Скачать презентацию THE GREAT KAHUNA AWARD TEA TUG 2006 CONFERENCE Скачать презентацию THE GREAT KAHUNA AWARD TEA TUG 2006 CONFERENCE

8a8c505107febe4cf33d2dbb0fe12554.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 32

THE GREAT KAHUNA AWARD !!! TEA/TUG 2006 CONFERENCE PORTLAND, ME OCTOBER 18 -21, 2006 THE GREAT KAHUNA AWARD !!! TEA/TUG 2006 CONFERENCE PORTLAND, ME OCTOBER 18 -21, 2006 OFFICE OF PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION HIPA-30

Agenda 4 Great Kahuna Award! 4 FHWA/ AASHTO Construction Management ETG Agenda 4 Great Kahuna Award! 4 FHWA/ AASHTO Construction Management ETG

REPORTING REQIREMENTS FOR FHWA-45, FHWA-810, AND FHWA-47 q FHWA-45: Is required for all projects REPORTING REQIREMENTS FOR FHWA-45, FHWA-810, AND FHWA-47 q FHWA-45: Is required for all projects on the NHS = > $500, 000. Ø Submit two weeks after the award of contract and no later than the fifth of the month after the end of the quarter. Ø Information on bid prices for major items Ø

REPORTING q FHWA-810: Bid tabulation Ø Is required for all F-A const. project on REPORTING q FHWA-810: Bid tabulation Ø Is required for all F-A const. project on the NHS. Ø Submit to Division Administrator. Ø Certified by STA official. Ø Show details on 3 low bidders. Ø Submit within two weeks of the award of contract.

REPORTING Ø FHWA-47: Is required for all projects on the NHS that are $1 REPORTING Ø FHWA-47: Is required for all projects on the NHS that are $1 million or more. Ø Contractor completes at end of contract. Ø Information on final costs of wages, salaries and materials used by the contractor. Ø State DOT personnel verifies information. q

Office of Program Administration 4 UPDATE 4 The GAO conducted a review of FHWA Office of Program Administration 4 UPDATE 4 The GAO conducted a review of FHWA Form-45 State construction cost. 4 Quality of the data was one big issue. 4 You may view the report at www. gao. gov , Report # is GAO-04113 R.

BID OPENING REPORT 01/01/2005 to 12/31/2005 State # of Bids received Alabama Alaska Arizona BID OPENING REPORT 01/01/2005 to 12/31/2005 State # of Bids received Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut 83 43 83 15 0 394 16 # of Low bids contracts over/(under) EE 25 (2. 97) 10 (3. 23) 26 15. 71 6 (2. 05) 0 0 99 4. 31 6 16. 22

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Delaware 19 # of contracts 6 Low BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Delaware 19 # of contracts 6 Low Bids DC 2 1 (4. 42) Florida 155 44 (0. 64) Georgia 0 0 0 Hawaii 0 0 0 Idaho 52 14 17. 6 Illinois * 0 0 0 over/(under) 1. 50

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Indiana 68 # of Contracts 22 Low BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Indiana 68 # of Contracts 22 Low Bids Iowa 0 0 0 Kansas 29 9 6. 77 Kentucky 29 20 (12. 97) Louisiana 20 6 (12. 51) Maine 27 13 12. 3 Maryland 119 40 7. 90 over/(under) (9. 16)

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Massachusetts 54 # of Contracts 14 Low BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Massachusetts 54 # of Contracts 14 Low Bids Michigan 66 12 1. 27 Minnesota * 0 0 0. 0 Mississippi 9 4 8. 04 Missouri 0 0 0 Montana 14 4 (0. 56) Nebraska 0 0 0 over/(under) 9. 08

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Nevada 17 # of Contracts 7 Low BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Nevada 17 # of Contracts 7 Low Bids New Hampshire New Jersey 19 6 (3. 09) 12 3 38. 10 New Mexico 1 1 12. 14 New York 581 133 9. 42 North Carolina 26 8 (2. 30) over/(under) 4. 31

