Agenda Indian Reservation Roads Program Coordinating … · 2011. 4. 12. · Peggy Oneill – Yurok Tribe 16. ... IRRPCC Committee endorse Mr. Gishi recommendation to ask the BIA

AgendaIndian Reservation Roads Program Coordinating Committee

Best Western Ramkota Hotel and Conference CenterRapid City, SD

Tuesday, June 24, 2008Time

8:00 AM Welcome and Introductions R.Gchachu, Chairman

8:30 AM Role Call R. Galloway, Secretary

9:00 AM Review and Approve Agenda FacilitatorProtocol

9:15 AM Public Comments – 191. Michael B. Jandreau - Lower Brule Sioux Tribe2. Ben Orsbon – S. Dakota DOT3. Pete Red Tomahawk –Standing Rock Sioux - Resolution 049-084. Gerry Foell – Great Plains Regional Road Engr.5. Dr. David Gipp – UTTC, Bismark SD6. Frank Jameilson – Wisconsin Waste Co.7. Zane Arpon – Cheyenne River DOT8. Emma Featherman-Sam; Oglala Sioux Tribe DOT9. Julianne Baltar – Alaska TTWG10. Tim Ramirez – Prairie Band Potawatomie Nation11. Frances G. Antone – Tohono O’odham Nation12. Davis Pecusa – Hopi13. Tom Platero – Navajo DOT14. Irvin Bekis –15. Peggy Oneill – Yurok Tribe16. Sam Davis – Karuk Tribe17. Kevin Orcutt –18. Jacque Hostler – Trinidad Rancheria19. Pete Red Tomahawk –Standing Rock Sioux

10:15 AM BREAK

10:30 AM Update where Formal Consultation has occurred GishiPPT – Road Maintenance “Part”

10:45 AM Road Maintenance 2009 GishiPPT – FY08 Funding

11:00 AM Public Comment

12:00 Noon LUNCH

1:30 PM Funding for FY2008 (Update) Gishi



2:00 PM IRR inventory Update Gishi

2:10 PM Question 10 Update Gishi/Sparrow

3:00 PM BREAK

3:15 PM Public Comment cont –

20. Gerri Harrison, presented Navaho concerns 25CFR 170,Appendix C to Subpart C

21. Rodney M. Bordeaux – Rosebud Sioux Tribe

3:25 PM Cost Tables andCost to Construct Updates, GPRs, History, Etc. R. Frazier

5:00 PM Recess for Day



Wednesday, June 25, 2008Time


8:15 AM Prayer song – Gilbert Red Dog

8:30 AM Committee Workgroup AssignmentsResults-based planStrategic PlanNote: ERFO and Title I not yet available

9:00 AM Break into Workgroups

12:00 Noon LUNCH

1:30 PM Regroup in Workgroups

3:00 PM BREAK

3:15 PM Regroup in Workgroups

5:00 PM Adjourn for Day



Thursday, June 26, 2008Time


8:15 AM Prayer song – Gilbert Red Dog

8:30 AM Report of Workgroup Full committee

Policy

Delivery of Service

Technical Standards and Funding

12:00 Noon LUNCH

1:30 PM Full CommitteeR. Gchachu, Chairman

- July Mtg with BIA Management- Update on Top “3” Issues for each workgroup, target dates, lead- Next meeting of IRRPCC- 4 Region renewal

2:45 PM Adjourn



INDIAN RESERVATION ROADS COORDINATING COMMITTEE

Oneida September 9-11, 2008 – Motions 1-15

MOTION SHEET

Date: September 9, 2008 Type Of Meeting: Regular [X] Special [ ] Time: 4:30 PM

MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Erin Forest

MOTION 1: Adopt as amended September 2007 minutes of the Albuquerque NWmeeting.

