FTA Oversight Procedures - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

etween risk reduction and risk acceptance typically occurs at the point where all market risk has been mitigated, or early construction risk (geotechnical/utility) has also been mitigated, whichever occurs later. Prior to this “break point”, unless otherwise provided for in a project strategy plan, triggered mitigation is the first line of defense in order to preserve and the minimum contingency balance must be met in order to provide sufficient funds for the completion of the project, or revenue operations consistent with Project Strategy parameters defined in later deliverables. 6.6.2 Primary Cost Risk Mitigation Recommendations The PMOC shall develop a unified list of cost mitigation activities, including scope, deliverables, and outcomes, based upon products previously developed through this OP‐40 and other OPs. This list shall be entitled “Primary Mitigation Deliverables and Outcomes”. This list will serve as a means to provide recommendations and to monitor the reduction of project cost risk. The PMOC’s evaluation of these Grantee’s activities as recommended shall be performed as part of 6.7 Specialized Risk Management products. 6.6.3 Primary Schedule Risk Mitigation Recommendations The PMOC shall develop a unified list of schedule mitigation activities, including scope, deliverables, and outcomes, based upon products previously developed through this OP‐40 and other OPs. This list shall be integrated with the list entitled “Primary Mitigation Deliverables and Outcomes”, developed in 6.6.2, above. This list serves as means to provide recommendations and monitor schedule risk to the project. The PMOC’s evaluation of the Grantee’s activities as recommended shall be performed as part of 6.7 Specialized Risk Management products. Schedule risk mitigation recommendations shall recognize that schedule risk is focused on the homogeneity and stability of the project critical path. A critical path is homogeneous when its activities are mapped out using a histogram and demonstrate a mode and mean activity duration that is within 10% of each other. A critical path is ideally stable when all delays on other paths consume their path float but do not result in a project delay and no event has consumed all float, becoming critical. Schedule risk mitigation recommendations should specifically treat both critical path and non‐ critical path activities. Frequent changes in the configuration of the project critical path are disruptive and degrade the grantee’s ability to efficiently and effectively implement the project. The role of schedule mitigation is to protect the critical path from non‐critical path activities becoming critical themselves. The primary objective of schedule risk management is keeping a necessary amount of path float between the project critical path and all of its intersecting paths, i.e. to “buffer” the critical path and thus preserve its stability. The secondary objective of schedule risk management is to keep technical risks off of the project critical path, or minimize their duration if they are critical path activities. High risk project work elements are to be executed as early as possible in the project schedule such that their negative outcomes can be mitigated by triggered mitigation and not by the application of project contingency. OP 40 Risk Assessment and Mitigation Review Revision 0, June 2008 Page 11 of 16
6.6.4 Secondary Risk Mitigation Recommendations The PMOC shall develop recommendations for activities to accomplish Secondary Risk Mitigation. These recommendations shall include both the targeted magnitude of the cost or time savings expected, as well as a description of the scope, deliverables, and outcomes of the activity. The contractor will also recommend progress‐reporting intervals for tracking the performance and management of such mitigation capacities; as well as any integration with the Grantee’s overall program schedule and resource loading. All material assumptions shall be identified along with their rationales. Such recommendations are to be established as distinct from any concurrent value engineering activities. Value Engineering (VE) is a formal, systematic, multi‐disciplined process designed to optimize the value of each dollar spent. The objective of VE is to satisfy all required functions at the lowest total costs (capital, operating and maintenance) over the life of the project consistent