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
ACA
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,000
 
 
27,690
 
 
 
TRN
 
 
 
 
 
 
3,650
 
 
84,722
 
Reid S. Essl
 
TRN
 
 
 
 
 
 
10,833
 
 
382,513
 
Name
Stock Awards
Stock Ticker
Number of
Shares
Acquired on
Vesting
(#)
Value
Realized
on Vesting
($)(1)
Antonio Carrillo
ACA
160,409
$10,086,518
Scott C. Beasley
ACA
14,401
905,535
TRN
7,497
218,463
Gail M. Peck
ACA
10,833
681,179
TRN
4,257
124,049
Kerry S. Cole
ACA
18,204
1,144,668
TRN
3,501
102,019
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
ACA
12,759
802,286
TRN
4,257
124,049
Reid S. Essl
ACA
15,602
981,054
TRN
7,830
228,166
Bryan P. Stevenson
ACA
10,286
646,784
TRN
2,403
70,023
(1)
The amounts shown are calculated based on the closing stock price of common stockCommon Stock on the date of exercise or vesting.
45

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

The table below shows the contributions by the executivesNamed Executive Officers and the Company,Arcosa, the aggregate earnings on nonqualified deferred compensation in 20182021, and the aggregate balance at year end under nonqualified deferred compensation plans of Arcosa. Arcosa does not provide matching contribution amounts under the Company.

NonqualifiedArcosa Deferred Compensation Table

Name
Executive
Contributions
in Last Fiscal
Year(1)
($)
Registrant
Contributions
in Last Fiscal
Year(2)
($)
Aggregate
Earnings
in Last Fiscal
Year(3)
($)
Aggregate
Balance
at Last Fiscal
Year End(4)
($)
Antonio Carrillo
$
 
$
 
$
(39,778
)
$
173,739
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
46,113
 
 
8,320
 
 
(7,311
)
 
74,608
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
15,048
 
 
8,050
 
 
(20,259
)
 
243,787
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Reid S. Essl
 
32,736
 
 
10,668
 
 
(10,105
)
 
137,852
 
Plan.
Name
Executive
Contributions
in Last Fiscal
Year(1)
($)
Aggregate
Earnings
in Last Fiscal
Year(2)
($)
Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
($)
Aggregate
Balance
at Last Fiscal
Year End(3)
($)
​Antonio Carrillo
$
$(7,468)
$
$303,030
Scott C. Beasley
8,272
127,535
Gail M. Peck
3,391
591,603
Kerry S. Cole
41,726
455,061
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
Reid S. Essl
54,676
43,820
402,372
Bryan P. Stevenson
(1)
Salary and incentive compensation deferrals to the Company’s SupplementalArcosa’s Deferred Compensation Plan. The amounts are also included in the “Salary” and/or “Non-Incentive Equity“Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation” columns, as applicable, in the Summary Compensation Table for 2018.2021.
(2)
(2)This column represents matching amounts under the Company’s Supplemental Plan. These amounts are also includedRepresents earnings in the “All Other Compensation” column of the SummaryArcosa’s Deferred Compensation TablePlan for 2018.
(3)ThisMessrs. Beasley, Cole, and Essl, and Ms. Peck. For Mr. Carrillo, this column represents earnings in the Company’s Supplemental Plan.respect of deferred director fees previously earned as a director of our Former Parent.
(3)
(4)This column includesIncludes salary and incentive compensation deferrals to, and Company matching amounts under, the Company’s SupplementalArcosa’s Deferred Compensation Plan in the aggregate for Messrs. Beasley, $26,212; Cole, $21,344; and Essl, $39,180 that are reported in the Summary Compensation Table for 2017.Messrs. Beasley, $4,500; and Essl, $46,353 in 2020; and Messrs. Beasley, $6,000; Cole, $27,864 and Essl, $25,516 in 2019.

Deferred Compensation Discussion

The Former Parent

For 2021, we had a supplemental profit sharing plan that was establishedDeferred Compensation Plan for highly compensated employees who are limited as to the amount of deferrals allowed under the Former Parent’sour 401(k) plan.Plan. Participants electedmay elect to defer salary prior to the beginning of the fiscal year and annual incentive pay prior to the beginning of the year to which the incentive payments related. The first 6% of a participant’s base salary and bonus contributed to the supplemental plan, less any compensation matched under the 401(k) plan, was matched from 25% to 50% by the Former Parent based on years of service. The Former Parent’s match vested 20% for each year of service up to 100% after five years. Participants chose from several mutual fund-like deemed investments.

If elected at the time of enrollment, participants may take an in-service distribution of deferrals three years after the end of the plan year in which the deferral was made. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Compensation Plans.”

Amounts are paid out immediately onupon death. Upon termination of employment, amounts in the SupplementalDeferred Compensation Plan are paid out beginning six months after termination of employment in lump sum or annual installments from one to 20twenty years according to election of the participant.

In connection with the Separation, the Company adopted a substantially similar 401(k) plan and Supplemental Plan.

46
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 40


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

Death, Disability, or Retirement

Named Executive Officers that terminate voluntarily, involuntarily, by death or by disability have the same death and disability benefits that are available to the majority of salaried employees. While employed by the Company, salaried employees have a death benefit equal to the greater of their accrued benefit under the pension plan or one year of base salary for less than 10 years of service and 212 times base salary for at least 10 years of service.

The Company’s

Arcosa’s long-term disability plan provides all salaried employees, including the Named Executive Officers, with a disability benefit after six months of disability of 60% of base salary up to a maximum of $12,000 a month while disabled and until normal retirement at age 65.65, provided that the disability occurred prior to age 60. If the disability occurred at age 60 or older the maximum benefit period will be based on the age at disability. Deferred compensation benefits that are payable onupon termination are described under “Deferred Compensation Discussion.”
Equity awards held by the Named Executive Officers have no acceleration of vesting upon voluntary or involuntary termination but vesting is accelerated on death andor disability, and in some cases retirement. The Company AIP provides that in the event of death or disability, if the HR Committee so determines, the participant will be eligible to receive the pro rata portion of the participant’s AIP that would have been payable in such year. The Company AIP also provides that in the event of termination of employment for any other reason following the end of the performance period and prior to the date of actual payment, the HR Committee may pay the participant an amount not to exceed the amount earned.

The following table provides the dollar value of (i) accelerated vesting of equity awards and (ii) the payment of annual incentive compensation, in each case assuming each of the Named Executive Officers had been terminated by death, disability, or retirement on December 31, 2018.2021. As of December 31, 2018,2021, there were no outstanding stock options held by any of the Named Executive Officers.

 
Antonio Carrillo
($)
Scott C. Beasley
($)
Kerry S. Cole
($)
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
($)
Reid S. Essl
($)
Death
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Equity Awards(1)
$
5,252,178
 
$
1,048,807
 
$
1,820,668
 
$
929,184
 
$
1,541,738
 
AIP(2)
 
633,185
 
 
207,000
 
 
302,400
 
 
202,500
 
 
202,500
 
Total
$
5,885,363
 
$
1,255,807
 
$
2,123,068
 
$
1,131,684
 
$
1,744,238
 
Disability
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Equity Awards(1)
$
5,252,178
 
$
1,048,807
 
$
1,820,668
 
$
929,184
 
$
1,541,738
 
AIP(2)
 
633,185
 
 
207,000
 
 
302,400
 
 
202,500
 
 
202,500
 
Total
$
5,885,363
 
$
1,255,807
 
$
2,123,068
 
$
1,131,684
 
$
1,744,238
 
Retirement
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Equity Awards(1)
$
627,262
 
$
7,543
 
$
11,734
 
$
7,543
 
$
7,543
 
AIP(2)
 
633,185
 
 
207,000
 
 
302,400
 
 
202,500
 
 
202,500
 
Total
$
1,260,447
 
$
214,543
 
$
314,134
 
$
210,043
 
$
210,043
 
Antonio
Carrillo(1)
($)
Gail M.
Peck
($)
Kerry S.
Cole
($)
Jesse E.
Collins, Jr.
($)
Reid S.
Essl
($)
Bryan P.
Stevenson
($)
Death
Equity Awards(2)
$17,397,705
$1,670,894
$2,112,123
$1,131,043
$2,101,193
$1,030,227
AIP(3)
1,008,250
258,262
284,280
272,950
324,632
257,513
Total
$18,405,955
$1,929,156
$2,396,403
$1,403,993
$2,425,825
$1,287,740
Disability
Equity Awards(2)
$17,397,705
$1,670,894
$2,112,123
$1,131,043
$2,101,193
$1,030,227
AIP(3)
1,008,250
258,262
284,280
272,950
324,632
257,513
Total
$18,405,955
$1,929,156
$2,396,403
$1,403,993
$2,425,825
$1,287,740
Retirement
Equity Awards(2)
$822,150
$
$
$
$
$
AIP(3)
1,008,250
258,262
284,280
272,950
324,632
257,513
Total
$1,830,400
$258,262
$284,280
$272,950
$324,632
$257,513
(1)
(1)Upon termination due to death, disability, or retirement, in addition to the amounts reflected in the table, Mr. Carrillo would also receive a cash payout for his cash balance under the Director Deferred Plan (as defined below), which represents fees earned and deferred while he served as a non-employee director of Former Parent. As of December 31, 2021, his accumulated cash balance in the Director Deferred Plan was $303,030.
(2)
The market value of the outstanding ACA and TRN equity awards was based on the closing price of the common stockCommon Stock as of December 31, 2018,2021, which was $27.69$52.70 for Arcosa and $20.59$30.20 for our Former Parent.
(2)
(3)
Assumes payment at the discretion of the HR Committee of 20182021 award payments under the AIP at 108% of target amount.based on 2021 actual results.

