ASCE OC Branch January 2015 Luncheon: OCTA and PQM
0 likes5,394 views
This document summarizes an analysis of change order costs (CCOs) on OCTA highway and grade separation projects to identify root causes and areas for improvement. The analysis found that for highway projects, 42% of CCO costs were from design issues, with the most frequent and costly root causes relating to drainage, roadway, and traffic design. For grade separations, 23% of CCO costs were design related, with utilities being the most frequent and costly root cause. Recommendations include strengthening design quality management, constructability reviews, inter-disciplinary coordination, and improving construction feedback. OCTA will implement improvements and conduct ongoing monitoring and audits.
![19
Grade Separation Projects - Evidence & Investigation
CCOs were collected as of March 2014
• CCOs (5 Projects) – 130 [14 are credits]
• CCOs Design Related - 34
• Cost - $1.4M](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/octaascepresentation-150124133935-conversion-gate01/85/ASCE-OC-Branch-January-2015-Luncheon-OCTA-and-PQM-19-320.jpg)
ASCE OC Branch January 2015 Luncheon: OCTA and PQM
- 1. 1 OCTA Highway Programs Presented by : Ross Lew, PE - OCTA Don Archer, PE - PQM, Inc. Jan 15, 2015 Continuous Improvement Initiative
- 2. 2 Agenda • Introduction & Approach • CCO Analysis –Highway Projects –Grade Separation Projects • OCTA Improvements & Implementation
- 3. 3 CCO Analysis Approach Mid-Project Review & Analysis of CCOs • Highway Projects • Grade Separations Conduct Root Causes Analysis (RCA) • Level 1 - Categories • Level 2 – Primary Discipline • Level 3 – QC Activity Corrective/Preventive Action & Recommendations
- 4. 4 Projects
- 5. 5 Highway Projects Grade Separation Projects Bid Prices Project A $16.4M Project B $28.6M Project C $29.0M Project D $102M Project E $65.8M $241.8M Bid Prices GS 1 $32.6M GS 2 $45.1M GS 3 $23.8M GS 4 $26.1M GS 5 $45.1M $149.8M
- 6. 6 Owner has the advantage Contractor has the advantage during construction Costs Advantages Premium
- 7. 7 Root Cause Analysis - Process 1. Change Occurs 2. Evidence of Change (CCOs) 3. Investigation & Understanding (Data) 4. Analysis – Determine Root Cause 5. Corrective/Preventive Action (CAPA) - Eliminate the Root Cause 6. Implement and Monitor CAPA - Verify Performance thru Audits/Surveillances
- 8. 8 Award Price and CCO Costs Highway Projects Grade Separations Project Award Price % Comp # CCOs Cost Project A $16.4M 44 26 $0.9M Project B $28.6M 71 49 $1.3M Project C $29M 75 41 $1.8M Project D $102M 61 129 $7.2M Project E $65.8M 67 62 $4.1M TOTAL $241.8M 64% 307 $15.3M Project Award Price % Comp # CCOs Cost GS 1 $32.6M 88 23 $1.46M GS 2 $45.1M 27 10 $0.42M GS 3 $23.8M 90 35 $2.12M GS 4 $22.2M 84 45 $1.44M GS 5 $26.1M 30 15 $0.61M TOTAL $149.8M 64% 130 $6.1M
- 9. 9 Highway Projects Project CCOs (#) Design CCOs (#) CCO ($) Design ($) Design (% of Award) TOTAL 307 139 $15.3M $6.4M 42% Project CCOs (#) Design CCOs (#) CCO ($) Design ($) Design (% of Award) TOTAL 130 41 $6.1M $1.4M 23% Grade Separation Projects CCOs – Design Related Issues
- 10. 10 Highway CCO Category Cost % of Cost Design Related Issues $6.4M 42% Owner Requested $0.2M 1.3% Safety Improvements $0.4M 2.6% Survey/Construction Errors $0.06M 0.4% Construction Permit/SWPPP $0.90M 6.3% Scope Changes $1.3M 8.5% Differing Field Conditions $1.9M 12.3% Supplemental Work $4.1M 26.8% CCO Category Cost % of Cost Owner Requested $ 2.5M 41% Contractor Requested $ 0.3M 5% Differing Field Conditions $ 2.2M 36% Design Related Issues $ 1.4M 23% Scope of Work Changes <$0.3M> -5% Grade Separation CCO by Categories (Level 1)
- 12. 12 Highway Projects - Evidence & Investigation • 307 CCOs on 5 Projects were collected in March 2013 • 139 CCOs were identified as Design Related at a cost of $6.4 M • RCA performed on 85 Design Related CCO
- 13. 13 Highway - Analysis & Identification (Level 2) Primary Discipline by Frequency Roadway 30% Drainage 22% Structures 13% Utility 10% Traffic 8% Geotech/ Mat'l 5% Specification 5% Electrical 4% Staging 2% Landscape 1% Mapping >1%