OTE: ________ FOR: ______OPPOSED: ______ ABSTAIN: ___ NOT VOTING: MOTION CARRIED: YES [ ] NO [ ]

PASSED BY CONSENSUS: XX YES: NO:

MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: John Healy

MOTION 2: Adopt as amended December 2007 minutes of the Albuquerque NW

meeting

VOTE: ______FOR: _____ OPPOSED:____ ABSTAIN: ___ NOT VOTING: MOTION CARRIED: YES [ ] NO [ ]






MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Paulson Chaco

MOTION 3: Adopt as amended January 2008 minutes of the Albuquerque NW

meeting


PASSED BY CONSENSUS: YES: XX NO:

MOTION SHEET

Date: September 11, 2008 Type Of Meeting: Regular [X] Special [ ] Time: 8:30 AM

MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Kirk Vinish

MOTION 4: Adopt as amended January 2008 minutes of the Albuquerque NW meeting. Exclude

Motion #2,

Date: January 30, 2008 Type Of Meeting: Regular [ ] Special [X] Time: 1:15 PM

MOTION BY: John Smith, RMR 2ND BY: Erin Forest, Western Region

MOTION 2: Motion to adopt the IRR Fund Matrix document as a “Working” tool to determine

tribal share % funding mechanism.

VOTE: __ FOR:_______ OPPOSED: ____ABSTAIN: __ NOT VOTING: MOTION CARRIED: YES [ ] NO [ ]






MOTION SHEET

Date: September 11, 2008 Type Of Meeting: Regular [X] Special [ ] Time: 8:45 AM

MOTION BY: Erin Forest 2ND BY: Ben Banfield

MOTION 5: Recommend that the committee authorize Mr. LeRoy Gishi to proceed with thefederal procurement process for the recording of the IRRPCC meetings.


PASSED BY CONSENSUS: ___ YES: : XX NO:

MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Robert Endicott 2ND BY: Ben Banfield

MOTION 6: Next meeting - to be held in WA DC at the same time in January 2009 that the AS-IA is available for the IRRPCC semi-annual meeting.


PASSED BY CONSENSUS: ___ YES: XX_ NO:





MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Erin Forrest

MOTION 7: Next meeting - to be held in Albuquerque, NM in the week of December 14th

2008. Letters to AS-IA and Mr. John Baxter inviting to the meeting.

VOTE: FOR: OPPOSED: ABSTAIN: NOT VOTING: MOTION CARRIED: YES [ ] NO [ ]


MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Kirk Vinish

MOTION 8: Recommend adoption: Other Transportation facilities – Motion to have otherTransportation Facilities such as Barge Facilities, Docks and Mooring Facilities, Depots, BusShelters, Transit Facilities, Seaplane Facilities, etc. to be included as eligible inventory activitycoded as a class 9. Other Transportation Facilities will include all facilities allowable expenditures inregulation.


PASSED BY CONSENSUS XX YES: ___ NO:





MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Ben Banfield

MOTION 9: Recommend adopting DOS motion: Boardwalks and Board Roads – Motion to

have Boardwalks and Board Roads implemented into the Indian Reservation Roads Inventory as a

class 5 by a default. As Primitive Surface Types. Once they are built the construction need would be

zero. Add or expand GPR’s cost tables for regions that this would be relevant to?



MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Sam Thomas 2ND BY: Mike Moilanen

MOTION 10: Recommend to adopt the DOS committee motion: “Ice Roads” – Motion to havemanagement look into the legal of having “Ice Roads” being eligible road to be implemented into theIndian Reservation Roads National Inventory and Tribes being able to expend IRR funds on “IceRoads”.







MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Pete Red Tomahawk 2ND BY: Ben Banfield

MOTION 11: Recommend to adopt the Policy committee motion: Sampson Begay moved to

approve the new BIA flexible financing procedure as an acceptable initial response to the

Committee’s request, but further requested that the Committee continue to monitor the

implementation of this new policy and request that BIA training and education efforts be made to

educate Tribal leaders about this new procedure. JoAnn Polston seconded the motion. The Policy

Workgroup passed the motion and forwarded its recommendation to the Committee for approval by

consensus



MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Pete Red Tomahawk 2ND BY: Erin Forrest

MOTION 12: Recommend to adopt the Policy committee motion: that the Full Committeerecommend that Acting Assistant Secretary Skibine immediately approve the Model Title I Contractfor use by BIA Regional offices and Tribes as a template, unless the Tribe requests that a differentformat be used. It is further moved that the Committee recommend that Tribes that are unable tosecure a Model Title I Contract from their BIA Regional Office be authorized by Mr. Skibine tonegotiate the Model Title I Contract with Awarding Officials appointed by BIA Headquarters inWashington, D.C. or Albuquerque, New Mexico. It is additionally further moved that the Committeerecommend that this new procedure be established no later than November 28, 2008 and that, if thisprocedure is not established, Acting Assistant Secretary Skibine and BIA Director Gidner be invitedto attend the next IRR Program Coordinating Committee meeting in person to discuss this issue withthe committee.







MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: JoAnn Polston 2ND BY: Royce Gchachu

MOTION 13: Recommend to adopt the Policy committee motion: that the FullIRRPCC Committee endorse Mr. Gishi recommendation to ask the BIA Director to send a formalpolicy memorandum to all BIA Regional Directors clarifying that each BIA Regional Office mustprovide all Tribes with:

Their current approved IRR Inventory by November 1st (in paper or electronic form,as requested by the Tribe). This means that the information must be sent severaldays earlier so that Tribes will receive it by the deadline.

An acknowledgement letter upon the Regional Office’s receipt of each Tribe’sMarch 15th inventory submission (in paper or electronic form, as requested by theTribe)

An “errors and omissions” review letter by May 15th explaining in sufficient detailwhat corrections should be made in order for the Tribe’s submission to be approvedby the Regional Office and transferred to BIADOT. This means that the reviewletter must be sent several days earlier so Tribes will receive it by the deadline. Thisletter should be sent to the Tribal leadership and copied to the Tribal TransportationDepartment or Planner.

It is further moved that the Committee recommend that this policy memorandum also statethat adherence to the 25 CFR. Part 170 IRR Inventory update deadlines will be a key BIAperformance measure in FY 2009 and that Regional Offices will be held accountable for compliancewith the regulations.





MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: JoAnn Polston 2ND BY: Robert Endicott

MOTION 14: Recommend to adopt the Policy committee motion: that the full IRRPCCCommittee endorse Mr. Gishi recommendation to establish Q/A review teams for new inventorysubmittals, made up of Tribal and Federal officials, with the understanding the Tribal memberswould not review Inventory data in their own region. It is further moved that the Committee requesta formal briefing from Mr. Kipp and Mr. Kie at the next scheduled IRRPCC meeting to provideadvice and recommendations to the Policy Workgroup on technical improvements to the Inventoryreview process in light of the fact that the BIA now has access to Internet resources. This briefingshould not make any recommendations that would add additional burdens or requirements for Tribesthat are beyond the requirements in 25 CFR Part 170 or the Ragsdale “Minimum Attachment”memorandum.





MOTION SHEET


MOTION BY: Erin Forest 2ND BY: Ben Banfield

MOTION 15: Motion to adjourn the meeting.



Indian Reservation RoadsConstruction Costs Update

June 24, 2008Rapid City, South Dakota

Outline

• Introduction• Cost Data Transformation• Cost Update Process• Data Management Issues• Review of Cost Updates

Relative Need Distribution Formula

• 50% Cost-to-Construct• 30% Vehicles Miles Traveled• 20% Population

Importance of Costs

• Cost to Construct (CTC) factor contributes to fifty percent

• CTC is driven significantly by what it costs to construct one mile of road

• Costs X Miles on a reservation = CTC• Tribes benefit from timely and accurate

updates while outdated and inaccurate cost data have the opposite impact.