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids North Dakota 85 # of Contracts 22 BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids North Dakota 85 # of Contracts 22 Low Bids Ohio 369 100 (6. 44) Oklahoma 25 10 (1. 68) Oregon 25 10 8. 35 Pennsylvania 89 21 5. 48 Puerto Rico 0 0 0 Over/(under) (24. 91)

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Rhode Island * 0 # of Contracts BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Rhode Island * 0 # of Contracts 0 Low Bids South Carolina 30 9 (3. 29) South Dakota 185 48 75. 6 Tennessee 0 0 0 Texas 0 0 0 Utah 89 24 2. 60 over/(under) 0

BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Vermont * 0 # of Contracts 0 BID OPENING REPORT State # of Bids Vermont * 0 # of Contracts 0 Low Bids Virginia * 0 0 0. 0 Washington 43 14 6. 05 West Virginia 13 3 1. 59 Wisconsin 0 0 0 Wyoming 46 12 2. 26 Over/(under) 0. 0

Congratulations Montana DOT!! State Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota * Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska # of Congratulations Montana DOT!! State Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota * Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska # of Bids 54 66 0 9 0 14 0 # of Contracts 14 12 0 4 0 Low Bids over/(under) 9. 08 1. 27 0. 0 8. 04 0 (0. 56) 0

FHWA / AASHTO Construction Management Expert Task Group FHWA / AASHTO Construction Management Expert Task Group

2004 Construction Management Scan 2004 Construction Management Scan

Scan Objective “Examine international construction management procedures with a focus toward ensuring appropriate project Scan Objective “Examine international construction management procedures with a focus toward ensuring appropriate project delivery, contract compliance and quality assurance”

Scope of Study Pre-Construction Aspects of CM General Context Staffing Project Delivery Procurement Risk Scope of Study Pre-Construction Aspects of CM General Context Staffing Project Delivery Procurement Risk Allocation & Management Construction Aspects of CM Contract Administration Quality Plan Implementation Contract Change Processes Project Record Keeping Third Party Communications Environmental Monitoring Project Maintenance Requirements Post Construction Aspects of CM Maintenance and Warranties Process Improvement

Scan Team Locations Eugene Hoelker FHWA, MWRC John Smythe Iowa DOT Tucker Ferguson Penn. Scan Team Locations Eugene Hoelker FHWA, MWRC John Smythe Iowa DOT Tucker Ferguson Penn. DOT Richard Wagman G. A. & F. C. Wagman, Inc. Jerry Yakowenko FHWA, HQ Keith Molenaar U. Colorado, Boulder Steve De. Witt NC DOT James Triplett United Contractors Thomas Bohuslav TX DOT Greg Schiess FHWA, FL

What we found… 4 Similar transportation needs 4 Construction management systems that promote alignment What we found… 4 Similar transportation needs 4 Construction management systems that promote alignment of customer goals 4 Integrated use of risk analysis techniques 4 Strategic use of alternative delivery methods 4 Procurement systems that set the framework for success

What we found… 4 Contract payment methods that support alignment and trust 4 Delegation What we found… 4 Contract payment methods that support alignment and trust 4 Delegation of traditional highway agency functions that promote efficiency 4 A philosophy of network management 4 Greater partnership between public and private entities

British Highways Agency Example Early Contractor Involvement CLIENT PHASE 0 Identification of the Problem British Highways Agency Example Early Contractor Involvement CLIENT PHASE 0 Identification of the Problem PHASE 1 Preliminary Study & Recommendation CLIENT ADVISOR Feasibility, Public Involvement & Public Announcement. Contract Preparation & Tender PHASE 2 PHASE 3 Planning or Statutory Orders or Transport Act Application PHASE 4 Outline design CONTRACTOR PHASE 5 PHASE 6 Construction PHASE 7 CLIENT or CONTRACTOR Operation & Maintenance