Change in Control

Each of the Named Executive Officers is currently a participant in the 2022 CIC Plan, which replaced the 2018 CIC Plan that expired under its own terms on December 6, 2021. For discussion of the 2022 CIC Plan, see “Compensation Discussion & Analysis – Other Compensation Plans – Change in Control Severance Plan. Pursuant to the terms of the 2018 CIC Plan, if the Named Executive Officer’s employment iswas terminated by the CompanyArcosa without “Cause” (as defined below) or by the participant for “Good Reason” (as defined below), in each case, in connection with or within two years following a “Change in Control” (as defined below), then equity awards granted on or after the date of the 2018 CIC Plan vest and benefits under the SupplementalDeferred Compensation Plan Plan and 401(k) Plan vest. In addition, the Named Executive Officer will receivewould have received a lump-sum cash severance payment equal to (i)(x) the sum of the Named
47

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Executive Officer’s annual base salary and target annual incentive bonus multiplied by (y) three for the Chief Executive Officer, two for the Chief Financial Officer and business segmentgroup presidents, and 1.5one and a half for all other participants; plus (ii) a prorated annual incentive bonus for the year in which the termination occurs based on target performance. Pursuant to the terms of the 2018 CIC Plan, equity awards in existence prior to the 2018 CIC Plan vest upon a “Change in Control.”

A

Under the 2018 CIC Plan, a “Change in Control” iswas generally defined as (i) any other person or entity acquires beneficial ownership of 30% or more of the Company’sArcosa’s outstanding Common Stock, or the combined voting power over the Company’sArcosa’s outstanding voting securities unless the transaction resulting in the person becoming the beneficial owner of 30% or more of the combined voting power is approved in advance by the Company’sArcosa’s Board; (ii) incumbent directors cease for any reason

2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 41

TABLE OF CONTENTS

to constitute at least a majority of the Board; (iii) a merger or consolidation of the CompanyArcosa or any of its subsidiaries with any other corporation, or an agreement for the sale or disposition by the CompanyArcosa of all or substantially all of the Company’sArcosa’s assets, subject to certain exceptions; or (iv) the stockholders approve a complete liquidation or dissolution of the Company.

Arcosa.

“Cause” iswas generally defined as a participant’s (i) continued failure to satisfactorily perform his or her duties with the Company orArcosa, failure to comply with the Company’sArcosa’s code of conduct and other written policies, or willful failure to follow directions of the Board or his or her supervisor or manager, or any other willful act that likely will result in a materially negative effect to the Company,Arcosa, which, if curable, is not cured within thirty (30) days after notice thereof; (ii) fraud, theft, misappropriation embezzlement, dishonesty, or breach of fiduciary duty by the Participant; (iii) misappropriation of any corporate opportunity or otherwise obtaining personal profit from any transaction which is adverse to the interests of the CompanyArcosa or to the benefits of which the CompanyArcosa is entitled; (iv) the conviction of a crime that has caused or may be reasonably expected to cause material injury to the CompanyArcosa or any of its affiliates, or the conviction of a felony; or (v) willful misconduct which is injurious to the CompanyArcosa (monetarily or otherwise), which if curable, is not cured by the participant within thirty (30) days after of a written notice from the Company.

Arcosa.

“Good Reason” iswas generally defined as (i) a material diminution in the participant’s job title, responsibilities or duties; (ii) after the occurrence of a Change in Control, a material adverse change in the nature or scope of the authorities, powers, functions, responsibilities, or duties attached to the position(s) with the CompanyArcosa that the participant held immediately before the Change in Control; (iii) a reduction by the CompanyArcosa in the participant’s base salary, unless the reduction is a proportionate reduction of the compensation of the participant and all other senior officers of the CompanyArcosa as a part of a company-wide effort to enhance the Company’sArcosa’s financial condition; (iv) any action by the CompanyArcosa which would materially reduce the participant’s benefits, in the aggregate, under the Company’sArcosa’s benefit plans and incentive plans; (v) a change of more than fifty (50) miles from the location where the participant performs the majority of the participant’s job duties immediately prior to the Change in Control; or (vi) any material breach by the CompanyArcosa of any provision of the 2018 CIC Plan. Pursuant to the 2018 CIC Plan, the participant is required to provide the CompanyArcosa with an opportunity to remedy the Good Reason event prior to the participant submitting a notice of termination for Good Reason.

See “Change

For purposes of the table below, the payments and benefits reflect an assumption that the 2018 CIC Plan would have been extended in connection with a hypothetical Change in Control Severance Plan” under the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section above for further information about the CIC Plan.

Ifoccurring on December 31, 2021 with each Named Executive Officer’s employment had beenbeing terminated by the CompanyArcosa without Cause or by the NEONamed Executive Officer for Good Reason on December 31, 2018, occurring in connection with or within two years of a Change in Control of the Company, the NEO would have received the following:

Name
Equity Awards(1)
($)
AIP(2)
($)
Cash
Compensation(3)
($)
Continuation of
Benefits(4)
($)
Total
($)
Antonio Carrillo
$
6,614,425
 
$
586,282
 
$
4,308,846
 
$
57,488
 
$
11,567,041
 
Scott C. Beasley
 
1,138,961
 
 
191,667
 
 
1,183,334
 
 
57,006
 
 
2,570,968
 
Kerry S. Cole
 
1,960,900
 
 
280,000
 
 
1,400,000
 
 
53,413
 
 
3,694,313
 
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
1,019,338
 
 
187,500
 
 
1,075,000
 
 
50,127
 
 
2,331,965
 
Reid S. Essl
 
1,631,892
 
 
187,500
 
 
1,075,000
 
 
31,112
 
 
2,925,504
 
such date:
Name
Equity Awards(1)
($)
AIP(2)
($)
Cash
Compensation(3)
($)
Continuation of
Benefits(4)
($)
Total
($)
​Antonio Carrillo(5)
$20,590,921
$925,000
$5,550,000
$53,866
$27,119,787
Gail M. Peck
1,925,118
284,750
1,419,500
58,403
3,687,771
Kerry S. Cole
2,581,032
309,000
1,545,000
53,749
4,488,781
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
1,517,497
257,500
1,297,800
50,516
3,123,313
Reid S. Essl
2,515,809
304,934
1,536,868
32,934
4,390,543
Bryan P. Stevenson
1,379,581
236,250
976,500
53,591
2,645,922
48

