application of a multi‐variable project sequence model
TRANSCRIPT
2/16/2019
1
Application of a Multi‐Variable
Project Sequence Model
for the NYCDEP Wastewater Resiliency Program
New York Water Environment Association, Inc.91st Annual MeetingFebruary 4‐6, 2019
Team Contributors
Colin JohnsonAccountable Manager
718.595.4308
Matthew OsitPortfolio Manager
718.595.6077
Gabriel GilesProgram Director
AECOM – PM/[email protected]
212.984.7333
Alyki MalliarosDeputy Design Manager
AECOM‐ PM/[email protected]
212.984.7351
2
2/16/2019
2
Agenda Layout
01Introduction
Authors and key contributors to the Program’s sequencing plan.
02Timeline and Program Background
Key facts regarding the Program’s purpose and it’s need for a sequencing plan.
03Overall Framework
Five‐stage, multi‐step process used in the Program’s sequencing plan.
04Collection / Ranking Rubric
Inventory of scope and establishment of an initial prioritization model.
05Implementation / Validations / Budget
Execution of the initial project sequence, and plan adjustments
06Results / Questions
Conclusions, Key outcomes, and findings of the initial project sequence.
3
Start of the NYC DEP Wastewater Resiliency Program Timeline
Feb. 2011
DEP continues detailed Climate Risk Assessment and
Adaptation Strategy
May 2008
DEP initiates investigations on climate change
impacts
Oct. 2012
Hurricane Sandy makes landfall on
NYC
Jun. 2013
Results of DEP’s Climate Risk Assessment
and Adaptation Study
Oct 2013
DEP issues NYC Wastewater Resiliency Study
Mar 2016Start of DEP
Resiliency Program
4
2/16/2019
3
Start of the NYC DEP Wastewater Resiliency Program Timeline
Mar 2016Start of DEP
Resiliency Program
5
$370M SMLP, Deadline of July 1, 2021
$90M FEMA, Deadline of September 30, 2021Funding
Sites
14 Wastewater Treatment Plants, 56 Pumping Stations, 1 CSO facility, 2 Other (leachate facilities)
Resiliency Program Background / Key Points
Scope~1500 individual Scope ItemsTypes of work involved both building level and asset level strategies.
TeamDEP1 PM/CM3 TOC Design Firms Multiple JOC Contractors.
$156M
2/16/2019
4
Project Sequence Report serves as a guide to prioritize, package, and sequence the Scope Items a transparent, traceable, and systematic manner.
1,500 Scope Items
Resiliency Program Project Sequence Plan Purpose
7
Project Sequencing 5‐Stage Framework
Inventory of Scope Items.
Collection
Multivariable Assessment of Scope Items.
Ranking
Execution of initial Program Implementation Plan
Implementation Adjustment mechanisms to allow flexibility
Validation
Adaptive cost model
Budget
8
2/16/2019
5
Project Sequencing 5‐Stage Framework
Collection
Ranking
Implementation
Validation
Budget
9
CollectionA Program Inventory was established to organize and store pertinent information for the proposed work.
10
2/16/2019
6
Facility name, location, construction area, age of the structure, critical facilities, population served
General Information
Design flood elevation, grade elevation, minimum barrier height, recommended elevation approach
Design Elevation
Type, quantity, cost
Adaptation strategy
SMLP, FEMA, deadlines
Funding type
CollectionA Program Inventory was established to organize and store pertinent information for the proposed work.
The Inventory includes all scope items regardless of their size or implementation costs.
11
Ranking Scope Items were evaluated against three independent defined criteria. Multidimensional rubrics as well as data from the Program Inventory were used to generate separate numeric outputs or scores for each Scope Item with respect to these three defined criteria.
12
2/16/2019
7
Ranking Scope Items were evaluated against three independent defined criteria. Multidimensional rubrics as well as data from the Program Inventory were used to generate separate numeric outputs or scores for each Scope Item with respect to these three defined criteria.
