effective utility coordination practices using alternative ... · using alternative contract...

Effective Utility Coordination Practices

Using Alternative Contract Methods

Douglas D. Gransberg, PhD, PE, DBIA

Gransberg & Associates, Inc.

Norman, OK 73070-2395

[email protected]

NCHRP 20-07, Task 373

• The objectives of NCHRP Project 20-07/Task 373: Utility Coordination Using Alternative Contracting Methods are as follows:• Identify, analyze, and understand the current models for

successful utility coordination risk management on projects delivered by alternative contracting methods (ACM).

• Compare the advantages and disadvantages and identify successful approaches to managing utility coordination in each ACM.

• Prepare a set of Guidelines for managing utility coordination on projects delivered using alternative methods for implementation on highway construction projects by public agencies.

Research Team Members• Dr. Dominique Pittenger: Arbor Services, Inc.

• 10+ years paving contracting experience

• Research experience:• Asset management

• 3-D design/CIM

• Mr. Gary Chambers: Chambers Engr, LLC.• 20+ years mechanical/utility design-build contracting experience

• Research experience:• Airport utility operational planning

• Mr. Micheal Loulakis, DBIA: Capital Project Strategies, LLC• 30+ years design-build/construction law experience

• Co-PI on NCHRP 24-44: Geotechnical Risk Management Guide for Design-build Projects.

The Salient Issue

• DOTs use alternative contracting methods (ACM) to accelerate project delivery.

• The design and construction of subsurface features of work is generally the earliest package in the sequence of work.

• Utility issues must typically be resolved before construction can commence.

• Therefore, the risk of delay due to utility coordination problems is always high on ACM projects.

The Opportunity

• ACM projects furnish the ability to gain high levels of integration between the designer, construction contractor, and affected third parties.

• As a result, DOTS are afforded a number of opportunities:• Utility coordination responsibilities can be assigned to

the CMGC contractor/design-builder/P3 developer.

• If the DOT chooses to retain these, ACMs can be used to obtain early contractor involvement in the design details to increase overall constructability.

• During procurement, the DOT is able to consider competing design alternatives for the utility work.

The Research Details

• Literature review• SHRP2 utility products

• DOT utility coordination documents

• Content analysis of ACM procurement documents• 73 RFQ/RFPs

• $15.2 billion worth of projects in 27 states

• DOT survey • 29 DOTs +DC – 58% response rate

• 7 case study projects

Survey, Content Analysis and Case Study Map

Case Study Project SynopsisState/Agency

ProjectDelivery Method

Value Project Type Rationale for Inclusion

Georgia/GDOT

I-285/Ga. 400 Improvements Project

DBF (P3) $1.06billion

Interchangebridges,&roadway

Project only includes private finance with no post-construction maintenance. Schedule is highly aggressive.

Kentucky/IndianaKYTC/INDOT

Ohio River Bridges DB (Downtown Crossing)P3 (East End Crossing)

$2.8billion

Bridges Urban setting with utilities that span two states and two different delivery methods.

Minnesota/MnDOT

Hastings Bridge DB/ATCs $120million

Bridge Project had large ATC that included utility aspects.

Missouri/MoDOT

Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge

DBB/ATC $230million

Bridge Urban setting with utilities that span two states and had an ATC that included utility aspects.

Pennsylvania/PennDOT

Rapid Bridge Replacement Project

DBFM (P3) $1.7billion

557 rural bridges

Massive number of small bridges with a variety of utility issues.

Texas/TxDOT

Horseshoe Interchange Project

DB $818million

Interchange bridges & roadway

Multiple jurisdictions with both overhead and underground utility issues.

Washington/WSDOT

Colman Dock CMGC $320million

Ferry Terminal

Multimodal facility utility coordination with 2 other active projects that abut the ROW.

Benchmark of the Practice

• Causes of inefficiency in the project development and delivery process. • Delays due to utility coordination and location failures.

• Delays due to untimely actions by third party stakeholders and utility companies.

