national stakeholder’s meeting on managing for excellence: an action plan for the 21 st century...
TRANSCRIPT
National Stakeholder’s Meeting on Managing For Excellence:
An Action Plan for the 21st Century Bureau of Reclamation
Implementation of the Action Plan
• Reclamation’s Action Plan Published February 2006• Implementing Action Plan
• Phase I Information Collection and Decision Making (Mar 2006 – Dec 2007)
• Phase II Implementation (2008)• Phase III Execution (2008 forward)
Scope & Nature of the Action Plan
• National Research Council Report, “Managing Construction and Infrastructure in the 21st Century Bureau of Reclamation” catalyst
• Multiple Sources Consulted– 2004 Reclamation Customer Survey– Written Input from Stakeholders– Other Reclamation Reports– ‘Lessons Learned’
• Provides The Philosophy And Underpinnings Of How Recommendations will be Formulated
Functional Areas
• Relationships With Customers & Other Stakeholders
• Policy and Organization• Engineering and Design Services• Major Repair Challenges• Project Management• Asset Sustainment• Research and Lab Services• Human Resources/Workforce
• Trudy Harlow
• Roseann Gonzales• Maryanne Bach• Mike Ryan• Rick Gold• Bill Rinne• Maryanne Bach• Larry Todd
Immediate Office of the Commissioner
*CIO reports Administratively to the Director of Administration
Following Border denotes office location:
Washington, D.C. Denver, CORegions
Chief of StaffKerry Rae (Acting)
Director, ProgramAnd BudgetRobert Wolf
Deputy CommissionerExternal & Intergovernmental Affairs
Trudy Harlow (Acting)
CommissionerBill Rinne (Acting)
Bureau of Reclamation OrganizationFebruary 6, 2006
Manager, WO Admin ServicesJanice Johnson
Public AffairsTrudy Harlow
Congressional andLegislative Affairs
Vacant
Associate DirectorRobert Quint
Regional Liaison Group
Native American Affairs
Chris Kenney
International AffairsDick Ives
Associate DirectorJames Hess
Director, WO OperationsFred Ore
Associate DirectorJennifer Gimbel
Regional Director PN Region
Bill McDonald
Regional Director, MP Region
Kirk Rodgers
Regional Director, LC Region
Robert Johnson
Regional Director, UC RegionRick Gold
Regional Director, GP RegionMike Ryan
Assistant Director, Program and Budget
Louis Mauney
Public Affairs – Denver
Peter Soeth
Director,Program and
Policy ServicesRoseann Gonzales
Program Support Services
Lilas Lindell
Land ResourcesRichard Rizzi
Power ResourcesDeborah Linke
Water & Environmental Resources Jari Beek
Contract ServiceSandi Simons
Maintenance ServicesKen Maxey
Deputy Commissioner, OperationsRegional Directors (Acting)
Deputy CommissionerPolicy, Administration and Budget
Larry Todd
Director, Management Service Office
Elizabeth Harrison
Director, Administration
vacant
Chief Information OfficeRandy Feuerstein
*
Manager, Civil Rights& EEO
Keith Kirkpatrick (Acting)
Manager,Human ResourcesAnn Gold (Acting)
Financial Policy
Doug Denardo (Acting)
Acquisition & Assistance
ManagementKarla Smiley
Business AnalysisEd Abreo
Finance & AccountingEffraim Escalante
Property & Office ServicesRoger Molinar
Director, SSLEDavid Achterberg (Acting)
Program ManagementKathy Norris
Law EnforcementVincent Parolisi
Safety & Health ServicesLinda Rowley
Dam SafetyBruce Muller
Security OfficeDonald Taussig
Washington Liaison Grp
Director, Research and
DevelopmentChuck Hennig (Acting)
DSO/ DEC Manager
Bruce Moore (Acting)
Power Liaison with COE/TVAMichael Roluti
Director, Technical Resources
Maryanne Bach
Director, TSCMike Gabaldon
Steps for Accomplishing Action Items
• Assign Task to the Appropriate Entity (completed Mar 14)
• Define the Task (substantially complete)
– Outreach Plan– Budget/Staff Needs– Milestones
• Analysis of Issues/Problems (has been initiated)
• Development of Alternatives & Recommendations
(to be completed by Dec 2007 for all items) • Decision Making (to be completed by Dec 2007 for all items)
Key Action Items for Stakeholders Meeting• Engineering, action items 9-16• Asset Sustainment, action items 25-28, 30• Major Repair Challenges, action item 18
Engineering & Design Services
Purpose– Develop 21st Century service model
• Maintain a Center of Engineering & Design Excellence– Re-evaluate Reclamation/Industry Standards