British Highways Agency Example British Highways Agency Example

Recommendations 4 4 4 Align Team Goals to Customer Goals Develop Risk Assessment and Recommendations 4 4 4 Align Team Goals to Customer Goals Develop Risk Assessment and Allocation Techniques Strategically Apply Alternative Delivery Methods Enhance Qualification Rating Processes Use Qualifications in Procurement Pilot Early Contractor http: //international. fhwa. dot. gov/cons Involvement truction_mgmt/contents. htm

Recommendations 4 4 4 Apply Alternate Bids/Designs in Procurement Conduct Pre-Proposal Meetings Apply More Recommendations 4 4 4 Apply Alternate Bids/Designs in Procurement Conduct Pre-Proposal Meetings Apply More Contractor Quality Management Use Appropriate Alternative Contract Payment Methods Work Toward Warranties and Life Cycle Responsibility

Construction Management ETG 4 Implementation group for SCAN recommendations 4 Funding - $300, 000 Construction Management ETG 4 Implementation group for SCAN recommendations 4 Funding - $300, 000 from FHWA 4 National Construction Management Conference in 2008 4 State DOT, FHWA, Industry, Academia representation

Construction Management ETG Members 4 4 4 4 4 Stuart Anderson, Texas A&M University Construction Management ETG Members 4 4 4 4 4 Stuart Anderson, Texas A&M University Thomas R. Bohuslav, Construction, Texas DOT Tim Aschenbrener, Materials, Colorado DOT Bob Burns, CH 2 M Hill Steven D. De. Witt, (Co-chair), North Carolina Turnpike Authority Tucker Ferguson, Maintenance Division, Penn. DOT Ted Ferragut, TDC Partners, Ltd. Matt Girard, , HBG Flatiron Eugene Hoelker, FHWA Rich Juliano, ARTBA 4 4 4 4 4 Mike Loulakis, Attorney, Wickwire Gavin Keith R. Molenaar, U. of Colorado Jerry Porter, Peter Kiewit Sons', Inc. Greg L. Schiess, FHWA Sid Scott, Trauner Consulting Services, Inc. John M. Smythe, Construction, Iowa DOT Jim Sorenson, FHWA James E. Triplett, United Contractors W Richard Wagman, G. A. & F. C. Wagman, Inc. Gerald Yakowenko, (Co-chair), FHWA

Construction Management ETG Current Activities 4 Best Value Implementation Plan. % NCHRP 10 -61 Construction Management ETG Current Activities 4 Best Value Implementation Plan. % NCHRP 10 -61 - additional case studies (NCHRP Report #561 available in hardcopy) % Pilot Projects under SEP-14 4 Alternative Payment Methods. % Develop a “white-paper” on current US alternate payment methods – Provide examples that include lump sum payments, milestones/components, plan quantity, etc. – Include the advantages and disadvantages of each strategy. – Impacts on staffing requirements, material usage approvals, fair and equitable adjustment of quantities, audits, supporting documentation of claims, prompt payment, historic database for future estimates

Construction Management ETG Current Activities Risk Assessment and Allocation 4 Prepare a Risk Assessment Construction Management ETG Current Activities Risk Assessment and Allocation 4 Prepare a Risk Assessment and Allocation Guide for Highway Construction Management % Includes: risk identification, assessment, analysis, mitigation and planning, allocation, monitoring, checklists, examples, etc. 4 Conduct Risk Workshops

Construction Management ETG Future Activities 4 4 4 Enhance Qualification Rating Process Alternative Bidding Construction Management ETG Future Activities 4 4 4 Enhance Qualification Rating Process Alternative Bidding State of the Practice Contractor Quality Management Strategic Use of Alternative Delivery Methods Qualifications in Procurement Warranties and Life Cycle Responsibility

Questions 4 Who may I contact for more information about the Construction Management ETG? Questions 4 Who may I contact for more information about the Construction Management ETG? % Steve Dewitt, Co-chair, NCDOT, (919) 715 -4458, sdewitt@dot. state. nc. us % Jerry Yakowenko, Co-chair, FHWA, (202) 366 -1562, gerald. yakowenko@dot. gov % Ted Ferragut, Consultant to ETG, 703 -836 -1671, tferragut@tdcpartners. com