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
(1)
Accelerated vesting of equity awards. The market value of the outstanding ACA and TRN equity awards was based on the closing price of the common stockCommon Stock as of December 31, 2018,2021, which was $27.69$52.70 for Arcosa and $20.59$30.20 for our Former Parent.
(2)
Payment of 20182021 award under the AIP at target amount.amount then in effect.
(3)
Cash lump sum equal to the sum of base salary and target amount under the AIP both then in effect, multiplied by (i) three for the CEO, (ii) two for the CFO and business segmentgroup presidents, and (iii) 1.5one and a half for all other participants.
(4)
Estimated cost of continuation for 24 months of medical, dental, life, and other insurance benefits, any additional income tax payable byand the executivemaximum amount of outplacement services benefits.
(5)
In addition to the amounts reflected in the table, Mr. Carrillo would also receive a cash payout for his cash balance under the Director Deferred Plan (as defined below), which represents fees earned and deferred while he served as a resultnon-employee director of these benefits, and outplacement services.Former Parent. As of December 31, 2021, his accumulated cash balance in the Director Deferred Plan was $303,030.
CEO Pay Ratio
As required by Section 953(b) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and Item 402(u) of SEC Regulation S-K, Arcosa is providing the following information about the relationship of the median of the annual total compensation of its employees and the annual total compensation of Mr. Carrillo, the CEO.
2021 Compensation
CEO, Antonio Carrillo
$5,632,354
Median Employee
$56,080
Compensation Ratio
100:1
SEC rules and regulations require a company to identify the median employee only once every three years, absent significant changes to the company’s employee population, employee compensation arrangements or median employee’s status during that period that would reasonably be expected to result in a significant change in the pay ratio. For 2021, we concluded that there have been no significant changes in our employee population or employee compensation arrangements that we reasonably believe would significantly impact our pay ratio disclosure. However, in 2021, the original median employee experienced a change in circumstances that we believe would result in a significant change to our pay ratio disclosure. Accordingly, in accordance with SEC rules and regulations, we selected a new median employee whose compensation was substantially similar to the compensation of the original median employee before such change in circumstances, based on the compensation measures used to select the original median employee in 2019.
Arcosa used the following methodology, material assumptions and adjustments to identify the median of the annual total compensation of all its employees and to determine the annual total compensation of the “original median employee” and to then select the median employee for 2021 based upon the 2019 methodology:
Arcosa determined that, as of December 31, 2019, its employee population consisted of approximately 6,275 individuals working at Arcosa and its consolidated subsidiaries. This population consisted of full-time, part-time, seasonal and temporary employees based on those individuals who were determined to be employees using the Code test.
As permitted under SEC rules, Arcosa adjusted the employee population to exclude 15 Canadian employees (or less than 1% of the employee population) such that a total of 6,260 individuals were used in determining the original median employee. For Arcosa’s employees in Mexico, amounts were converted from Mexican pesos to U.S. dollars using the 2019 calendar year twelve-month average exchange rate.
Arcosa determined each employee’s base salary and cash performance incentive compensation paid during 2019 as reflected in Arcosa payroll records. Arcosa identified its original median employee from its adjusted employee population based on this compensation measure.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4249


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

From our employee population, we used statistical sampling to collect additional compensation data for a group of employees who were paid within a relatively narrow range around our estimated median consistently applied compensation measure. From this group, we selected an employee for substitution who was reasonably representative of our workforce to be our median employee for 2021 using the 2019 methodology.

Prior

The ratio disclosed above is a reasonable estimate calculated in a manner consistent with Item 402(u) of SEC Regulation S-K. The specific dollar amounts used to determine the annual total compensation of the identified new 2021 “median employee” shown above are different from the actual compensation measure described above that was used to identify the “median employee” in 2019 and may not be comparable to the Separation, ratio used at other companies. Arcosa is disclosing this ratio in accordance with SEC requirements.
50

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Proposal Two
Advisory Vote to Approve Named Executive Officer Compensation
Arcosa seeks approval, on an advisory basis, from its shareholders of the compensation of its named executive officers as described in this Proxy Statement.
As described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, Arcosa’s executive compensation program (i) encourages high levels of performance and accountability, (ii) aligns the interests of executives with those of shareholders, and (iii) links compensation to business objectives and strategies.
This proposal provides shareholders the opportunity to approve or not approve Arcosa’s executive compensation program through the following resolution:
“RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to Arcosa’s Named Executive Officers, as disclosed pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and the related narrative discussion, is hereby approved.”
Because this is an advisory vote, it will not be binding upon the Board. However, the HR Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote when considering future executive compensation arrangements. After the 2022 Annual Meeting, the next advisory vote to approve the compensation of the named executive officers will occur at the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders unless the Board modifies its policy on the frequency of holding such advisory votes.
"FOR"
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR approval of this resolution.
51

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Director Compensation
In December 2020, the G&S Committee conducted its annual review, pursuant to the G&S Committee Charter, of non-employee director compensation. Following a review of comparative market analysis provided by the Compensation Consultant, the G&S Committee determined no changes were necessary for non-employee director compensation for 2021.
The following table sets forth the components of 2021 compensation for our non-employee directors approved by the Board:
2021 Compensation Element
Amount
Annual Cash Retainer for Non-Employee Directors
$110,000
Annual Equity Award for Non-Employee Directors(1)
$130,000
Annual Cash Fees
Non-Executive Chair Retainer Fee(2)
$100,000
Chair of Governance and Sustainability Committee
$15,000
Chairs of Audit and Human Resources Committees
$20,000
Other Cash Fees
Board and Committee Additional Meeting Fee per meeting attended(3)
$2,000
Ad hoc or special assignment work performed for or at the request of the CEO, per diem
$2,000
(1)
Number of shares is based on the closing stock price on the date of grant. The annual equity award is granted following the Annual Meeting for continuing directors in the form of restricted stock with one-year cliff vesting or deferred restricted stock units that vest in one year but remain deferred until a qualifying termination of service from the Board, with the decision being made at the election of the individual director. Following the director's qualifying termination of services, vested deferred restricted stock units convert into shares of Common Stock equal to the number of units.
(2)
The Non-Executive Chair Retainer Fee may be paid, at the Chair's election, in the form of cash or deferred restricted stock units.
(3)
The Additional Meeting Fee is payable to members of the Board or members of Board committees for their attendance of each meeting attended, beginning with the second non-regularly scheduled meeting of the Board or its committees.
Non-employee directors may elect, pursuant to the Director Deferred Plan, to defer the receipt of all or a specified portion of the cash retainers and fees to be paid to him or her. Deferred amounts are credited to an account on the books of Arcosa and treated as if invested either at an interest rate equivalent (5% in 2021) or, at the director’s prior election, in units (“phantom stock units”) of the Common Stock at the closing price on the NYSE on the last day of the quarter following the date that a payment is credited to the director’s account. The phantom stock units are settled only in cash. Phantom stock units are credited with amounts equivalent to dividends paid on the Common Stock. Upon a qualifying termination, the value of the Director Deferred Plan account will be paid in cash to the director in a lump sum or in annual installments not exceeding ten years according to the director’s prior election.
Fees deferred pursuant to the Director Deferred Plan are credited to the director’s Director Deferred Plan account monthly. Fees that are not deferred pursuant to the Director Deferred Plan are paid in cash quarterly, in arrears.
Messrs. Best, Biegler, Carrillo, Gafford, and Rock served as directors ofparticipated in our Former Parent.Parent's deferred plan for director fees. In connection with the Separation, they resigned asamounts accumulated under this plan were transferred to Arcosa's Director Deferred Plan and continue to be deferred until a qualifying termination under the Director Deferred Plan.
To further align our non-employee directors’ and shareholders’ interests, we require that the directors hold shares of our Former Parent and joined our Board. Mr. Carrillo served asCommon Stock in an amount equal to five times the annual Board retainer within five years of becoming a directordirector. All of our Former Parent until his appointmentdirectors have met or are on track to meet the ownership requirements.
Non-employee directors may also participate in April 2018Arcosa's matching gift program on the same terms as an officer of our Former Parent and future CEO of Arcosa. While serving on our Former Parent’s board, each of these directors received compensation and equity awards from our Former Parent for their service as non-employee directors. employees. Under the program, Arcosa matches contributions up to $5,000 per year, per director, to charitable organizations.
52

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
The following table summarizes the compensation paid by the CompanyArcosa to non-employee directors for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018. The table presents information regarding only the compensation and equity awards that we have paid or granted to the non-employee directors from the date of Separation and do not reflect any compensation or equity awards paid or granted to Messrs.2021. Mr. Carrillo Best, Biegler, Gafford, and Rock for their service on our Former Parent’s board of directors. Mr. Carrillo’s compensation earned for his service as a director of our Former Parent through the date of his April 2018 appointment as an officer of our Former Parent and future CEO of Arcosa is reflected in the “Summary Compensation Table” above. He does not receive additional compensation for his services as a director of the Company.

Arcosa.