• Inefficiencies in the project delivery process due to failure to include salient utility issues in the procurement process.

• Lost opportunities to avoid utility conflicts.

• Claims due to utility-related differing site conditions

• Poor quality utility work

Implementing the Strategies

• “Strategies typically address a specific problem and are formulated to address a problem’s root cause…

• The strategy is implemented through a method. A method is a means or manner of procedure, especially a regular and systematic way of accomplishing something…

• A method is then implemented using a tool. A tool is something used in the performance of an operation” (Anderson et al. 2006).

Preview of the Findings

• Six strategies identified• Implement early contractor design involvement as

appropriate for each given ACM project.• Use ACMs to address utility company timeliness by involving

third party stakeholders as early as practical in project development and delivery.

• Raise the visibility of utility-related issues in ACM projects to ensure competing contractor teams understand the level of criticality on each project.

• Promote utility avoidance as the preferred solution to utility conflicts.

• Avoid utility-related claims through enhanced contract mechanisms designed specifically for addressing utility issues.

• Promote an atmosphere of life cycle-based design and construction decision-making on ACM projects.

Methods and Tools

• The ACMs are the methods for implementing the strategies:• DBB w/ATCs

• CMGC

• DB and DB w/ATCs

• P3 and P3 w/ATCs

• 36 tools were identified• Many apply to all methods

• Some are specific to a method

• Organized by strategy and method for implementation in the proposed guide.

Strategy: Contractor design involvement using ACM

Alliancing

Early Contractor Involvement

Design-Build

CMGC

Public Private Partnership

Design-Bid-Build

Design-Bid-Build w/ATCs

Design Construction MaintenancePlanning

Utility Coord. Tasks vs. ACM TimingPre-Letting

Procurement DBB

Post-Award 1 DOT 1 DOT 2 Cont 1 DOT 2 Cont 1 DOT 2 Cont

1. Utility Coordination Initiation Phase.

2. Utility Research Phase.

3. Utility Initial Notice Phase

4. Utility Verification Phase

5. Utility Conflict Analysis Phase

6. Utility Work Plans Phase

7. Utility Agreement Phase

8. Utility Construction Phase

Stage

IND

OT

UC

Ph

ase

1 DOT responsible for UC

2 CMGC/DB/P3 developer responsible for UC

CMGC DB P3

Project Delivery Method3. Utility Initial Notice Phase DBB CMGC DB P3 Send letter initial notice to each utility Schedule initial coordination workshop meeting with all utility representatives. Determine the

following as a minimum:

DOT participation in obtaining

easements.

Basis for reimbursement for the

utility, if any.

Conceptual estimate for cost to

relocate the utility facilities.

Conceptual schedule to relocate utility if necessary

Where utilities will be relocated if required.

Potential to design to avoid each utility.

Plan for completing the relocation work.

Utility elevations for their facilities, if available.

Need for sub-surface utility engineering (SUE).

Receive written response to initial notice from each utility:

Determine those in the project’s

conceptual limits.

Determine designated

representative.

Conceptual estimate for the cost of relocation.

Determine which are reimbursable and on what

basis.

Consolidate responses to initial notice Develop list of all reimbursable expenses and estimated cost Review project funding for reimbursable relocations Review risk evaluation of utility coordination deliverables Notify appropriate agencies to have utility facilities marked in the field Notify owner of signals to have buried wires marked in the field Measure and record the location of field markings and facilities Designer include utility facility information on plan sheets

Methods and Tools to Implement an Early Contractor Design Involvement Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Request of utility-related ATCs on DBB projectsUtility-related information interaction during procurement (RFIs/Confidential meetings)Utility-related incentives/disincentives

MoDOT Content

DB Request of utility-related ATCs Responsive utility PAEAssign contractor responsibility for utility coordination Evaluate utility avoidance approach in proposalUtility-related information interaction during procurement (RFIs/Confidential meetings)Utility-related incentives/disincentives