- 14. 14 Highway - Analysis & Identification (Level 2) Primary Discipline by Cost Roadway 22% Drainage 25% Structures 9% Utility 8% Traffic 12% Geotech/ Mat'l 4% Specification 9% Electrical 4% Staging 2% Landscape 2% Mapping 2% Environmental 1%
- 15. 15 Highway Analysis & Identification (Level 2) Most Frequent Most Cost Roadway – 30% Drainage – 25% Drainage – 22% Roadway – 22% Structures – 12% Traffic – 12% Utilities – 10% Structures – 9% Traffic – 8% Specs – 9%
- 16. 16 Highway - Analysis & Identification (Level 3) 39 13 11 9 9 4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 FailureFrequency QC Activity Failure Mode Frequency (85 CCOs)
- 17. 17 Highway - Analysis & Identification (Level 3) $2.52 $1.64 $0.66 $0.63 $0.43 $0.36 Intra-Discipline Assumptions Constructability Specifications Issue Resolution Inter-Discipline Millions($) QC Activity Failure Mode Cost
- 19. 19 Grade Separation Projects - Evidence & Investigation CCOs were collected as of March 2014 • CCOs (5 Projects) – 130 [14 are credits] • CCOs Design Related - 34 • Cost - $1.4M
- 20. 20 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 1 by Frequency) 5 34 32 43 16 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Contractor Request Design Related Differing Field Conditions Owner Request Construction Changes (Credits)
- 21. 21 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 1 by Cost) Contractor Requested $315,000 (5.2%) Design Related $1,398,000 (22.9%) Differing Field Conditions $2,168,000 (35.5%) Owner Requested $2,514,000 (41.2%) Credits ($295,000) (4.8%)
- 22. 22 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 2 by Frequency) 11 13 10 6 9 12 7 13 35 14 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Frequency Discipline
- 23. 23 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 2 by Cost) Drainage $571,000 (9%) Env $1,358,000 (22%) Grading $985,000 (16%) Landscape $35,000 (1%) Partnering $116,000 (2%) Roadway $361,000 (6%) Structures $330,000 (5%) Traffic $721,000 (12%) Utilities $1,908,000 (31%) Credits -$285,000 (5%)
- 24. 24 GS - Analysis & Identification Most Cost Most Frequency Utilities – 31% Utilities – 27% Environmental – 22% Environmental – 10% Grading – 16% Traffic – 10% Traffic – 12% Roadway – 9% Grading – 8% Drainage – 8%
- 25. 25 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 3 by Frequency) 2 29 34 4 1 1 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
- 26. 26 GS - Analysis & Identification (Level 3 by Cost) Accuracy Check $139,321 (2%) Discipline Review $1,215,813 (19%) External Review $2,117,501 (33%) IDR $289,786 (5%) Ext. Coord $81,760 (1%) Mgmt Review $173,300 (3%) Unpreventable $2,367,936 (37%)
- 28. 28 Improve Design Quality Management Plan 1. Identify QC Reviewers and provide Qualifications in DQMP 2. Strengthen use of checklists to improve Accuracy (QC Procedures) 3. Improve Coordination between disciplines & subconsultants whenever design changes are made (Implement the Design Control Log) 4. Ensure current reference files are utilized by all disciplines/subconsultants to eliminate errors (EDMS) 5. Increase QA over subs (Prime conduct audits on subs)
- 29. 29 6. Engage construction professionals to perform Constructability Reviews (Validate Qualifications) 7. Use Comment Response Log that Categorizes the Comments (by Discipline then Engineering, CADD, Specifications, General) 8. DO NOT rely on As-Built data – Verify As-Built data (Assumptions) • Request adequate surveys • Perform thorough field investigations 9. Implement Risk Identification Log – Document Risks and assumptions on a Risk ID Log Improve Design Quality Management Plan
- 30. 30 Improve Construction Feedback 1. Use consistent Categories for CCOs for all Projects 2. CM/RE completes the RCA; then it’s Verified by PM/QM
- 31. 31 Implementation and Monitoring Follow up Program • Milestone QA Project Reviews at Consultants Office – Surveillances – Audits • Project Performance Assessments • Maintain the Continuous Improvement Program
- 32. 32 Q & A
- 33. 33 END
Editor's Notes
- #3: Ross – I suggest that you take the introduction and Improvements