Director Compensation Table

Name
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash(1)
($)
Stock Awards(2)(3)
($)
Change in
Pension Value
and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(4)
($)
All Other
Compensation(5)
($)
Total
($)
Joseph Alvarado
$
19,667
 
$
65,015
 
$
 
$
5,000
 
$
89,682
 
Rhys J. Best
 
38,333
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,000
 
 
43,333
 
David W. Biegler
 
25,000
 
 
 
 
18,587
 
 
5,000
 
 
48,587
 
Jeffrey A. Craig
 
15,667
 
 
65,015
 
 
 
 
 
 
80,682
 
Ronald J. Gafford
 
24,167
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,000
 
 
29,167
 
John W. Lindsay
 
21,667
 
 
65,015
 
 
 
 
 
 
86,682
 
Douglas L. Rock
 
25,000
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
25,000
 
Melanie Trent
 
21,667
 
 
65,015
 
 
 
 
5,000
 
 
91,682
 
Name
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash(1)
($)
Stock Awards(2)(3)
($)
Change in
Pension Value and
Nonqualified Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(4)
($)
All Other
Compensation(5)
($)
Total
($)
Joseph Alvarado
$117,333
$130,036
$
$5,000
$252,369
Rhys J. Best
212,000
130,036
5,000
347,036
David W. Biegler
94,250
130,036
26,220
2,646
253,152
Jeffrey A. Craig
112,000
130,036
242,036
Ronald J. Gafford
129,000
130,036
15,459
274,495
John W. Lindsay
112,000
130,036
6,198
248,234
Kimberly S. Lubel
18,333
65,003
5,000
88,336
Julie A. Piggott
6,801
54,179
60,980
Douglas L. Rock
132,000
130,036
4,922
266,958
Melanie M. Trent
114,000
130,036
5,000
249,036
(1)
(1)This column reflectsReflects the cash fees earned by directors for Board and Committeecommittee service to Arcosa beginning November 1, 2018.Arcosa. Includes amounts deferred under the Arcosa, Inc. Deferred Plan for Director Fees (“Director Deferred Plan”).
(2)
Reflects pro-rata awardawards of restricted shares and restricted stock units granted on November 12, 2018 for service from November 2018 to May 2019.4, 2021. These awards vest on May 4, 2022. For Ms. Lubel and Ms. Piggott, this amount includes awards of restricted shares granted upon election to the date of the Annual Meeting.Board. The grant date fair value dollar amounts are computed in accordance with ASC Topic 718. The policy and assumptions made in the valuation of share-based payments are contained in Note 1213 of Item 8 of the 20182021 Annual Report. Messrs. Best, Biegler, Gafford, and Rock received their annual non-employee director equity grant from our Former Parent in May 2018. These awards were converted to Arcosa equity awards in connection with the Separation and are not reflected in this table.
(3)
As of December 31, 2018,2021, the directors had Arcosa restricted stock and restricted stock units totaling as follows: Messrs. Alvarado, 2,145;2,017; Best, 39,394; Biegler, 31,161;34,860; Craig, 2,145;2,017; Gafford, 29,561;25,106; Lindsay, 2,145;9,357; and Rock, 20,938;22,955; and Ms.Mses. Lubel, 1,198; Piggott, 984; and Trent, 2,145.5,805. In addition, Messrs. Best, Biegler, Gafford, and Rock held deferred restricted stock units of our Former Parent for which they received Arcosa deferred restricted stock units based on the same distribution ratio of one Arcosa share for every three shares of Trinity that the Trinity shareholders received. As of December 31, 2018,2021, these directors held the following restricted stock and deferred restricted stock units of our Former Parent: Messrs. Best, 73,936; Biegler, 73,242;69,970; Gafford, 73,242;69,276; and Rock, 50,795.
(4)
Represents for Mr. Biegler the above market earnings from the interest rate equivalent under the Director Deferred Plan. See “Director Compensation Discussion.”
(5)
For each of Messrs. Alvarado, Best, Biegler, Gafford, and Ms.Lindsay, and Mses. Lubel and Trent, includes a $5,000 matching contribution by the CompanyArcosa in his or her name pursuant to the Company’sArcosa’s program of matching charitable contributions. The maximum annual contribution that may be matched under that program is $5,000 per individual. Also includes dividend equivalents earned on phantom stock units for Messrs. Biegler, Gafford, Lindsay, and Rock.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4353


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

Director Compensation Discussion

Report of the Audit Committee

We are a standing committee comprised of independent directors as “independence” is currently defined by SEC regulations and the applicable listing standards of the NYSE. The following table sets forthBoard of Directors has determined that three of the componentsmembers of compensation for our non-employee directors (to be prorated based on actual service periods) approvedthe Audit Committee are “audit committee financial experts” as defined by applicable SEC rules. We operate under a written charter adopted by the Board.

Compensation Element
Amount
Annual Cash Retainer for Non-Employee Directors
$
70,000
 
Annual Equity Award for Non-Employee Directors(1)
$
130,000
 
Annual Cash Fees
 
 
 
Non-Executive Chair Fee(2)
$
100,000
 
Chair of Corporate Governance and Directors Nominating Committee
$
15,000
 
Chairs of Audit and Human Resources Committees
$
20,000
 
Other Cash Fees
 
 
 
Board and Committee meeting fee per meeting attended
$
2,000
 
Ad hoc or special assignment work performed for or at the request of the CEO, per diem
$
2,000
 
Board of Directors. A copy of the charter is available free of charge on Arcosa’s website at ir.arcosa.com under the heading “Corporate Governance — Board Committees & Charters— Arcosa Audit Committee Charter.”
We annually select Arcosa’s independent auditors. That recommendation is subject to ratification by Arcosa’s shareholders.
(1)Number of shares is based on the closing stock price on the date of grant. The annual equity award is granted following the annual meeting for continuing directors in the form of restricted stock units with one-year cliff vesting or deferred restricted stock units that vest in one year but remain deferred until a qualifying termination of service on the Board. Vested deferred restricted stock units will be settled in a lump sum or installments following termination of service on the Board in accordance with the elections previously made by the non-employee directors.
Management is responsible for Arcosa’s financial statements, internal controls and the financial reporting process. The independent auditors are responsible for performing an independent audit of Arcosa’s consolidated and combined financial statements in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and issuing a report thereon. As provided in our charter, our responsibilities include the monitoring and oversight of these processes.
(2)The Non-Executive Chair Fee may be paid, at the Chair’s election, in the form of cash or deferred restricted stock units.
Consistent with our charter responsibilities, we met and held discussions with management and the independent auditors. In this context, management and the independent auditors represented to us that Arcosa’s consolidated and combined financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 were prepared in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. We reviewed and discussed the consolidated and combined financial statements with management and the independent auditors and discussed with the independent auditors matters required to be discussed by Auditing Standard No. 1301, “Communications with Audit Committees,” issued by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”).

Non-employee directors may elect, pursuant

Arcosa’s independent auditors have also provided to us the written disclosures and the letter required by applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding the independent auditors’ communications with the Audit Committee, and we discussed with the independent auditors that firm’s independence. We also considered whether the provision of non-audit services is compatible with maintaining the independent auditors’ independence and concluded that such services have not impaired the auditors’ independence.
Based upon our reviews and discussions with management, Arcosa's internal auditors, and the independent auditors, and our review of the representation of management and the report of the independent auditors to the Director Deferred Plan, to defer the receipt of all or a specified portion of the cash retainers and fees to be paid to him or her. Deferred amounts are credited to an account on the books of the Company and treated as if invested either at an interest rate equivalent (5% in 2018) or, at the director’s prior election, in units (“phantom stock units”) of the Common Stock at the closing price on the NYSE on the last day of the quarter following the date that a payment is creditedAudit Committee, we recommended to the director’s account, or ifBoard of Directors that the last day ofaudited consolidated and combined financial statements be included in Arcosa’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the quarter is not a trading day, on the next succeeding trading day. The phantom stock units are settled only in cash. Phantom stock units are credited with amounts equivalent to dividends paid on the Common Stock. Upon a qualifying termination, the value of the account will be paid in cash to the director in annual installments not exceeding ten years according to the director’s prior election.

Fees deferred pursuant to the Director Deferred Plan are credited to the director’s account monthly. Fees that are not deferred pursuant to the Director Deferred Plan are paid in cash quarterly, in arrears.

Messrs. Carrillo, Biegler, Gafford, and Rock participated in our Former Parent’s deferred plan for director fees. In connectionyear ended December 31, 2021 filed with the Separation, amounts accumulated under this plan were transferred to Arcosa’s Director Deferred Plan.

To further align our non-employee directors’ and shareholders’ interests, we require that the directors hold shares of our Common Stock in an amount equal to five times the annual Board retainer within five years of becoming a director. Since all of our current directors have served for less than five years, they are not yet required to meet the stock ownership requirement.

Non-employee directors may also participate in the Company’s matching gift program on the same terms as our employees. Under the program, the Company matches contributions up to $5,000 per year, per director, to charitable organizations.