Combination of facility/process based and community factors
Vulnerability Factors
Severity of the consequences of not implementing work
Vulnerability Scores
3 43 41 21 23 41 2
Funding AnalysisScoreTracking status available funding
Initial Project Hierarchy starts with development of Priority Level Matrix
Priority Levels
Illustrates logistics of implementing work
Complexity Score
13
These factors were used to quantify the financial, social, and environmental consequences related to the failure of implementing specific protective measures at DEP facilities. Factors considered included:• Facility/Process Based
Factors • Community Based Factors
Vulnerability Factors
Ranking
14
2/16/2019
8
Ranking
Facility/Process Based Factors
Process ImpactReduction in plant's level of wastewater treatment; noncompliance with SPDES permits
Replacement Cost ($) for Asset
Cost of Repair or Replacement of failed equipment or system. Consider connectivity of rooms and galleries when assessing costs.
Historic Flooding Has facility experienced flooding in the past?
Elevation Is equipment above 500 year base flood elevation (BFE)?
Facility Vulnerability
FEMA Flood Zone Designation by Area. If area is located within multiple flood zones, default to worst case.
Social Community Based Factors
No. Critical Facilities in Service Area
e.g. Hospitals, Schools, Public Safety Facilities
Population Served Population Served
Beaches Proximity to sensitive waterways
Vulnerability Factors
15
Ranking
Vulnerability Factors
16
2/16/2019
9
Ranking
Facility/Process Based Factors Weight
Process ImpactReduction in plant's level of wastewater treatment; noncompliance with SPDES permits
5
Replacement Cost ($) for Asset
Cost of Repair or Replacement of failed equipment or system. Consider connectivity of rooms and galleries when assessing costs.
4
Historic Flooding Has facility experienced flooding in the past? 3
Elevation Is equipment above 500 year base flood elevation (BFE)? 2
Facility VulnerabilityFEMA Flood Zone Designation by Area. If area is located within multiple flood zones, default to worst case.
1
Social Community Based Factors Weight
No. Critical Facilities in Service Area
e.g. Hospitals, Schools, Public Safety Facilities 4
Population Served Population Served 2
Beaches Proximity to sensitive waterways 1
Vulnerability Factors
Ranking
A score has been computed for each scope item, summing the products of weight and rating for each factor. Based on the distribution of all scope item scores, three Vulnerability Levels were established (Scores 1, 2 and 3)
Vulnerability Scores3 41 2
18
2/16/2019
10
Based on the statistical distribution of SIs along the graph, three distinct vulnerability areas were identified (Green, Yellow, and Red) and used to categorize scope items. These three areas are referred to as the Vulnerability Score and denote the severity of the consequences if the SI is not completed under the Program.
Vulnerability Scores3 41 2
Ranking
70
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
WORK ITEM SCORE DISTRIBUTION VULNERABILITY BAND SCORE
WORK ITEMSCORE
MIN MAX
1 1 133
2 133 154
3 154 2771 2 3
19
Ranking
A Complexity Score has been assigned to each work item based on the Adaptation Strategy. This score analyzed the logistics of implementing the various adaptation strategies.(Scores 1 thru 5)
Complexity Score
20
2/16/2019
11
Ranking
Complexity
21
Ranking
Complexity
22
Adaptation Strategy Complexity Score
Elevate Equipment 5
Permanent Barrier 5
Flood Proof Conduits (Buried) 4
Flood Proof Equipment 3
Seal Building 3
Temporary Barrier 2
Flood Proof Conduits (above ground 2
Sandbagging 1
2/16/2019
12
Ranking
Work items have been grouped based on the funding type (FEMA, SMLP or Other) with the purpose of identifying the most critical work items that have immediate availability of grant funding. (Scores 1 thru 9)
Funding Type Score
23
Funding Type Analysis
DESCRIPTION RATE 1 RATE 3 RATE 5 RATE 7 RATE 9
FUNDINGEligible
Is Project Eligible for Funding? SMLP, FEMA? Assumes deadline for SMLP is earlier than deadline for FEMA funds
No Grant Funding
FEMA Applied
SMLP Applied
FEMA Funded
SMLP Funded
Ranking
Looking at the eligibility for each Scope Item
24
2/16/2019
13
In order to organize the Inventory data and facilitate the packaging of individual scope items into larger Projects, a Priority Level Matrix was developed. Scope items are ranked based on the Vulnerability, Funding Eligibility, and Complexity scores
Priority Level (PL)
Ranking
PL = ƒ( , , )
25
Priority Levels
Ranking
A Priority Levels Matrix was developed based on all combinations of these criteria:
75 potential Priority Levels PL#’s
22 Priority Levels have been identified based on all ACTIVEcombinations
For each Priority Level, the total construction cost of the proposed adaptation strategies for those scope items at the Priority Level is compiled per facility
PL = ƒ( , , )VulnerabilityScore
ComplexityScore
FundingEligibility
26
2/16/2019
14
Priority Levels
Ranking
PL = ƒ( , , )VulnerabilityScore
ComplexityScore
FundingEligibility
27
A Project in the Program is defined as a collection of scope items from the Inventory that are grouped together for design/construction packaging purposes.
