NDOR Partnering Workshop November 6, 2014 Tom Kellogg ACEC/N NDOR Partnering Committee Chair Rob Brigham ACEC/N President 5,179 Independent Engineering Companies 350,000+ Employees Responsible for more than $200 Billion of private and public works annually Devoted exclusively to the business and advocacy interests of engineering companies ACEC Top Challenges Infrastructure Funding Contracting Out Regulatory Burdens ACEC Advocacy Gains Passed WRRDA – expands QBS (in SRF); COE contracting out Restored short term solvency to Highway Trust Fund to 6/15 Killed FHWA “Excessive Cost” Recovery Strengthened engineering exemption in SEC Municipal Advisor rule Protected cash accounting ACEC Advocacy Challenges Infrastructure Funding - Achieving bipartisan consensus for strong federal funding; leveraging private investment Contracting Out - Building on advances in WRRDA; MAP-21 incentive language; completion of national study Unreasonable Liability - Shielding A/E from assuming owner and contractor risk, in legislation, court rulings Unreasonable Regulations - Mitigating new labor, environmental, health care mandates, SEC rules, other regulatory threats ACEC Nebraska Board of Directors Rob Brigham, Brigham President, JEO Consulting Group Steve Kathol, Past President, Schemmer Associates Jeff Sockel, President Elect, Alfred Benesch & Co Terry Atkins, Atkins Treasurer, Lamp, Rynearson & Associates Nate Maniktala, Maniktala Secretary, ME Group Jack Baker, National Director, Baker & Associates Craig Hunter, Hunter State Director, HDR Engineering Michael Olson, State Director, Kirkham Michael Steve Moffitt, Moffitt State Director, HGM Mike Piernicky, Piernicky State Director, Olsson Associates Randy Peters Joe Werning Director State Engineer Nebraska Division Administrator ACEC Annual Workshop Cornhusker Marriott Randall D. Peters November 7, 2014 Thanks partners • • • • • • • Contractors Chambers of Commerce Consulting engineers Federal Highway Administration Local Public Agencies Other state agencies NDOR workers NDOR Strategic Goals • • • • Enhance Safety Manage Assets Deliver projects Strengthen partnerships NDOR Strategic Goals • • • • Improve mobility Sustain environment Develop the workforce Be fiscally accountable NDOR Construction Program • Stable, but short of the mark • Entering Build Nebraska Act era Construction Program Size • • • • • FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 $316 $343 $372 S431 $457 + 8.5 % + 8.5 % + 16 % + 6.0 % Budget Facts • • • • $ 389 Million state appropriation $ 280 Million federal appropriation $ 457 Million program 153 New projects Build Nebraska Act • • • • • • One quarter cent sales tax to roads 85 % to NDOR, 15% to cities and counties Begins July 1,2013 and lasts 20 years Estimated $ 60 million/year to NDOR Estimated $ 10 million/year to locals Minimum 25 % of NDORs revenues to be spent on completing the 600 mile expwy Build Nebraska Act Tier 1 • • • • • • Hwy 133, Blair to Omaha Hwy 10, Kearney East Bypass, Phase 2 & 3 Hwy 77, Wahoo Bypass I-80, 126th to 96th, Omaha I-80, 60th to 24th, Omaha I-680, Center to Pacific Street, Omaha Build Nebraska Act Tier 2 • Hwy 30, Schuyler to Fremont • Hwy 75, Plattsmouth to Bellevue (N. of Platte) • Heartland Expressway (Hwy 385, L62A to Alliance) • I-80, NW 56th to Hwy 77, Lincoln • Hwy 75, Nebraska City SE Interchange • Hwy 6, Hastings Southeast Nation at a Crossroads MAP-21 • • • • Program Consolidation Environmental Streamlining Performance Measures Emphasis on Freight Federal Program Status • Map 21 Expired October 1,2014 • Apportionments (contract authority) extended thru May 31, 2015 • Obligation limitation extended thru Dec 11, 2014 • Money was infused from the General Fund to make the HTF solvent. NDOR/FHWA Partnership • Revising the NDOR/FHWA programmatic agreement for CE • Using the new programmatic agreement and standardized processes to make delivering CE’s more efficient, predictable and complete. Greg Wood Construction Division Project Coordinator Construction Engineering Lessons Learned Mike Hughes The Evolution of Cooperation THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION American Council of Engineering Companies November 6, 2014 Michael Hughes Hughes Collaboration www.hughes-collaboration.com 303-941-8010 THE PRISONERS’ DILEMMA Read the instructions Develop your strategy – not only for one pairing; for multiple pairings What you gain the most points for you (and only for you)? NO communication other than X or Y Highest total wins The Prisoners’ Dilemma What was your strategy? What do you think the moral of this story might be? Having played this out… The Prisoners’ Dilemma Cooperate Cooperate + 