Current Cost Data System

• The Final Rule does not adequately address the existing Construction Cost Data system, now we need to:– Understand the system – Identify the deficiencies– Improve the current system

What are Construction Costs?• Cost Accounting System

Job Cost Accounting - Accumulated by part number or contract- Dependent on historical and recorded data

• Construction CostsUnit Costs – The cost to build one-mile of roadway.

Unit Cost = $ / mile

What are Construction Costs?Costs vary due to• Geo-Political Region (GPR)

– Geographical location– Total (61)

• Functional classification of the road – Classification

– Terrain (Flat, Rolling, Mountainous)

– Roadway Width

How are the construction costs developed?

• Cost data is developed by the Regional Offices from

– Bid tabulations and/or Engineer Estimates of projects constructed

– P.L. 93-638 contracts

– Competitive contracts

– BIA force account


• The unit bid costs used are the initial costs as submitted by the successful low bidder.

• The unit bid list is broken down into four categories and :

• Incidental construction F3113• Grade & Drain construction F3109 • Gravel construction F3110 • Pavement construction F3111


• Each unit bid item is placed in its appropriate category.

• Each categories sum is computed and divided by the length of roadway being constructed and this equals the cost to construct a mile of roadway.

Unit Cost = $ / mile

Construction Costs• Total Number of IRR Costs

19 - Adequate Design Standards

61 – Geo-Political Regions (GPR)

4 – Construction Categories

4636 Individual Costs in the IRR Program

Costs related to the RNDF

• Inventory Data needed to locate costs– Inventory location identifier (Region,Agency,Res.)– State Code– Class Code– Terrain

Costs in RIFDS

• RIFDS Navigation Screen• Cost Module Screen (In use only)• Costs Tables• Controls Tab (Route Summary)• QA Detail Report for Roads• Geo Political Region Report

Cost Data Transformation

Cost Data Transformation

• Final Rule established a new funding formula– Road Classifications were changed. – Existing Cost Data became incompatible and

conversion of cost data was necessary.

2004 Cost Conversion

• In June 2005, discrepancies were identified with the cost tables due to the initial cost conversion.

• Where a number of cost cells had values much lower than were previously listed severely impacting a tribe’s annual allocation amount.

• Proposed to redo the conversion and only populate the zeroes.

2005 Cost Conversion• Existing Cost Data (2003 cost data file)

– Estimated costs– Actual costs– No costs (zero values) – Blanks (no cost & embedded cost)– The zero values were

• Cost cells that were never populated or may have been ignored.

• Because many zero values were not considered in the formula calculations because many road classifications do not exist in those states/GPRs

Steps in Cost Conversion1. Accounted for the existing costs by utilizing

those costs– Used historical data files to identify existing costs

2. Consolidated costs in correlation with Cost Tables Conversion.– Used the upper limit (existing) to satisfy conversion

3. Identified the zero values in the cost values4. Verified the zeroes by a search for

hidden/embedded values5. In accordance with 25CFR Part 170, first used

the state values to fill empty cells6. Completed filling empty cells with national

average values.

Cost Update Process

Cost Update Process• RIFDS allows the BIADOT to input the

cost data in the new format. • However the data entry and validation

process of the cost updates still exist in paper form, external to the computer program.

• BIADOT manually reviews the submittals for completeness and acceptability

Cost Update Process

• Regional office submits the cost data to BIADOT in accordance with the Chief of Transportation’s memo issued March, 2001, Process to Standardize the Cost to Construct Factors Within the Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) Program.

