Construction Manager at Risk Project Overview and Performance Jenica Keller, PE Assistant Chief of Project Management NDOT

What is CMAR?

Procurement Strategy Solicitation: RFP and Interview Evaluation & Selection process: – Qualification based – Best Value (qualification + Fee)

GMP Partnering ICE 3 ICE 1 OPCC 2 OPCC 3 ICE 2 OPCC 1 CMAR Process

NDOT Experience 4 projects – Diverging Diamond Interchange, pavement, structural and tunnel rehabilitation, ITS and bike path $1.5M to $31M Others under consideration

Moana Lane Improved Efficiency & Safety … Same Footprint Location and Scope I-580 at Moana in Reno Construct DDI $7M

Moana Lane Why CMAR? Adjacent local agency project High traffic volumes Subgrade issues

Stateline to Stateline Bikeway Location and Scope US-50 near South Lake Tahoe Construct multi- use path $1.5M

Stateline to Stateline Bikeway Why CMAR? Environmentally sensitive area Intense multi-agency coordination Very short construction season during peak tourist activity

Carlin Tunnels Location and Scope I-80 at Carlin Rehabilitate pavement, structures, tunnels and lighting $31M

Carlin Tunnels Why CMAR? State of the art LED Tunnel Lighting Environmentally sensitive area Unknown bridge deck conditions Tight working conditions Availability of labor/housing

. Kingsbury Grade Location and Scope SR-207 near South Lake Tahoe Rehab pavement and drainage $15-18M

Kingsbury Grade Why CMAR? Environmentally sensitive Very short construction season during peak tourist activity MOT and schedule Utilities Groundwater Stakeholders

How are we doing? Innovation Budget Schedule Risk

Program Performance - Innovation Multiple GMPs: – Early procurement of materials More scope for same budget Aggressive construction schedule/sequence More efficient methods

Program Performance - Budget Average preconstruction cost relative to bid  1.8% CMAR  1.5% ICE Average difference in bid  -2.8% CMAR/ICE  1.6% CMAR/Engineer Average savings from innovation  11.7%

Program Performance – Schedule Contractor’s input improved the schedule by identifying multiple shifts, increased production rates, etc. This resulted in reducing overall construction duration.

Program Performance – Risk Risks identified and mitigated during design CMAR owns quantity risk Average risk reserve budget relative to bid  2.5% CMAR  3-5% for DBB Trend shows risk reserves are adequate with budget remaining (NDOT retains) at closeout Budget related change orders = 0

What lessons have we learned? Program Procurement Construction

Lessons Learned - Program Designate an executive level champion Learn from others Ensure industry support Form an internal program team Evaluate each step along the way and adjust Known, fair and followed!

Lessons Learned - Procurement Communicate project goals, evaluation criteria Past CMAR experience wasn’t required Consider a pre-proposal meeting Evaluation and Selection: multi-disciplinary team; E&S plan; orientation/training Allow industry/FHWA to observe Offer debrief meetings

Lessons Learned - Construction Earlier communication and coordination leads to higher quality Overrun/Underrun Risk Easy to implement: not a significant culture change and minimal process changes required

Conclusion CMAR has been successful NDOT will continue to use CMAR