Scope Items are grouped into Projects according to the hierarchy of characteristics, which are derived from the Priority Level Matrices.
Project Development
Implementation The Program Implementation Plan outlines the specific order and sequence in which Projects will be carried out. The Program Sequence was established by two steps: Project Development and Project schedules.
• Location/Site
• Priority Level (highest level to lowest)
• Funding Source
• Construction Cost
28
2/16/2019
15
Implementation
Projects are assigned benchmark timelines that delineate specific activities that are anticipated to occur throughout the Project’s lifecycle. Timelines include an outline of basic procurement, design, and construction milestone/activities typical of DEP Projects. The applicability of each milestone/activity along with its specified duration was assessed based on the Project’s corresponding construction cost, which was taken as an indication of the level of effort required to complete a Project.
Project Schedules
Four typical Resiliency Project Benchmark Timelines (RLCY‐1, RLCY‐2, RLCY‐3 and RLCY‐4) were established to cover the construction value ranges derived from the initial list of Projects
RLCY‐1 RLCY‐2 RLCY‐3 RLCY‐4
Project Cost$0‐999K $1‐1.99M $5‐9.99M $>$10M
Solicitation9 9 10 11
Design12 26 39 52
Construction Procurement 3 3 3 3
Construction26 52 72 104
Close Out4 4 4 4
Total (years)1.0 1.8 2.4 3.3
29
The Program Implementation Plan outlines the specific order and sequence in which Projects will be carried out. The Program Sequence was established by two steps: Project Development and Project schedules.
Implementation
2/16/2019
16
ValidationThe Program’s overall Project Sequencing is flexible to allow the necessary modifications to accommodate external forces, and permits a variety of allowable validation and adjustment mechanisms.
31
The ability to adjust benchmark timelines to acceptable durations
Validation of Timelines and Initiation Dates
Adhere to all funding reimbursement requirements
Funding Limitations
As new funding grant reimbursement opportunities are introduced in the Program, new SIs and funding constraints are also to be expected.
Incorporation of New Funding Grants/Sources
ValidationThe Program’s overall Project Sequencing is flexible to allow the necessary modifications to accommodate external forces, and permits a variety of allowable validation and adjustment mechanisms.
Multiple contracting strategies amongst TOC’s and JOC’s
Contracting Strategies
DEP BWT will be consulted during the procurement, design and construction phases of each Project.
Operational Requests and Field Conditions
Some of the Program’s initial Project work may be addressed in other ongoing and/or planned DEP Projects
Integration of Other Efforts
32
2/16/2019
17
Validation
Capital Budget PlanThe Resiliency Capital Budget Plan presents the funding arrangement for the DEP’s Resiliency construction efforts over the course of the Program’s duration.
Construction Project Budget Plan (Typical)
The costs for each Project are spread between the start and finish dates of the applicable construction activities using a standard bell curve.
Program Budget Plan – All Projects(regardless of funding reimbursement limitations)
Sums the Project bell curves for the entire Program. The construction costs of each Project are spread between the start and finish dates of their applicable construction activities and overlaid upon one another.
34
2/16/2019
18
Conclusions, Outcomes and Findings
• The development of a five‐stage Project Sequencing Framework to be used to prioritize, package, and sequence proposed work identified for implementation under the Resiliency Program
• An initial Program Sequence which identifies a total of 60 Projects to be implemented under the Program; 44 of which have the potential to be reimbursed through either SMLP or FEMA
• A baseline Program Schedule which shows how Projects are sequenced relative to one another and relative to the known construction completion deadlines set by the Program’s funding streams (SMLP and FEMA)
• An initial Resiliency Construction Capital Budget Plan which shows the incremental budgetary impacts for each Potential Project and the cumulative costs of work through the Program’s life cycle
35
Questions?
36
2/16/2019
19
Thank You