SEC.
Audit Committee
Douglas L. Rock, Chair
Jeffrey A. Craig
Melanie M. Trent
Julie A. Piggott
54
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 44


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

TRANSACTIONS WITH RELATED PERSONS

Review, Approval,Fees of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for Fiscal Years 2021 and Ratification2020

The following table presents fees for professional audit services rendered by Ernst & Young LLP (“Ernst & Young”) for the audits of TransactionsArcosa’s annual financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, and fees for other non-audit services rendered by Ernst & Young during the period.
2021
2020
Audit fees
$2,358,345
$2,104,465
Audit-related fees
46,614
107,200
Tax fees
100,000
93,000
Services rendered by Ernst & Young in connection with Related Persons

fees presented above were as follows:

Audit Fees
Audit fees include fees and out-of-pocket costs associated with the annual audit of Arcosa’s consolidated and combined financial statements; incremental audit procedures related to acquisitions (primarily Cherry Companies in 2020, and StonePoint Materials and Southwest Rock Products in 2021); incremental audit procedures related to new systems implementation; incremental audit procedures and consultation services related to SEC filings; and statutory audits in Mexico and Europe.
Audit-Related Fees
Audit related fees are for due diligence services and agreed upon services related to Arcosa's 401(k) plan, and the use of online research tools.
Tax Fees
Tax fees include fees for general tax consultations, general state and local tax advisory services, general federal and international tax advisory services, and tax advice related to the work opportunity tax credit.
Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policy and Procedures
The GovernanceAudit Committee has adopted a Policy and Procedurespolicy for the Review, Approval, and Ratification of Related Person Transactions. In accordance with the written policy, the Governance Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, is responsible for the review, approval, and ratificationpre-approval of all transactions with related persons that are requiredaudit and permissible non-audit services provided by Ernst & Young. These services may include audit services, audit-related services, tax services, and other services. Under this policy, pre-approval is generally provided for up to be disclosed underone year, and any pre-approval is detailed as to the rulesservices or category of services and includes an anticipated budget. In addition, the Audit Committee also may pre-approve services on a case-by-case basis. The Audit Committee has delegated pre-approval authority to the Chair of the SEC. UnderAudit Committee. Pursuant to this delegation, the policy, a related person includesChair must report any of the Company’s directors, executive officers, certain stockholders, and any of their respective immediate family members. The policy applies to Related Person Transactions which are transactions in which the Company participates, a related person has a direct or indirect material interest, and the amount exceeds $120,000. Under the policy, the Chief Legal Officer (the “CLO”) will review potential transactions and in consultation with the CEO and CFO will assess whether the proposed transaction would be a Related Person Transaction. If the CLO determines the proposed transaction would be a Related Person Transaction, the proposed transaction is submittedpre-approval decision to the GovernanceAudit Committee orat its first meeting after the chair of such committee, as applicable, for review and consideration. In reviewing Related Person Transactions, the Governance Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, shall consider all relevant facts and circumstances available, including, but not limited to the following:

the benefits to the Company of the Related Person Transaction;
the impact of a director’s independence if the related person is a director, an immediate family member of a director or an entity in which a director is a partner, stockholder or executive officer;
the availability of other sources for comparable products and services;
the terms of the transaction; and
the terms available to unrelated third parties or employees generally.

After reviewing such information, the Governance Committee, or the chair of such committee, as applicable, may approve the Related Person Transaction if the committee, or the chair of the committee, as applicable, concludes in good faith that the Related Person Transaction is in, or is not inconsistent with, the best interests of the Company and its stockholders.

Under the policy, the HR Committee must approve hiring of immediate family members of executive officers or directors and any subsequent material changes in employment or compensation.

Agreements with Our Former Parent

On October 31, 2018, we entered into definitive agreements with our Former Parent that, among other things,pre-approval was obtained. All services set forth in the terms and conditions oftable above were pre-approved by the Separation of us from our Former Parent and provides a framework for our relationship with our Former Parent after the Separation, including the allocation between us and our Former Parent of our respective assets, liabilities and obligations attributable to periods prior to, at and after the Separation.

Separation and Distribution Agreement

We entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement with our Former Parent that sets forth, among other things, the agreements between us and our Former Parent regarding the principal transactions necessary to effect the Separation. It also sets forth other agreements that govern certain aspects of our ongoing relationship with our Former Parent following the Separation.

Transition Services Agreement

We entered into a Transition Services Agreement with our Former Parent pursuant to which each party will provide the other party with various services, including services relating to human resources, benefits administration, payroll, technology and information technology, for a transition period of up to eighteen months (which may be extended in certain circumstances) following the Separation. The charges for such services are generally intended to allow the

Audit Committee before being rendered.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4555


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

service provider

Proposal Three
Ratification of the Appointment of
Ernst & Young LLP
The Audit Committee has appointed Ernst & Young as the independent registered public accounting firm of Arcosa for the year ending December 31, 2022. Although the Amended and Restated Bylaws do not require that we seek shareholder ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young as our independent registered public accounting firm, we are doing so as a matter of good corporate governance. If the shareholders do not ratify the appointment, the Audit Committee will reconsider whether or not to recover all ofretain Ernst & Young. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee in its direct and indirect costs, generally without profit. For services performed in 2018 followingdiscretion may change the Separation, we owe our Former Parent approximately $0.3 million, net of fees owed by our Former Parent to us, underappointment at any time during the Transition Services Agreement.

Tax Matters Agreement

We entered intoyear if it determines that a Tax Matters Agreement with our Former Parent, which governs each party’s respective rights, responsibilities and obligations after the Separation with respect to tax liabilities and benefits (including taxes arisingchange would be in the ordinary coursebest interests of businessArcosa and taxes,its shareholders.

Arcosa has been advised by Ernst & Young that the firm has no relationship with Arcosa or its subsidiaries other than that arising from the firm’s engagement as auditors, tax advisors, and consultants.
Arcosa has also been advised that representatives of Ernst & Young will be present at the Annual Meeting where they will have an opportunity to make a statement if any, incurred as a result of any failure of the Separation or certain related transactionsthey desire to qualify for tax-free treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes), tax attributes, the preparationdo so and filing of tax returns, the control of audits and other tax proceedings and other matters regarding taxes.

Employee Matters Agreement

We entered into an Employee Matters Agreement with our Former Parent which, among other things, governs the parties’ and their respective subsidiaries’ and affiliates’ rights, responsibilities, and obligations after the Separation with respectwill be available to the following matters: (i) employees and former employees (and their respective dependents and beneficiaries) who are or were employed with either party or their respective subsidiaries or affiliates; (ii) the allocation of assets and liabilities generally relatingrespond to employees, employment or service-related matters and employee benefit plans; (iii) employee compensation plans and director compensation plans, including equity plans; and (iv) other human resources, employment, and employee benefits matters.

Intellectual Property Matters Agreement

We entered into an Intellectual Property Matters Agreement with our Former Parent, under which our Former Parent licenses certain intellectual property to us, and we license certain intellectual property to our Former Parent. The licenses are perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully paid-up, worldwide licenses, in connection with the current and future operation of the businesses, subject to certain limitations.

Supply Agreements and Other Commercial Arrangements

We entered into in the ordinary course of our business certain supply agreements and other commercial arrangements with our Former Parent. See Note 1 to the Notes to Financial Statements in our 2018 Annual Report for amounts subject to transactions with our Former Parent for purchases or sales of products and services.

appropriate questions.
"FOR"
The Board of Directors recommends that you vote FOR ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2022.
56
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 46


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

SECURITY OWNERSHIP

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

The following table presents the beneficial ownership of the Company’sArcosa’s Common Stock as of March 11, 2019, except as noted14, 2022 for (i) each person beneficially owning more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the Company’sArcosa’s Common Stock, (ii) each director and nominee for director of the Company,Arcosa, (iii) each executive officer of the CompanyArcosa listed in the Summary Compensation Table, and (iv) all of the Company’sArcosa’s directors and executive officers as a group. Except pursuant to applicable community property laws and except as otherwise indicated, each stockholdershareholder possesses sole voting and investment power with respect to its, his or her shares. The business address of each of the Company’sArcosa’s directors and executive officers is c/o Arcosa, Inc., 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201.

Name
Amount and Nature of
Ownership of
Common Stock(1)
Percent of
Class(2)
Directors:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Joseph Alvarado
 
2,145
 
 
 
*
Rhys J. Best
 
39,394
 
 
 
*
David W. Biegler
 
31,161
 
 
 
*
Jeffrey A. Craig
 
2,145
 
 
 
*
Ronald J. Gafford
 
29,561
 
 
 
*
John W. Lindsay
 
2,145
 
 
 
*
Douglas L. Rock
 
20,938
 
 
 
*
Melanie Trent
 
2,145
 
 
 
*
Named Executive Officers:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Antonio Carrillo
 
17,402
 
 
 
*
Scott C. Beasley
 
11,459
 
 
 
*
Kerry S. Cole
 
10,475
 
 
 
*
Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
 
2,839
 
 
 
*
Reid S. Essl
 
8,552
 
 
 
*
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (14 persons):
 
181,461
 
 
 
*
Other 5% Owners:
 
 
 
 
 
 
ValueAct Capital
 
7,135,963
(3) 
 
14.7
%(3)
The Vanguard Group
 
4,375,587
(4) 
 
9.0
%
BlackRock, Inc.
 
