ACEC‐INDOTLIAISONCOMMITTEE2014‐‘15

AGENDA

April 23, 2015‐10:00AM–Noon

LOCATION:

Indiana State Library 315 West Ohio Street in Author’s Room

  1. Welcome/Introductions/OpeningComments(Starting10:00am)

The following were in attendance:

Scott Adams – INDOT

Mark Miller - INDOT

Trevor Mills - INDOT

Trent Newport – Chair

Scott Hornsby – Board Liason

Nick Jahn – Secretary

Beth Bauer - ACEC

Louis Feagans

Jim Stark

Bill Bailey

John Brand

Jeff Byrd

Cash Canfield

Melissa Effinger

Kurt Heidenreich

Laurie Johnson

Dustin Quincy

Jeff Mahan

Dave Matson

Brad Miller

Gary Mroczka

Dandi Prasad

Michael Rowe

Scot Sondles

Alex Lee

Greg Wendling

  1. HOT TOPICS!
  • INDOT hiring freeze

Brandye Hendrickson has been named the new INDOT Commissioner. ACEC will be meeting with Commissioner Hendrickson in the near future to discuss several items that Former Commissioner Browning was pushing that ACEC feels would be detrimental to INDOT’s program. These items are as follows:

  • The 2 year cooling off period for all staff leaving INDOT. The cooling off period would restrict all employees, not just decision makers, from working on INDOT projects for a period of 2 years.
  • The separation of PE & CE funding. INDOT is proposing to utilize state funds (only) and value proposition selection for procuring PE services. This policy may not comply with the Brooks Act for federally funded projects.
  • Implementation of quantity purchasing agreements. Quantity purchasing agreements would essentially establish a specified labor rate for professional services. INDOT would then seek qualified firms to complete work at the specified rate.
  • Potential INDOT changes to PE contracting methods

See above discussion regarding quantity purchasing agreements.

  • Errors & Omissions

INDOT has been contacting Consultants to explore potential recoverables due to errors and omissions.

Thus far, most of these conversations have centered around utility coordination. If there are delays in construction or conflicts due to utility related issues, INDOT will come back to consultant to see if enough was done to avoid these issues. The main issue with this is that utilities do not want to commit until late in the design process and at that point additional fee is typically required to design around utilities. Consultants and INDOT need to work together in order to make sure that utilities are at the table sooner in the design process.

INDOT wants to score utility coordination as a performance metric. This particular task will be very difficult to score since utility coordination depends on many outside items that are outside of the Consultant’s control. At this point, scoring utility coordination is likely; ACEC needs to be involved in developing this metric.

Additional education with INDOT staff might be required to explain that E&O should not be utilized as a revenue stream.

  • Issue Resolution Process

Language describing the issue resolution process has been sent to ACEC for review. Beth Bauer will distribute the language to the group for review and comment.

The issue resolution process is meant to be a positive tool that can be utilized to initiate the proper conversations if INDOT has an issue with a Consultant and vice versa.

  • CPESC Training

CPESC Training will be held on June 4th in Indianapolis.

A corresponding certification exam must be passed in order to receive certification. ACEC is currently in talks to allow the exam to be completed on-line rather than at a proctored site. Once this is determined, ACEC will send out an update to firms who have expressed interest in attending the training.

Additional information regarding erosion and sediment control training can be found in the remarks provided by Mark Miller.

  • INDOT Scoring

INDOT Scoring will be discussed at the next Can-Do meeting in June.

John Brand will distribute comments collected from member firms and distribute to the group for review and comment. It is asked that all members review and provide any additional comments by the end of next week (5/1/15).

INDOT seems to be willing to discuss the potential of allowing abbreviated LOI’s for preservation projects such as bridge rehabs. With that said, some scorers want to see a full 12 page LOI regardless of the project type, while some would be fine with seeing less. Data showing how increased LOI requirements affect indirect overhead rates might be required in order to make the case that an abbreviated LOI might be appropriate in certain situations.

  1. TeamIndiana: April 9, 2015‐MeetingAgenda and Handouts
  • UpdateonhighlightsbyScott/Beth

Meeting notes from the Team Indiana Meeting were distributed to the full committee via email.

The draft Conexus report is due in June. It will be used to start conveying infrastructure needs to the legislature and laying the groundwork for the 2017 budget.

INDOT would like 85% of projects to be under contract within 14 days of letting. This metric is currently at 11%. INDOT is considering requiring LPA’s pay their match prior to letting.

  1. CAN‐DO: March 23, 2015–MeetingMinutes
  • UpdateonhighlightsbyBethBauer

Meeting notes from the CAN-DO Meeting were distributed to the full committee via email.

ACEC will confirm with Commissioner Hendrickson on her desire to continue holding CAN-DO meetings.

There will likely be a call for LPA projects this coming fall.

ACEC is concerned that on the tendency of INDOT to structure “on-call” design development projects is hourly vs. lump sum. This is something that needs to be brought with Commissioner Hendrickson during a future meeting.