10 Compete - 10 + 10 Compete + 10 + 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 The Mathematical Proof Start cooperatively Be provocable Be forgiving Keep your strategy simple Send conciliatory signals Eliminate envy Alexrod’s Lesson The Power of Reciprocity Negative Patterns are Self-Reinforcing Positive Patterns are Self-Reinforcing The Shadow of the Future The Greater the Interdependence, and the Longer it Lasts, the More Likely it is that we Move Toward Cooperation Questions NDOR Partnering Workshop Will Sharp HDR Troy Jerman Iowa DOT Program Management Approach to Deliver the Council Bluffs Interstate System PROGRAM OVERVIEW PROGRAM OVERVIEW » Reconstructing I-80/29/480 » 18 miles of interstate » Segment and multiple projects approach PROGRAM NEED » Does not meet current interstate design standards » System does not accommodate traffic needs WHY PROGRAM MANAGEMENT APPROACH? » Program magnitude » Limited resources to implement program work » Proactive budget and schedule management » Wanted access to new tools & technologies » Effective Communication across program PROGRAM APPROACH ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS CURRENT FUNDING / CONTRACTING ALTERNATIVES FUNDING FOR ACTIVE PROJECTS Iowa DOT’s Statewide Top Priority CONTRACTING SCENARIOS PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING SPECIFICATION PREVIOUS CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION » Schedule format was not specified (i.e. hand drawn, Excel, MS Project) » No requirement of Project Critical Path » No requirement for Resource Loaded Schedule CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING SPECIFICATION CURRENT CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION » Resource Loaded Schedule with clear Critical Path required in Primavera » AGC coordination in development of spec » Base Schedule and Monthly Updates » Training in Primavera CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULING SPECIFICATION SCHEDULING SPEC RESULTS TO DATE » Spec implemented on two projects ($101M total) to date » Integral to Construction Progress Reporting » Enables field staff to focus on critical path project activities » Provides Owner confidence in milestone dates (major traffic shifts, major interim completion dates) » Mixed reviews – Contractors - DOT open to spec modifications PROGRAM MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM PROGRESS REPORTING PROGRESS REPORTING TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE MONITORING » Transportation Management Plans » Purpose – Safety, Traffic Flow, Minimize Impacts » Use – Design Through Construction » Elements –Speeds, Lane Widths, Incident Management, Work Restrictions, Closure Periods, Performance Criteria TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE MONITORING TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE MONITORING UGoVia Notice: 3:50 pm OPS Center Notified: 4:00 pm DMS Activated: 4:10 pm 511 Notice Issued: 4:16 pm Crash Vehicles Removed: 4:28 pm Traffic Cleared: 4:45 pm STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT CouncilBluffsInterstate.IowaDOT.gov STAKEHOLDER AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT » Since the Program launch in January 2014 Jessica Jurzenski Environmental Scientist Fellsburg Holt and Ullevig American Burying Beetles: the First Federally Endangered Terrestrial Beetle American Burying Beetles: the First Federally Endangered Terrestrial Beetle Jessica Jurzenski, PhD Things to Learn… What is an American burying beetle (ABB)? Importance of carrion and burying beetles Why is the ABB endangered? ABB Conservation What is an ABB? • 2 types of carrion beetle •Carrion beetles with freeliving larvae •Burying beetles with larvae raised in brood chamber 11 burying beetles (all Nicrophorus species) • 7 other silphids • Images: Ratcliffe, B.C. 1996. Bulletin Univ. of NE State Museum 13: 1-100. • Carcass detection within an hour and up to 2.5 • miles away Almost any kind of dead animal – Birds, mammals, snakes, frogs, fish, etc. • ABB is nocturnal Ratcliffe, B.C. 1996. Bulletin Univ. of NE State Museum 13: 1-100. Bedick, J.C., B.C. Ratcliffe, and L.G. Higley. 2004. Coleopterists Bulletin 58: 57-70. Brood Chamber Mouse Burial: ~ 4 hours Image: Ratcliffe, B.C. 1996. Bulletin Univ. of NE State Museum 13: 1-100. Importance of Carrion Beetles Recycle nutrients (nature’s recyclers) Carcass removal (underground) – Compete with flies Phoretic mites further reduce fly eggs – Compete with small vertebrate scavengers Food for other wildlife Potential source for new meat preservatives or antibiotics Image created by: Stephanie Butler and Mike Cavallaro Why is the ABB Endangered? Historical Range (as of 1910) Introduced population Current Range 2011 Threats to Conservation of ABB Natural enemies/competitors Habitat loss (land conversion) Night lights Pesticides Where ABB Live in Nebraska Adapted from: Jurzenski et al. 2011. Great Plains Research. 