WSDOT MnDOT TxDOT TxDOT Content

ContentCMGC Assign contractor responsibility for utility coordination

Include contractor support to SUE and utility engineering effort in CMGC preconstruction contract

Utility-related information interaction during procurement (RFIs/Confidential meetings)Utility-related incentives/disincentives

WSDOT Lit Content Content Content

P3 Requesting of utility-related ATCs Responsive utility PAE Leverage P3 contractor’s pro forma financial analysis regarding utility riskAssign contractor responsibility for utility coordination Evaluate utility avoidance approach in proposalUtility-related information interaction during procurement (RFIs/Confidential meetings)Utility-related incentives/disincentives

GDOT MnDOT GDOT GDOT GDOT Content Content

Methods and Tools to Implement Address Utility Company Timeliness Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Stakeholder panels led by the CMGC/DB/P3 contractor to facilitate a utility

coordination after award

Corridor-level master utility conflict matrix

Utility-related incentives/disincentives

Leverage existing contractor-utility relationships

MnDOT

WSDOT

Content

Content/Survey

DB Stakeholder panels led by the CMGC/DB/P3 contractor to facilitate a utility


Contractor authority to pay for utility adjustments




MnDOT

Content

Content

Content

Content/Survey

CMGC Stakeholder panels led by the CMGC/DB/P3 contractor to facilitate a utility






MnDOT

Content

Content

Content

Content/Survey

P3 Stakeholder panels led by the CMGC/DB/P3 contractor to facilitate a utility





MnDOT

Content

WSDOT

Content/Survey

Content/Survey

Methods and Tools to Implement Raised Visibility of Utility-related Issues Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Request utility-related ATCs on DBB projects


Utility-related information interaction during procurement (RFIs/Confidential mtgs)


Include statement of utility strategy intent in solicitation

MoDOT

WSDOT

Content

Content

Survey

DB Request utility-related ATCs


Responsive utility PAE

Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria




Lit/content

Content

MnDOT

Content/KYTC

WSDOT

Content

Survey

CMGC Request utility-related info in interview questions





Assign CMGC contractor responsibility to secure final utility agreements

Lit/content

Content/KYTC

WSDOT

Content

Survey

Survey

P3 Request utility-related ATCs


Responsive utility PAE





Lit/content

Content

MnDOT

Content/KYTC

WSDOT

Content

Survey

Methods and Tools to Implement Utility Avoidance Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Include necessary utility data in ACM solicitation


Content/KYTC

Content

DB Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria

Include necessary utility data in ACM solicitation documents



Content/KYTC

Content

Content

Survey

CMGC Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria

Include necessary utility data in ACM solicitation



Content/KYTC

Content

Content

Survey

P3 Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria

Include necessary utility data in ACM solicitation




Content/KYTC

Content

WSDOT

Content Survey

Survey

Methods and Tools to Implement Utility-Related Claims Avoidance Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria

Use a standard utility information report prepared during planning as a

contract document

Definition of utility-related differing site condition

KYTC

MN, TX, &

WSDOT

Content

DB Use a standard utility information report prepared during planning

as a contract document


MN, TX, &

WSDOT

Content

CMGC Weighted utility-related evaluation criteria

Use a standard utility information report prepared during planning as a

contract document


Content/KYTC

MN, TX,

&WSDOT

Content

P3 Use a standard utility information report prepared during planning as a

contract document


MN, TX,

&WSDOT

Content

Methods and Tools to Implement Life Cycle-based ACM Decision-making Strategy

ACM Tool Source

ATCs Require LCC info on ATCs


MoDOT

Survey

DB Require LCC info on ATCs


Lit/Content

Survey

CMGC Include statement of utility strategy intent in solicitation Survey

P3 Include post-construction maintenance

Require LCC info on ATCs


GDOT

Lit/Content/

TxDOT

Survey

UC Guidelines – Chapter 1Chapter/Section

Title Content

Executive Summary A concise review of the important concepts and the business case Brief reference to previous SHRP2-related products.