ACEC to help reduce INDOT (contracting staff) workloads by suggesting potential methods (i.e. project bundling) that lessen the amount of contracts that require processing.

  1. Sub-CommitteeUpdates
  1. FAR–BethBauer

No Meeting

  1. LPA –Laurie Johnson

March 4th meeting minutes

Meeting notes from the LPA Sub-Committee were distributed to the full committee via email.

  1. INDOTPrequalification

No meeting

Next meeting May 7th at 9 am Room N755

  1. BridgeInspection–Scott Hornsby

No meeting

  1. 11:00 AM Scott Adams and Mark Miller with INDOT

Scott Adams made the following remarks:

Scott has taken over a new rolewithin INDOT and will now serve as the Director of Project Delivery (Louis Feagans former position).

One of INDOT’s major initiatives will be the assimilation of LPA PM’s into INDOT’s capital program.

Once all PM”s are on board, traditional district lines will no longer exist. PM’s and in-house designers will pair up to match capacity and talents. An example of this would be if 9 projects are located in a particular corridor. All 9 projects would be assigned to a single PM regardless of where that particular PM sits. With that said, it is unlikely that a Ft. Wayne District project is assigned to a Vincennes District PM, unless special circumstances dictate such an assignment.

INDOT will look at expertise and capacity when making assignments on what will be done in-house. It is likely that more and a more diverse array of projects will go to Consultants.

INDOT is in the process of developing a draft plan to implement the proposed organizational changes. The draft plan will be submitted on June 1, with implementation expected by July 1. An organizational chart will be prepared and submitted to ACEC.

The point of many of the organizational changes is to empower districts to make project level decisions. Only when political or other barriers exist will these decisions get elevated.

INDOT is pursuing full and complete implementation of practical design across all areas of the organization. Some re-calibration of views is still required within INDOT.

ACEC needs to make INDOT aware of when practical design / innovation is not being embraced within INDOT, as this is an opportunity to sit down and understand why it (practical design) is not being embraced.

Currently, LPA PM’s have different performance metrics than capital program PM’s. The same metrics will be used to evaluation PM’s regardless of what type of project is assigned.

Traditional PM’s that were assigned major moves projects will no longer be direct reports to Scott or Trevor. They will now report to the same structure as all other PM’s.

The direct reports to Scott will be the 6 capital program directors in each district office.

Trevor Mills made the following remarks:

Trevor has taken over a new roll within INDOT and will now serve as Director of Project Support.

In his new role, Trevor will work to ensure consistent practices across all INDOT PM’s. The goal is to minimize the phase “This is how we do it in such and such district”.

All questions regarding the LPA program will still go to Kathy Eaton McKalip.

All questions regarding project specific items need to go through the PM’s.

Mark Miller made the following remarks:

INDOT revised the Section 205 Specification Section via a recurring special provision that will be used on projects specifically selected by INDOT. The concept behind the new Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) Process is for Contractor’s to take control of developing the stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) where it makes sense.

Thus for, 5 projects will utilize the special provision in 2015 and only 1 project will use it in 2016. This number may fluctuate as additional projects are analyzed.

The Consultant will still be responsible for developing the erosion and sediment control plans for the project. The Contractor will then be responsible for developing the SWPPP and modifying the ESC Plans as appropriate.

The SWPPP must be developed by a Professional Engineer who also holds a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC) certification. Because of this, Contractors will likely procure the services of Consultant’s to perform this task.

Changes in the Consultant developed ESC Plans will not require an additional submittal to IDEM. INDOT will be able to administratively approve changes to the plans.

An allowance pay item (E&SC Budget) will be included in the contract for temporary erosion and sediment control measures. The allowance will be based on the ESC Plans developed by the Consultant and established prices for ESC measures determined by INDOT. The Contractor will have to provide a lump sum cost for the E&SC QCP Preparation and Implementation pay item which includes the preparation of the SWPPP, plan modifications, field visits, etc.

The ESC Plans may be modified such that they are developed in phases. For example the initial phase may only include those measures required for initial clearing and grubbing work that takes place prior to grade changing activities. The second phase may then include all other measures. If phased activities are pursued, the latter phases may not begin until the appropriate revisions are approved by IDEM.

The Contractor must designate a staff member as a storm water quality manager, which requires various certifications. Only one person within the Contractor’s organization needs to be designated as the storm water quality manager. The storm water quality manager would then be responsible for all other construction staff assigned to inspect and implement ESC Measures.

INDOT will make sure that projects that utilize the special provisions are made well known in advance such that Contractor’s and Consultants can get personnel certified.

E&O Training was discussed and it was determined that separating out E&O training (from site manager training) and providing a separate class for Consultants would be very beneficial. The goal would be to hold training sessions sooner rather than later and in various locations so that field personnel could leave active jobs without having to spend a large amount of time traveling.

  1. NextCommitteeMeeting
  • June 18th at 10 am– location to be determined