21: 131-143. Where ABBs are Protected in Nebraska How Do We Know Where ABBs Live? USFWS and NGPC permits required – Spring/Summer emergence to feed and reproduce – Mid-summer the mature adults stay in the brood chamber feeding and protecting larvae – Summer/Fall re-emergence of senescent adults and emergence of teneral (new) adults to feed • Varying amounts of beetles What we don’t know about ABB Daytime habitat preferences Average flying height Reproductive versus feeding habitats Overwintering activities Conservation Strategies Critical habitat not established at this time Previous methods – Baiting beetles away from construction areas – Trapping and relocating beetles Jurzenski, J. 2012. Factors affecting the distribution and survival of endangered ABBs. PhD Dissertation, UNL Opossums and Leopard Frogs Eat ABB Jurzenski, J. , and W.W. Hoback. 2011. The Coleopterists Bulletin 65: 88-90. Current methods – Presence/Absence surveys – Techniques to minimize or avoid impacts – Conservation banking in Oklahoma – On-going research into habitat modeling Programmatic Agreement – Conservation conditions to temporarily reduce habitat suitability Mowing and removal of residual vegetation Carrion removal Night time work restrictions Habitat Suitability Models Jurzenski, J. et al. 2014. Systematics and Biodiversity 12: 149-162. What Did We Learn? What is an American burying beetle (ABB)? – Large, noticeable beetle that provides parental care and can bury dead animals! Importance of carrion and burying beetles – Nature’s recyclers and potential source of new antibiotics Why the ABB is endangered – Cause of disappearance from most of its range is unknown ABB Conservation – Continued efforts to protect this amazing creature Acknowledgements UNK and UNL Dr. Wyatt Hoback NDOR USFWS and NGPC QUESTIONS? Mike Owen Planning and Project Development Mike Owen, PE – NDOR Planning and Project Development Engineer AGENDA Financial Charts RFP’s On-Call Services 2015 Other Opportunities RFP’S JUST CLOSED Grand Island Area MPO - Planning, Long Range Transportation Plan Safe Route to Schools, 3 locations Environmental Specialist Embedded 2nd Street, Court –Ella in Beatrice RFP ADVERTISED CE (LOCAL PROJECTS) On Call CE Services for LPA Projects, Closes Nov 12 8 firms would be selected Master Agreement by Mid January 2015 On Call used by NDOR and Locals RFP ADVERTISED CE (LOCAL PROJECTS) Revision: Clarify this is a 1 year term, $500 guarantee, for services up to $0.5 million Upcoming Year 20+ CE projects to contract for upcoming season NDOR has advertise and select On Call ON CALL SERVICES FOR 2015 Soon PE Services (Local); Includes Survey, NEPA, Preliminary & Final Design Spring RFP On Call Noise & Air Quality Studies ON CALL SERVICES FOR 2015 Fall RFP Geological Surveys (Title 200, UG tanks) HAZMAT Assessments Traffic Operation Studies and Design Sub-Surface Utility Exploration ON CALL SERVICES FOR 2015 Division Needs for 2015 Right of Way Design Bridge Design Fracture Critical Inspection Roadway Design Traffic Division Project Development Environmental Project Scoping FEDERAL FUND PURCHASE PROGRAM (FFPP) Opportunities and RC Roles First payments went out in March 2014 County STP- NDOR paid out $8.5 million BR funds-$7.0 million(County, FCC, Lincoln and Omaha) First payments (FY15) for FCC out in 2016 STP funds $5.6 million Money must be spent on Transportation Does not include routine maintenance Projects using Local Cash must comply with laws & regs and receive appropriate permits FEDERAL FUND PURCHASE PROGRAM (FFPP) Major On Fed Aid System Bridges FY 2018-19 program Project Selection will occur in 2015 LPA will manage projects LPA will select PE & CE Services $2 million for FY 2018 $2 million for FY 2019 FEDERAL AID PROGRAM (LOCAL) BRO (off system) and TAP Programs FY 18 and 19 Federal Aid program NDOR is the RC NDOR will select in 2015 from PE On Call (local) BRO = $4 million (fed aid share) TAP = $4 million (fed aid Share) FEDERAL AID PROGRAM (LOCAL) Federal Aid STP to TMA’s LCLC $5 million, MAPA $13 million, LPA is RC OTHER NOTES Build Nebraska Act Build Nebraska Act, First 10 years Tier 1 Already Let Tier 2 and 3 Contracted Build Nebraska Act, Second 10 years Process to rank and select Probably no contracts next year Thank you for participating in today’s ACEC/N NDOR Partnering Workshop
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