1Introduction to ACM Utility Coordination

Purpose of the guidelines; Target audience; Definitions of key terminology; Brief description of each ACM

1.1 The Business Case Brief summary of utility coordination issues in the ACM context; Proactive utility coordination strategies found in the research One or two examples of benefits realized on case study project

1.2Generic Project Development Process

Brief overview of a typical federal-aid project’s development process Utility issues that influence design decision at each stage in the project development

process. Graphic of project life cycle timeline showing utility milestones

1.3ACM Selection Decision

Utility issues that influence the decision to not use traditional DBB ACM selection rationale referencing Colorado ACM decision tool Utility issues that must be included in the ACM decision. Utility red flags that indicate reconsidering or dropping ACM delivery

1.4 Utility ACM Strategies Discussion of the development of utility strategies in ACM projects Review of the 6 strategies found in the research Explanation of relating ACMs and related tools to a given strategy

1.5The ACM Utility Coordination Strategy Workshop

Explanation of the workshop’s purpose Reference to workshop template in Appendix D General instructions for planning and executing the workshop Reference to specific instruction is each ACM chapter

1.6How to use the Guidelines

List and short explanation of the various components of the guidelines Instructions on how to access supporting SHRP2 products

UC Guidelines

• One chapter for each specific ACM

• Chapter on ACM contract administration• ACM Utility Identification,

Location, and Coordination Contract Components

• ACM Design Phase Contract Components

• ACM Construction Phase Contract Components

• ACM P3 Maintenance Phase Contract Components

• ACM Dispute Avoidance and Resolution

Design-Build Utility Coordination Flow Chart

Design-Build Utility Coordination Flow Chart (continued)

Pro

cure

me

nt

Stag

eP

re-L

ett

ing

Stag

eP

ost

-Aw

ard

Sta

ge

Pre-Award Activities

Design-Build Project Closeout

Preliminary Engineering Final Engineering Construction

Project RFQ

Utility Coordination Qualifications

Utility Coordination

Technical Req’ts

Develop the DB RFQ/RFP

Select Design-builder

Award DB Contract

Short-List? Project RFP

Utility ATCs Evaluate Utility ATCs

YESApproved ATCs

Evaluate Proposals

Project ProposalsATCs? NO

Assess Utility ATC Impact on

Proposed Strategy

Utility Coordination

Plan

Construction Utility Tasks

Project Complete

Proceed to Post- Award Stage

Pre-Work Conferences

From Procurement

Stage

Conduct Post-award Utility Coordination

Workshop

Updated Utility Risks w/Design-

Builder

SUE QL-B Validation

Final Project Utility

Strategy

Updated Project Risk Register w/Design-builder

Input

Post-Award Risk

Management Conference

Initial Post-Award Design

Conference

Develop SUE/Utility Impact Assessment

SUE/Utility Impact Analysis

SUE QL-A Test Holes, as req’d

Utility Relocation

Plans

Request Utility

Permits

Design-Builder Coordination Meetings w/

Utility Owners as req’d

ID Eligible Reimburse-

ments

Eligible Utility Reimbursements

Reimburse Eligible Utility

Owners

Project As-Builts

This line blurs in DB if work is packaged

Complete Project

Construction

Complete Project Design

Effort

Utility-Related Administrative

Documents

Assign Utility Coord to Design-

builder?

Proposed DB Project Utility

Strategy

Select DB Project Delivery

Develop Utility Coordination

Scope

Project Scope of Work

Utilities High Risk?

Develop Utility Input to

Procurement Documents

YES

NO

Project Risk Register

Identified Utility Risks

SUE QL-B Overlay on Conceptual

Plans

Utilities Risk a

Driver?

NO

YES

Conduct Initial Utility Coordination

Workshop with Utility Owners

Draft Utility MOUs

Pre-Let Utility Risk Mitigation

Plan

Pre-Procurement

Administrative Tasks

YESNO

YES

Update SUE/

Utility Inventory

Proposal Validation;Partnering; Etc.

Questions???