5,782,344
(5) 
 
11.9
%
Name
Amount and Nature of
Ownership of
Common Stock(1)
Percent of
Class(2)
Directors:
​Joseph Alvarado
11,502
*
​Rhys J. Best
50,934
*
​Jeffrey A. Craig
11,502
*
​Ronald J. Gafford
25,106
*
​John W. Lindsay
11,502
*
​Kimberly S. Lubel
1,198
​Julie A. Piggott
984
​Douglas L. Rock
30,295
*
​Melanie M. Trent
11,502
*
Named Executive Officers:
​Antonio Carrillo
129,692
*
​Gail M. Peck
26,778
​Kerry S. Cole
13,522
*
​Jesse E. Collins, Jr.
6,720
*
​Reid S. Essl
23,617
*
​Bryan P. Stevenson
13,844
*
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (15 persons):
368,698
*
Other 5% Owners:
Capital International Investors
3,770,534(3)
7.8%
The Vanguard Group
5,159,686(4)
10.7%
BlackRock, Inc.
7,637,028(5)
15.8%
*
Less than one percent (1%)
(1)
Unless otherwise noted, all shares are owned directly, and the owner has the right to vote the shares, except for shares that officers and directors have the right to acquire through restricted stock units held as of March 11, 2019,14, 2022, or within 60 days thereafter, as follows: Best, 23,320; Biegler, 23,089;32,843; Carrillo, 5,736; Gafford, 23,089; Lindsay, 9,357; Rock, 20,938; Trent, 5,805; and all directors and executive officers as a group, 96,17297,768 shares. At March 11, 2019,14, 2022, no directors or executive officers had any shares pledged as security.
(2)
Percentage ownership is based on number of shares of Common Stock outstanding as of March 11, 2019.14, 2022.
(3)
(3)ValueAct Capital and its affiliates, One Letterman Drive, Building D, Fourth Floor, San Francisco,International Investors, 333 South Hope Street, 55th Fl., Los Angeles, CA 94129,90071, reported to the SEC on a Schedule 13D13G filed on November 13, 2018,February 11, 2022, that they had sharedit has sole voting power over 2,717,341 shares, and sharedsole dispositive power over 7,135,9633,770,534 shares. On March 14, 2019, ValueAct Capital reported to the SEC on a Form 4 the sale on March 12, 2019 of 1,395,000 shares of the Common Stock and reported on Amendment No. 1 to Schedule 13D that as of March 12, 2019, it has shared voting and shared dispositive power over 5,740,963 shares, representing 11.8% of ownership of the Common Stock.
(4)
The Vanguard Group and its subsidiaries, 100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA 19355, reported to the SEC on an amendment to Schedule 13G filed on February 11, 2019,9, 2022, that they have sole voting power over 22,106 shares, shared voting power over 5,90040,685 shares, sole dispositive power over 4,351,4335,076,492 shares, and shared dispositive power over 24,15483,194 shares.
(5)
BlackRock, Inc. and its affiliates, 55 East 52nd52nd Street, New York, NY 10055, reported to the SEC on an Amendment to Schedule 13G filed January 24, 2019,27, 2022, that they have sole voting power over 5,588,3697,535,889 shares and sole dispositive power over 5,782,3447,637,028 shares.
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4757


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, requires the Company’s executive officers, directors, and persons who own more than ten percent of the Company’s Common Stock to file initial reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC.

Additionally, SEC regulations require that the Company identify any individuals for whom one of the referenced reports was not filed on a timely basis during the most recent fiscal year. To the Company’s knowledge, based on a review of reports furnished to it and written representations from reporting persons, each individual who was required to file such reports complied with the applicable filing requirements during 2018.

StockholderShareholder Proposals for the 20202023 Proxy Statement

Stockholder

Shareholder proposals to be presented at the 20202023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders,Shareholders, for inclusion in the Company’sArcosa’s proxy statement and form of proxy relating to the meeting pursuant to SEC Rule 14a-8, must be received by the CompanyArcosa at its offices in Dallas, Texas, addressed to the Corporate Secretary of the Company,Arcosa, no later than November 27, 2019.22, 2022. Upon timely receipt of any such proposal, the CompanyArcosa will determine whether or not to include such proposal in the proxy statement and proxy in accordance with applicable regulations and provisions governing the solicitation of proxies.

Director Nominations or Other Business for Presentation at the 20202023 Annual Meeting

Our Bylaws establish advance notice procedures with regard to director nominations and stockholdershareholder proposals that are not submitted for inclusion in the proxy statement, but that a stockholdershareholder instead wishes to present directly at an annual meeting. These procedures provide, generally, that stockholdersshareholders desiring to place in nomination persons for directors and/or bring a proper subject of business before an annual meeting must do so by a written notice timely received (on or before February 7, 2020,2, 2023, but no earlier than January 8, 2020,3, 2023, for the 20202023 Annual Meeting)Meeting of Shareholders) to the Corporate Secretary of the Company. StockholdersArcosa. Shareholders should review the specific procedures set forth in the Bylaws regarding the exact information required. Copies of the Company’s Bylaws are available from the Company’s Corporate Secretary at Arcosa, Inc., 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75201.

Annual Report on Form 10-K

The Company

Arcosa will provide by mail, without charge, a copy of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20182021 (not including exhibits and documents incorporated by reference), the Proxy Statement for this Annual Meeting, and the annual report and proxy materials for future annual meetings (once available) at your request. Please direct all requests to Yuki P. Whitmire,Mark J. Elmore, Associate General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Arcosa, Inc., 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, Texas 75201. These materials also are available, free of charge, on our website at www.arcosa.comir.arcosa.com or at the website of the SEC at www.sec.gov.

58
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 48


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
Questions and Answers About the Meeting
Voting and Questions During the Annual Meeting of Shareholders
Shareholders may vote their shares electronically online during the Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

If you choose to vote your shares online during the meeting, please follow the instructions posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/ACA2022. You will need the 16-digit control number included on your proxy card or voting instruction form. Voting electronically online during the Annual Meeting will replace any previous votes. Shareholders may submit pertinent questions prior to or during the meeting, and questions will be answered during the meeting, subject to time constraints. For more information on how to submit pertinent questions, please follow the instructions posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/ACA2022.
Whether or not you plan to attend the virtual meeting, we encourage you to vote by proxy as soon as possible. Your shares will be voted in accordance with your instructions.
Who is entitled to vote and how many votes do I have?
The outstanding voting securities of Arcosa consist of shares of common stock, $0.01 par value per share (“Common Stock”). The record date for the determination of the shareholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting, or any postponement or adjournment thereof, has been established by the Board of Directors as the close of business on March 14, 2022. At that date, 48,312,860 shares of Common Stock were outstanding and entitled to be voted. A holder of Common Stock will be entitled to one vote per share on each matter properly brought before the Annual Meeting.
Why did I receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials?
In order to both save money and protect the environment, we have elected to provide access to our proxy materials and Annual Report to Shareholders for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021 (“2021 Annual Report”) on the Internet, instead of mailing the full set of printed proxy materials, in accordance with the rules of the SEC for the electronic distribution of proxy materials. Proxy materials or a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (the “Notice”) are being first released or mailed to shareholders on or about March 22, 2022. If you received a Notice by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials in the mail unless you request it. Instead, the Notice instructs you on how to obtain and review all of the important information contained in the Proxy Statement and Annual Report. The Notice also instructs you on how to submit your proxy over the Internet. If you received a Notice by mail and would like to receive a printed copy of our proxy materials, you should follow the instructions for requesting such materials included in the Notice.
What is the difference between holding shares as a shareholder of record and as a beneficial owner of shares?
Shareholder of Record or Registered Shareholder. If your shares of Common Stock are registered directly in your name with our transfer agent, you are considered a “shareholder of record” or a “registered shareholder” of those shares.
Beneficial Owner of Shares. If your shares are held in an account at a bank, brokerage firm, or other similar organization, then you are a beneficial owner of shares held in “street name.” In that case, you will have received these proxy materials from the bank, brokerage firm, or other similar organization holding your account and, as a beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your bank, brokerage firm, or similar organization as to how to vote the shares held in your account.
59