with the requirements of performance, reliability, maintainability, safety and esthetics. The VE process generates a list of alternative methods for performing the required functions involved in the targeted areas of the design represented by any given scope element that when taken as an aggregate, are likely to achieve a project cost‐reduction objective. The result is change in the physical or technical aspects of project. VE recommendations if accepted by the Grantee are implemented on a non‐contingent basis. Secondary Mitigation is also a formal, systematic, multi‐disciplined process but it is designed to achieve a cost‐reduction objective in targeted areas of the design, construction general conditions, etc. with or without a material reduction in transit capacity, level of service, or revenue vehicles. Secondary Mitigation and Value Engineering both can result in reductions to Project Scope, transit capacity, level of service, etc. and thereby Project Cost (and Project Schedule as applicable). Secondary Mitigation is reduction(s) in project scope that might, in certain circumstances, merit reinstatement back into the project, i.e. “mitigation recapture”. Secondary Mitigation is fundamentally different than Value Engineering. Mitigation Targets are amounts of secondary mitigation that are recommended to be developed on a phase‐by‐phase basis. These targets are developed upon the result of the Cost Risk Assessment developed in 6.2.2. The Mitigation Target for a given phase is a percentage of the difference between the project budget and either: 1) the 90 th percentile forecast at each of the Project Milestones (see 6.2.2.1), or 2) an adjusted target that includes contingency values established through OP‐35. Table 2 provides the initial recommendation for percentages to apply to the difference (or “gap”) between the budget and 90 th percentile forecast. The PMOC may, with the <strong>FTA</strong> work order manager’s approval, modify these targets based upon overlapping Grantee milestones, or develop additional targets due to additional milestones lying between these targets. Table 2 - Mitigation Target Percentages Milestone Target Entry in Preliminary Engineering 10% Entry into Final Design 30% FFGA award 50% 40% bid 60% 20% construction 70% 50% construction 80% OP 40 Risk Assessment and Mitigation Review Revision 0, June 2008 Page 12 of 16
Page 1 and 2:
CLIN# OP# FTA Oversight Procedures
Page 3 and 4:
5.0 GRANTEE SUBMITTALS NA 6.0 SCOPE
Page 5 and 6:
6.1.2 Task Orders FTA headquarters
Page 7 and 8:
and communications systems; fare co
Page 9 and 10:
7.1 Format Avoid repetition in the
Page 11 and 12:
APPENDIX B Sample Task Order ______
Page 13 and 14:
APPENDIX D Sample Proposal Format _
Page 15 and 16:
U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administra
Page 17 and 18:
Management controls are the organiz
Page 19 and 20:
5. Act in a manner consistent with
Page 21 and 22:
5) Introduction to PMOC scope of wo
Page 23 and 24:
7.3 Project Status Reporting - Cont
Page 25 and 26:
Cost $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,0
Page 27 and 28:
• Legislators, legislative staff
Page 29 and 30:
4.2 FTA Circulars • C5010.1C, Gra
Page 31 and 32:
v) develop and implement a force ac
Page 33 and 34:
4.0 REFERENCES The following are th
Page 35 and 36:
o PMOC’s opinion of situations an
Page 37 and 38:
The report formatting requirements
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41:
APPENDIX A Sample - Lessons Learned
Page 66 and 67:
• Recipients with major capital p
Page 68 and 69:
follow, have different names for si
Page 70 and 71:
documents referenced in the SSMP to
Page 72 and 73:
(2) The effectiveness of the proces
Page 74 and 75:
For recipients with projects affect
Page 76 and 77:
APPENDIX A: SSMP REVIEW CHECKLIST -
Page 78 and 79:
App. No. Checklist Item Plan Requir
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
APPENDIX B: LIST OF SUGGESTED DOCUM
Page 90 and 91:
DOCUMENT (Title and acronym; R sign
Page 92 and 93:
DOCUMENT (Title and acronym; R sign
Page 94 and 95:
APPENDIX D: SAMPLE INTERVIEW QUESTI
Page 96 and 97:
APPENDIX E: SSMP REVIEW CHECKLIST -
Page 98 and 99:
Note: SSMP Element Compliant with D
Page 100 and 101:
SSMP Element Compliant with DRAFT G
Page 102 and 103:
APPENDIX F: DISCUSSION OF CONTENTS
Page 104 and 105:
candidates for the committee so tha
Page 106 and 107:
US DOT Federal Transit Administrati
Page 108 and 109:
the time. During preliminary engine
Page 110 and 111:
• Plans - who prepares, who can m
Page 112 and 113:
U.S. Department of Transportation F
Page 114 and 115:
• Serve as a resource by lending
Page 116 and 117:
c. Peak Vehicle Requirement include
Page 118 and 119:
3 PMOC review of Grantee’s Operat
Page 120 and 121:
Requirement PMOC Review Comments 5C
Page 122 and 123:
waiver is requested are not produce
Page 124 and 125:
(5) To provide PMOCs with recommend
Page 126 and 127:
4.1.2 Pre-Award Purchaser’s Requi
Page 128 and 129:
5.0 PMOC REVIEW OF PROJECT SPONSOR
Page 130 and 131:
• If no, examine contract files,
Page 132 and 133:
6.3.2 Corrective Action: The Grante
Page 134 and 135:
8.0 APPENDICES 8.1 Sample Review Ce
Page 136 and 137:
comply? 5.3.1.5 Are the vehicle bod
Page 138 and 139:
US DOT Federal Transit Administrati
Page 140 and 141:
including: the applicability of Fed
Page 142 and 143:
• Each document addresses the int
Page 144 and 145:
APPENDIX A: CHECKLIST OP Section Is
Page 146 and 147:
orders: 5.6.2.1 Is PDR consistent w
Page 148 and 149:
design-to-budget approach that main
Page 150 and 151:
15) Step the project forward using
Page 152 and 153:
2.2 The New Starts Process New Star
Page 154 and 155:
3.0 OBJECTIVES During the initial e
Page 156 and 157:
7.0 REPORT, PRESENTATION, RECONCILI
Page 158 and 159:
provisions) to make detailed design
Page 160 and 161:
6) Identify any unknown or uncertai
Page 162 and 163:
APPENDIX A Scope Review Checklist E
Page 164 and 165:
o Development of strategies for min
Page 166 and 167:
to then be backfilled or would othe
Page 168 and 169:
• Major or critical work details;
Page 170 and 171:
It is important to select a project
Page 172 and 173:
6.2 Preliminary Document Review Upo
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177: o Level 4: Subdivide Level 3 as fol
Page 178 and 179: • Is integrated with and makes ad
Page 180 and 181: APPENDIX B Cost Estimate Review Che
Page 182 and 183: o Confirm that cost estimates are b
Page 184 and 185: 12) Appendices a) Grantee Project I
Page 186 and 187: This sample of 118 cost items was s
Page 188 and 189: consistently accurate. In addition,
Page 190 and 191: SCC-10.02 Earth Excavation Although
Page 192 and 193: The scope review identifies risk in
Page 194 and 195: • Producer Price Index (PPI) - Th
Page 196 and 197: APPENDICES PROJECT COST ESTIMATE ([
Page 198 and 199: EXHIBIT D-1: PROJECT COST ESTIMATE
Page 200 and 201: 3.0 OBJECTIVES FTA’s objective is
Page 202 and 203: E) Lead times and durations for equ
Page 204 and 205: activity durations. Critical path f
Page 206 and 207: US DOT Federal Transit Administrati
Page 208 and 209: orders may direct the PMOC to reeva
Page 210 and 211: Design‐Build or CM‐GC), the pro
Page 212 and 213: degree of understanding among the p
Page 214 and 215: management labor and profit/fee. Su
Page 216 and 217: US DOT Federal Transit Administrati
Page 218 and 219: Construction Risk is subdivided int
Page 220 and 221: Category or sub‐category cost ele
Page 222 and 223: with the construction contractor. T
Page 224 and 225: Management Plan; these recommendati
Page 228 and 229: 75% construction 85% 90% constructi
Page 230 and 231: milestones, the value of expected m
Page 232 and 233: U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administra
Page 234 and 235: 4.2 Guidance coordination of platfo
Page 236 and 237: communicate with the vehicle manufa
Page 238 and 239: APPENDIX A FTA Request for Informat
Page 240 and 241: APPENDIX B OP 41 ADA Review - Level
Page 242 and 243: 4.1 Legislative • The Safe, Accou
Page 244 and 245: 4) Cost estimate in year-of-expendi
Page 248 and 249: • Project Schedule (Master Schedu
Page 250 and 251: d) Assessed safety and security iss
Page 254 and 255: • Interim Guidance on Design-Buil
Page 256 and 257: (3) Appropriateness of the proposed
Page 258 and 259: 7) Project Schedule The PMOC should
Page 262 and 263: 2) The Grantee’s program for adva
Page 264 and 265: 2. Identify all apparent discrepanc
Page 266 and 267: • The PMOC shall assess whether t
Page 268 and 269: to FD phase of the project, should
Page 270 and 271: Table 1, continued: Expected Attrib
Page 272 and 273: • Real Estate Acquisition Managem
Page 276 and 277:
performed Quality assurance records
Page 278 and 279:
plan that ensures the necessary qua
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
5.3 Systems/Facilities Integration
Page 284:
6.2 Successful completion and recor
show all

FTA Oversight Procedures - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?