NCDOT Project Delivery Improvement Recommendations

1. NCDOT Project Delivery Improvement Recommendations Prepared for:North Carolina General AssemblyJuly 3, 2007

2. Introduction • Tom Barry • Senior Vice President PBS&J Southeast Regional Transportation Manager • Former Florida DOT Secretary • Held a wide variety of FDOT positions including: • Assistant Secretary for Finance and Administration • Secretary and Director of Production: District Five • Professional Engineer -2-

3. Introduction • Gene Conti • Vice President PBS&J Mid South District Director • Former Chief Deputy Secretary North Carolina DOT • Held transportation related positions: • Assistant Secretary Transportation Policy USDOT • Deputy Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs USDOT • Secretary Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation -3-

4. NCDOT Project DeliveryImprovement Recommendations • 12-week study focusing on NCDOT’s TIP delivery processes through three tasks: • Reviewed TIP management and overall project delivery process • Reviewed NCDOT and resource agency approaches to environmental reviews and permitting • Performed Value Engineering studies for specific TIP projects -4-

5. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Review focused on major project-delivery issues raised in the Dye Management report • Predictability, accountability, communications for project delivery • Overall project-delivery process (specifically development/delivery TIP and use of alternative-delivery options) • Causes of delay • Project-management principles/practice -5-

6. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Conducted interviews with: • Senior NCDOT staff • Former NCDOT staff • Transportation industry leaders and organizations -6-

7. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Findings • Predictability, accountability, communications for project delivery: • Minimal progress on Dye Management recommendations • 12-month/36-month lists • Delivery/Development TIP -7-

8. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Findings • Overall project-delivery process: • Delivery TIP – Value Engineering efforts • Alternative Delivery • “Turn-key” consultant contracts • Intrastate design alternatives -8-

9. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Findings • Causes of delay – environmental process: • Lead agency/elevation • Causes of delay – consultant procurement/management: • Threshold raised to $250,000 • PDEA coordinated contracting approach • Procurement alternatives -9-

10. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Findings • Project-management principles/practice: • Very little progress – PM positions almost non-existent, no Program Delivery oversight • PMii offers potential for major gains • Leadership seems receptive to change – McKinsey effort -10-

11. TIP Management andOverall Project Delivery Process • Recommendations • Begin immediately to establish “Project Management” as the overall guiding philosophy for NCDOT. • Begin to use PMii both as a project-management tool and as a broader reporting mechanism. This can be achieved easily within the next 6 months. • Begin the new TIP cycle this summer, with the goal of having a measurable and realistic first- year work plan developed by May 2008, to be implemented for the second year of the TIP. • Develop and test alternative pre-construction scoping and contracting mechanisms to determine if significant time- or cost savings can be achieved through these new approaches. • Identify 10 pilot projects to test the “team delivery” concepts, using PM principles and methodologies. -11-

12. Environmental Reviews and Permitting • Study Overview • Reviewed environmental policies including: • NEPA/404 Merger 01 process • NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) • Stream Mitigation Guidelines • SAFETEA-LU and Environmental Streamlining • Conducted interviews with: • FHWA • NCDOT • USACE • NCDWQ • EPA • Consultants -12-

13. Environmental Reviews and Permitting • Findings • Merger/SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 • Merger process is longer for planning purposes, may save permitting time • Section 6002 more clearly places DOT in lead role • Merger process generally produces more detailed study alternatives and higher levels of design • Section 6002 would allow more Categorical Exclusions than current Merger process/guidelines -13-

14. Environmental Reviews and Permitting • Findings • NC Ecosystem Enhancement (EEP) • Has reduced “mitigation” risk • Initial costs were high; recent changes • Stream Buffer Guidelines • Encouraged longer, more costly bridging in certain river basins (Tar, Neuse) • Resource Agency Funding • Significant investments have been made (over 30 positions now funded) -14-

15. Environmental Reviews and Permitting • Merger 01/Section 6002 Recommendations • NCDOT should reaffirm lead-agency status • NCDOT should use the “elevation” process more frequently • Consider endangered species prior to CP 2a • Expand the Categorical Exclusion process to include road widening projects • Execute level of design appropriate to exclude alternatives -15-

16. Environmental Reviews and Permitting • Other Recommendations • Eliminate NCDOT’s Bridge Buffer memorandum • Improve NCDOT’s GIS database • Provide Merger 01 training periodically and for new staff • Provide up-to-date computer equipment and software when needed -16-

17. TIP ProjectsValue Engineering • Study Overview • Ten various TIP projects selected for study • Each project costs over $25 million • Each project programmed for final design/project letting within 2 to 4 years -17-

18. TIP ProjectsValue Engineering • Study Results -18-

19. TIP ProjectsValue Engineering • Recommendations • Cost awareness • Construction cost knowledge • Right-of-Way • Median width and type • Context-sensitive design -19-

20. TIP ProjectsValue Engineering Thank You!