Cost Update Process• The memo provides:

• Standardized list of categorized items– Based on FP-96

• Defines Scope and Source of data– 5 years of previous construction cost data

• Consistency by an input format– Methods – Calculations

• Quality assurance – Organize existing Data & Data Collection Procedures

COST TO CONSTRUCT CATEGORY FP-96 BID ITEM

Incidental Construction CostsMobilizationConstruction stakingErosion control measuresRip-rapRemovalsConstruction surveyingConstruction inspectionMaterials testingGuardrailPermanent traffic control devicesStripingSignageConcrete barriersObstruction removalPavement removalTemporary construction traffic controlSidewalksCurb & gutterFencingLandscapingStructural concreteTraffic signalsUtilitiesManhole AdjustmentsTopsoil

Grade & Drain Construction

Clearing and GrubbingRoadway excavationAll drainage structures and appurtenances

Gravel Construction

Aggregate bases

Aggregate surfacing

Pavement ConstructionHot Mix Asphalt pavements

Surface Treatments - Prime coats, tack coats

Aggregates and Asphalt Materials - Chip Seals

Concrete pavements

Example of Report FormPay Incidental Construction Grade & Drain Construction Grave Item ITEM NAME Unit Cost Quantity Unit Amount Quantity Unit Amount Quantity

15101 Mobilization $37,500.00 1.00 L.S. $37,500.00 15201 Construction Staking $16,000.00 1.00 L.S. $16,000.00 15301 Contractor Quality Control and Inspection $31,500.00 1.00 L.S. $31,500.0015401 Contractor Sampling and Testing $3,000.00 1.00 L.S. $3,000.0015501 Construction Schedule $1,000.00 1.00 L.S. $1,000.00

15801 Watering for Dust Control $5.00 100.00 Mgal $500.0020401 Roadway Excavation $5.00 4408.00 cy $22,040.0030101 Aggregate Base Grading $8.00 11960.0040101 Hot Asphalt Concrete Pavement

class grading, pavement smoothness $33.0040103 Asphalt Cement Grade 13A $225.0041202 Tack Coat $2.0060216 Concrete Pipe, Class 4, 30" x 19" $35.00 222.00 lf $7,770.0060216 Concrete Pipe, Class 4, 38" x 24" $45.00 110.00 lf $4,950.0060222 Concrete Culvert End Section, 30" x 19" $400.00 6.00 each $2,400.0060222 Concrete Culvert End Section, 38" x 24" $550.00 4.00 each $2,200.0060902 Portland Cement Concrete Curb and Gutter,

mm Depth Det B2 $20.00 157.00 lf $3,140.0062102 Marker, Culvet $40.00 10.00 each $400.0062404 Placing Conserved Topsoil, 4" depth $1.00 8060.00 sy $8,060.0062502 Seeding, Dry Method $12.00 150.00 lb $1,800.0062505 Mulching, Dry Method $0.25 8060.00 sy $2,015.0062507 Fertilizer, Dry Method $25.00 5.00 cwt $125.0063302 Sign Installation $15.00 55.90 sf $838.50 63305 Wood Posts $40.00 11.00 each $440.0063501 Temporary Traffic Control $2,500.00 1.00 L.S. $2,500.00 63401 Pavement Markings, 4 " Epoxy $0.10 13388.00 lf $1,338.8063401 Pavement Markings, Channelizing, 8 " Epox $1.00 200.00 lf $200.0071316 Silt Fence $2.25 2750.00 lf $6,187.50

Cost $116,144.80 Cost $39,760.00

Average Cost to construct one mile of road $184,356.83 $63,111.11

The review criteria identified at BIADOT are:

• The project from which the costs are derived is relative to the cost of a road construction project.

• The classification of the road, based on information provided from the Plan title and typical sheet, must correspond to the appropriate Adequate Design Standard being proposed which is in accordance to Table 1 Appendix C.

• The bid items from a given initial bid schedule or negotiated bid schedule are appropriately separated into the four construction types and formatted for review.

• On the formatted breakout sheet, the sums of each four construction types are divided by the total project length.

Cost Update Process

• An annual deadline date for submission of cost data has not been established under the New Rule.

• The former deadline coincided with the annual IRR inventory update deadline (June 1st of each year).

• Presently BIADOT is considering June 15th as the deadline for cost update submissions.