TABLE OF CONTENTSOTHER BUSINESS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
How do I vote if I am a shareholder of record?
In Advance by Telephone or Internet. All shareholders of record can vote by telephone using the toll-free telephone number on the Notice or proxy card, or via the Internet at www.proxyvote.com, and using the procedures and instructions described on the Notice or proxy card. You will need the 16-digit control number provided in your proxy materials.
In Advance by Written Proxy. If you are a shareholder of record and receive a Notice card, you may request a written proxy card by following the instructions included in the Notice.
Virtually During the Meeting. All shareholders of record may vote by attending the meeting virtually at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/ACA2022.
Whether or not you plan to attend the meeting, we encourage you to vote by proxy as soon as possible. Your shares will be voted in accordance with your instructions.
How do I vote if I am a beneficial owner of shares?
As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker on how to vote the shares in your account. Your broker should give you instructions for voting your shares by Internet, telephone or mail. As a beneficial owner, you are invited to virtually attend the Annual Meeting, but you may not vote your shares at the Annual Meeting unless you request and obtain a valid legal proxy from your broker giving you the legal right to vote the shares virtually during the Annual Meeting.
Who will vote my shares during the Annual Meeting and how will they vote my shares if I provide voting instructions and/or grant my proxy?
The persons named as proxies in the proxy card or electronic voting form will vote your shares according to your instructions. If you sign and return your proxy card but do not make any of the selections, the named proxies will vote your shares: (i) FOR election of the director nominees as set forth in this Proxy Statement; (ii) FOR approval, on an advisory basis, of the compensation of Arcosa’s named executive officers as disclosed in these materials; and (iii) FOR ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of Arcosa for the year ending December 31, 2022.
What is a Broker Non-Vote?
A “broker non-vote” occurs when a broker submits a proxy for the meeting with respect to a discretionary, or routine, matter but does not have the authority to vote on non-discretionary matters because the beneficial owner did not provide voting instructions on those matters.
Under NYSE rules, the proposal to ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2022 (Proposal 3) is considered a “discretionary” or “routine” item. This means that brokerage firms may vote in their discretion on behalf of clients (beneficial owners) who have not furnished voting instructions. In contrast, all of the other proposals set forth in this Proxy Statement are “non-discretionary” or “non-routine” items—brokerage firms that have not received voting instructions from their clients on these matters may not vote on these proposals.
Can I change or revoke my vote?
If you are a registered shareholder, any subsequent vote you cast will replace your earlier vote. This applies whether you cast your vote by executing a proxy card bearing a later date, vote by telephone or Internet, or by virtually attending the Annual Meeting and submitting your vote virtually during the Annual Meeting. The proxy may be revoked at any time before it is exercised by filing with Arcosa a written revocation addressed to the Corporate Secretary.
60

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
If you hold your shares in street name, you must contact your broker, bank, or other nominee for specific instructions on how to change or revoke your vote.
What constitutes a “quorum” for the meeting?
The presence, in person or by proxy, of the holders of record of a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at the Annual Meeting, but if a quorum should not be present, the meeting may be adjourned from time to time until a quorum is obtained.
What is the voting requirement to approve each of the proposals, and how are votes counted?
Proposal
Description
Votes Required for Approval
Effect of Abstention
1
Election of Nominated Directors
Affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast for the election of directors during the virtual Annual Meeting
An abstention will not count as a vote cast and therefore will not affect the outcome of the vote.

An incumbent director nominee who is not elected is required to tender his or her resignation, which will be accepted or rejected by the Board as more fully described in “Proposal 1 - Election of Nominated Directors.”
2
Advisory vote to approve named executive officer compensation
Affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on the subject matter
An abstention will effectively count as a vote cast against this proposal.
3
Ratification of Ernst & Young LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2022
Affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on the subject matter
An abstention will effectively count as a vote cast against this proposal.
Cumulative voting is not permitted in the election of directors. Shares of a shareholder who abstains from voting on any or all proposals will be included for the purpose of determining the presence of a quorum. Broker non-votes on any matter, as to which the broker has indicated on the proxy that it does not have discretionary authority to vote, will be treated as votes not cast or as shares not entitled to vote with respect to that matter and will not affect the outcome of the vote. However, such shares will be considered present and entitled to vote for quorum purposes so long as they are entitled to vote on at least one other matter.
Who pays for the solicitation of proxies?
The cost of soliciting proxies will be borne by Arcosa. In addition to the use of postal services or the Internet, proxies may be solicited by directors, officers, and employees of Arcosa (none of whom will receive any additional compensation for any assistance they may provide in the solicitation of proxies) in person or by telephone. Arcosa has hired Georgeson, Inc. to assist in the solicitation of proxies at an estimated cost of $12,500 plus expenses.
What does it mean if I receive more than one Notice, proxy card, or voting instructions?
This means that you have multiple accounts in which you own our Common Stock. Please vote all Notices, proxy cards, or voting instructions from us to ensure that all of your shares of Common Stock are voted.
61

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
What is “householding”?
In order to reduce expenses, we are taking advantage of certain SEC rules, commonly known as “householding,” that permit us to deliver, in certain cases, only one Notice, Annual Report, or Proxy Statement, as applicable, to multiple shareholders sharing the same address, unless we have received contrary instructions from one or more of the shareholders. If you received a householded mailing this year and would like to have additional copies of the Notice, Annual Report, Proxy Statement, or other proxy materials sent to you, please submit your request directed to our Corporate Secretary, Arcosa, Inc., 500 N. Akard St., Suite 400, Dallas, TX 75201, or by telephone at 972-942-6500. If you hold your stock in street name, you may revoke your consent to householding at any time by notifying your broker.
If you are currently a shareholder sharing an address with another of our shareholders and wish to have your future proxy statements and annual reports householded, or your materials are currently householded and you would prefer to receive separate materials in the future, please contact our Corporate Secretary at the above address or telephone number.
62

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
OTHER BUSINESS
Management of the CompanyArcosa is not aware of other business to be presented for action at the Annual Meeting; however, if other matters are properly presented for action at the meeting, it is the intention of the persons named as proxies in the proxy card or electronic voting form to vote in accordance with their judgment on such matters.

By Order of the Board of Directors,


YUKI P. WHITMIRE

Mark J. ELMORE
Associate General Counsel and Corporate Secretary

March 26, 2019

22, 2022
2019 PROXY STATEMENT | 4963


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

ANNEX A
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP

Financial Measures
This Proxy Statement contains financial measures that have not been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). This non-GAAP financial information is provided as supplemental information for investors and is not in accordance with, or an alternative to, GAAP. Additionally, these non-GAAP measures may be different than similar measures used by other companies.
Reconciliations of each of the non-GAAP financial measures to the closest GAAP measure are set forth in the tables below.
ENTERPRISE ADJUSTED EBITDA
($ in millions)
“Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA” is defined solely for purposes of this Proxy as enterprise operating income (loss) from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, depreciation, depletion, and amortization, extraordinary adjustments to asset values (gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gains or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, any changes to federal, state, or local tax laws that impact the Company's tax liability, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate. GAAP does not define Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA and it should not be considered as alternatives to earnings measures defined by GAAP, including net income. We use Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA in this Proxy to assess the operating performance of our consolidated business, as a metric for incentive-based compensation, and as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting as we believe that it closely correlates to long-term shareholder value. As a widely used metric by analysts, investors, and competitors in our industry, we believe Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA also assists investors in comparing a company's performance on a consistent basis without regard to depreciation, depletion, amortization, and other items which can vary significantly depending on many factors.
Year Ended
December 31,
2021
2020
2019
Revenues
$2,036.4
$ 1,935.6
$ 1,736.9
Net income
69.6
106.6
113.3
Add:
Interest expense, net
23.4
10.2
5.4
Provision for income taxes
14.0
31.6
33.5
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization expense(1)
144.3
114.5
85.8
Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
20.1
10.3
2.0
Impairment charge
2.9
7.1
Legal settlement
8.7
Other, net (income) expense(3)
0.3
3.4
0.7
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
$283.3
$283.7
$240.7
(1)
Includes the impact of the fair value markup of acquired long-lived assets, subject to final purchase price adjustments.