Data Management Issues

Cost InputData Source

Data Elements

Cost Input• So costs may remain as high as possible • Requests to update a specific cost cell when

replacement across the four construction types would result in lower costs of other costs cells are permissible.

• Undesired costs are blocked out in the submittal package to signify its hold back.

• Has been implemented when existing/actual costs are considered.

Cost Input• Populating multiple cost cells with one set of

data, which covers more than one Adequate Design Standard.

• Where the ADSs are within the same functional classification. – Mountainous used for Rolling costs.– Rolling used for Flat costs.

• Historically there is no evidence of this practice and has not been implemented.

Cost Input• Three sources of data are required to justify

costs exceeding the $1,000,000 per mile level of any of the four construction types.

• Previously, projects had been accepted that were unreasonably high, so in order to contain these anomalies this method was implemented.

Data Source• The PS&E requirement as supporting

documentation needs endorsement. – Its primary purpose is to support the Bid Tab

amounts – and correlate the cost data with the physical

geometry of the roadway. – The verification of the functional

classification and confirmation of the standard unit of measure (English/Metric) are derived from the title and typical section sheets.

Data Source

• Obtaining construction cost data from state transportation departments has been the concern of IRR Regional offices.

• The obstacle relates to the difficulties in obtaining the PS&E as supporting documents to the cost data.

• Although this is an identified problem it is important to the approval process.

Data Source

• In addition previously mentioned data source (State DOTs) past practice has required the Regional office to convert the state bid item descriptions to the FP-96 bid item descriptions.

• Regional offices have requested this task be performed at the BEO headquarters.

Data Source• State DOT data is commonly used for estimating

construction costs for upcoming projects.• The data is typically compiled from numerous

road projects that are not separated by road classifications.

• Additionally the units provided by the states are average bid item costs as opposed to the units (cost per mile) used in the TAP calculations.

• Consider applying one standard project type in order to utilize these data such as; 12 ft. wide lanes, 2 miles in length, with specific depth of base materials and standard number of Incidental items, etc.

Data ElementsProject Types

The following types of projects do not adequately reflect the costs relative to road construction, therefore are not acceptable as data.• Bridge Projects• Traffic Signal Installations• Landscaping/Enhancements• Safety Improvements

Data ElementsModifications

– The original contract bid amount is required for the breakdown of the bid items.

– The total of the bid items must equal the original bid amount.

– Contract modification amounts are not considered part of the road construction costs and are not part of the cost calculations.

Data ElementsProject Length

– The length of a project has significant impacts on the cost data.

– The unit of construction cost is dollars per mile ($/mi.),

– So the shorter the project length (< one mile), the cost increases inversely.

– Road construction projects with project lengths less than one mile have generated over-inflated costs.

Data ElementsLump Sum Bid Items

– There are Regions that prefer to divide these costs among the four construction categories.

– This is not customary and does not benefit the cost amounts.

– Because incidental costs are primarily the first costs to be generated in the formula, sometimes never generating gravel and pavement costs.

Data ElementsPhased Construction

– Two or three phases are compiled into one cost data package. Is there one project or a series of projects? 1. This method increases the costs of lump sum

items significantly. (Mobilization: 2X, 3X) 2. Example:

– Excavation & Rock, Phase I; – Grade and Drain, Phase II; – Paving, Phase III. (includes chip seal)

– Acceptable if all work is within one contract.

Review of Cost Updates

FY Summaries

Review of Cost Updates

• FY 2000 – FY2008 Updates

• FY Summaries

Contact

Robert FrazierHighway EngineerBIADOT, Branch of Engineering & Operations1001 Indian School Rd., Suite 249AAlbuquerque, NM 87104(505) 563-3319

Agenda Indian Reservation Roads Program Coordinating … · 2011. 4. 12. · Peggy Oneill – Yurok Tribe 16. ... IRRPCC Committee endorse Mr. Gishi recommendation to ask the BIA

Documents