64

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three

(2)
Expenses associated with acquisitions, including the cost impact of the fair value markup of acquired inventory, advisory and professional fees, integration, and other transaction costs.
(3)
Included in Other, net (income) expense was the impact of foreign currency exchange transactions of $0.6 million, $3.6 million, and $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, 2020, and 2019 respectively.
ADJUSTED SEGMENT EBITDA

($ in millions)
“Segment EBITDA” is defined as segment operating profit plus depreciation, depletion, and amortization. “Adjusted Segment EBITDA” is defined solely for the purpose of this Proxy as Segment EBITDA adjusted for certain items that are not reflective of the normal earnings of our business. GAAP does not define Segment EBITDA or Adjusted Segment EBITDA and they should not be considered as alternatives to earnings measures defined by GAAP, including segment operating profit. We use Adjusted Segment EBITDA in this Proxy to assess the operating performance of our businesses, and as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting as we believe that it closely correlates to long-term shareholder value. As a widely used metric by analysts, investors, and competitors in our industry we believe Adjusted Segment EBITDA also assists investors in comparing a company's performance on a consistent basis without regard to depreciation, depletion, amortization, and other items, which can vary significantly depending on many factors.
Year Ended
December 31,
2021
2020
2019
Construction Products
Revenues
$ 796.8
$ 593.6
$ 439.7
Operating Profit
83.2
74.7
52.7
Add: Depreciation, depletion, and amortization expense(1)
88.7
60.1
38.0
Segment EBITDA
171.9
134.8
90.7
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
7.6
2.9
1.4
Add: Impairment charge
0.8
Adjusted Segment EBITDA
$ 179.5
$ 138.5
$92.1
Adjusted Segment EBITDA margin
22.5 %
23.3 %
20.9 %
Engineered Structures
Revenues
$ 934.1
$ 877.7
$ 836.6
Operating Profit
88.0
80.2
100.7
Add: Depreciation and amortization expense(1)
33.1
31.5
27.9
Segment EBITDA
121.1
111.7
128.6
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
1.0
2.8
Add: Impairment charge
2.9
1.3
Adjusted Segment EBITDA
$ 125.0
$115.8
$ 128.6
Adjusted Segment EBITDA margin
13.4 %
13.2 %
15.4 %
Transportation Products
Revenues
$ 305.6
$ 466.5
$ 465.7
Operating Profit
6.4
54.6
46.8
Add: Depreciation and amortization expense
17.8
18.0
16.3
Segment EBITDA
24.2
72.6
63.1
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
0.6
Add: Impairment charge
5.0
Adjusted Segment EBITDA
$24.2
��
$77.6
$63.7
Adjusted Segment EBITDA margin
7.9 %
16.6 %
13.7 %
Operating Loss - Corporate
(70.3)
(57.7)
(47.3)
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses - Corporate(2)
11.5
4.6
Add: Legal settlement
8.7
Add: Corporate depreciation expense
4.7
4.9
3.6
Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
$ 283.3
$ 283.7
$ 240.7

65

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
(1)
Includes the impact of the fair value markup of acquired long-lived assets, subject to final purchase price adjustments.
(2)
Expenses associated with acquisitions, including the cost impact of the fair value markup of acquired inventory, advisory and professional fees, integration, and other transaction costs.
GROUP ADJUSTED EBITDA
($ in millions)
“Group Adjusted EBITDA” is defined is defined solely for purposes of this Proxy as group operating income (loss) from continuing operations before interest, income taxes, depreciation, depletion, and amortization, extraordinary adjustments to asset values (gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gains or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, any changes to federal, state or local tax laws that impact the Company's tax liability, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate. GAAP does not define Group Adjusted EBITDA and it should not be considered as alternatives to earnings measures defined by GAAP, including operating profit. We use Group Adjusted EBITDA in this Proxy as a metric for incentive-based compensation.
Year Ended
December 31,
2021
Kerry Cole Group
Operating Profit
73.1
Add: Depreciation and amortization expense
29.1
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
1.0
Add: Impairment charge
2.9
Group Adjusted EBITDA
106.1
Jesse Collins Group
Operating Profit
28.5
Add: Depreciation and amortization expense
19.2
Group Adjusted EBITDA
47.7
Reid Essl Group
Operating Profit
67.3
Add: Depreciation, depletion, and amortization expense(1)
85.6
Add: Impact of acquisition-related expenses(2)
7.6
Group Adjusted EBITDA
160.5
(1)
Includes the impact of the fair value markup of acquired long-lived assets, subject to final purchase price adjustments.
(2)
Expenses associated with acquisitions, including the cost impact of the fair value markup of acquired inventory, advisory and professional fees, integration, and other transaction costs.
66

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
PRE-TAX RETURN ON CAPITAL
($ in millions)
“Pre-tax Return on Capital” is defined solely for purposes of this Proxy as Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA (as defined above) divided by ((Current Assets – Current Liabilities + Current Portion of Long-Term Debt) + Net Plant, Property and Equipment). Balance Sheet items will be calculated using an average of 5 points (Beginning of Q1, End of Q1, End of Q2, End of Q3, End of Q4). GAAP does not define Pre-tax Return on Capital and it should not be considered as alternatives to earnings measures defined by GAAP, including operating profit and net income. We use Pre-tax Return on Capital in this Proxy to assess the operating returns of our business, as a metric for incentive-based compensation, and as a basis for strategic planning and forecasting as we believe that it closely correlates to long-term shareholder value.
As of
December 31,
2020
March 31,
2021
June 30,
2021
September 30,
2021
December 31,
2021
Current assets
$664.9
$697.8
$784.0
$810.9
$767.9
Property, plant, and equipment, net
913.3
905.2
1,206.7
1,273.0
1,201.9
Current liabilities
(310.3)
(312.2)
(353.0)
(389.4)
(364.0)
Current portion of long-term debt
6.3
5.8
8.8
12.0
14.8
​$ 1,274.2
$ 1,296.6
$ 1,646.5
$ 1,706.5
$ 1,620.6

5-quarter average
$ 1,508.9
Trailing twelve month Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
​$283.3
Pre-tax Return on Capital
18.8%
As of
December 31,
2019
March 31,
2020
June 30,
2020
September 30,
2020
December 31,
2020
Current assets
$757.2
$772.0
$705.9
$740.6
$664.9
Property, plant, and equipment, net
816.2
891.7
892.7
894.8
913.3
Current liabilities
(284.0)
(279.0)
(285.9)
(312.2)
(310.3)
Current portion of long-term debt
3.7
4.6
4.5
4.2
6.3
​$ 1,293.1
$ 1,389.3
$ 1,317.2
$ 1,327.4
$ 1,274.2

5-quarter average
$ 1,320.2
Trailing twelve month Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
​$283.7
Pre-tax Return on Capital
21.5%
67

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Proxy Summary
Director Nominees
Proposal One
Corporate Governance
Exec. Compensation
Proposal Two
Proposal Three
As of
December 31,
2018
March 31,
2019
June 30,
2019
September 30,
2019
December 31,
2019
Current assets
$667.0
$617.8
$622.9
$674.4
$757.2
Property, plant, and equipment, net
803.0
801.9
814.3
815.0
816.2
Current liabilities
(234.2)
(245.8)
(203.1)
(223.8)
(284.0)
Current portion of long-term debt
1.8
1.8
1.1
1.1
3.7
​$ 1,237.6
$ 1,175.7
$ 1,235.2
$ 1,266.7
$ 1,293.1

5-quarter average
$ 1,241.7
Trailing twelve month Enterprise Adjusted EBITDA
​$240.7
Pre-tax Return on Capital
19.4%
ADJUSTED EPS
“Adjusted Earnings Per Share” or “Adjusted EPS” is defined solely for purposes of this Proxy as reported diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations before extraordinary adjustments to asset values (gains or losses), asset impairment charges, material restructuring/reorganization expenses, gains or losses on extraordinary dispositions, gain or losses from currency translation adjustments, acquisition-related gains or expenses (including transaction expenses and purchase price accounting adjustments), the impact of changes in accounting rules, in each case as approved by the HR Committee, and any other adjustments the HR Committee deems appropriate. GAAP does not define “Adjusted EPS” and it should not be considered as an alternative to earnings measures defined by GAAP, including diluted EPS. We use this metric in this Proxy to assess the operating performance of our consolidated business and as a metric for incentive-based compensation. We adjust diluted EPS for certain items that are not reflective of the normal operations of our business to provide investors with what we believe is a more consistent comparison of earnings performance from period to period.
Year Ended
December 31,
2021
2020
2019
Diluted EPS
$ 1.42
$ 2.18
$ 2.32
Impact of acquisition-related expenses
0.32
0.16
0.03
Impairment charge
0.05
0.11
Legal settlement
0.14
Adjusted EPS
$ 1.93
$ 2.45
$ 2.35
68