• Determine costs• Determine who pays
Engineering & Design Services
Key Elements:• Assess historic and present workload
– Utilize A-76 methodology• Examine and critique Reclamation and Industry standards• Analyze Unit Cost• In-house versus Outsourcing• Right Size Technical Resources of the Agency• Identify funding options consistent with the 1902 Act, as
amended • Pilot DEC and establish policies and procedures
Engineering & Design Services Action Items
9. Workload Evaluation (TSC, Regional & Area Offices)
10. Workload Evaluation (A-76, Sustain Core Capability)
11. Analyze Unit Cost: In-house Versus Outsourcing
12. Right-Size Design, Estimating, and Construction Management
13. Alternate Funding of Engineering and Design
14. Implement Design Engineering Cost Estimating Oversight
15. Establish Agency Policy for Oversight of Design and Construction Estimates
16. Analyze Reclamation’s Engineering Standards
Team Leads
• 9 & 11. Jamie Macartney, Business Resources Manager, Great Plains Region
• 10. Gayle Shanahan, Funds Manager Office Of Program and Policy Services, Denver
• 12. Jamie Macartney & Perry Hensley, Chief, Geotechnical Services Division, Denver
• 13. Larry Walkoviak, Deputy Regional Director, Lower Colorado Region
• 14-15. Bruce Moore, DSO/ DEC Manager, Denver• 16. Gerry Kelso, Area Manager, Upper Columbia Area Office
16. Analyze Reclamation’s Engineering Standards
Key Milestones:• Identify and review Reclamation practices for
internal and external designs• Collect and review internal policies and reports• Review external/industry design standards and
guidelines• Meet with external entities to assess design
practices• Determine best practices
12. Complete Right Sizing Process for Design, Engineering & Construction
Key Milestones:• Assess existing technical capabilities and workload
profiles (complete #9)• Identify required core capabilities and subsequent
staffing levels• Seek input on outsourcing and retaining/
consolidating/eliminating lab services (#32 !)• Seek input on workload categorization according to
A-76 (#10)• Summarize in-house vs. outsourcing efficiency• ID staffing levels, location, and outsourcing options
Major Repair Challenges
Purpose Overview:
• Challenges extending beyond “Managing Existing Infrastructure.”
• Three Additional Questions:– Finance– Risk Management– Innovation
17 … Loan Guarantee Authority and Implementation – Sandie Simons, Manager, Water Contracts and Repayment
Office
18 … Process and Tools to Determine “Go” or “No Go” – Tim Ulrich, Area Manager, Lower Colorado Dams Office
19 … Involving Stakeholders to Increase Value– Steven Jarsky, Manager, O&M Technical Services West,
Snake River Area Office
Major Repair Action Items
18 – Develop processes or measuring tools to determine whether a major repair project is warranted.
• Existing Processes• Internal Feedback• External Feedback• Need for Additional Processes• Develop Additional Processes• Alternatives and Recommendations
O&M Activity
Work Order Prepared
MaintenancePerformed
Asset Operates to Standard
Justification PreparedWith Alternatives Using
Standard Tools orMeasures
Asset Operates to Standard
RepairJustified
Asset Placed Back in Servicewith Diminished Service
New PerformanceStandard Is Established
Repair isPerformed
Asset PlacedBack In Service
Asset PlacedBack In Service
Asset RemainsIn Service
Asset Assessment
Condition DocumentedWith Impacts and Risk
To Standard Performance
StandardPerformance
Expected
Justification PreparedWith Alternatives Using
Standard Tools orMeasures
Asset Condition
Good
RepairJustified
Asset Placed Back in Servicewith Conditions Defined forRepair or New Performance
Standards Established
Repair PerformedOr Scheduled
Asset RemainsIn Service
Asset RemainsIn Service
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
Customer/StakeholderInvolvement
Review Team
Need to DefineOperatingStandards
RoutineMaintenance
or Repair
Asset Sustainment
• Purpose Overview– Reclamation will perform a thorough analysis of how its
infrastructure will be managed.• Physical and engineering• Economic
– Greatest efficiencies to be gained in this area
Asset Sustainment Action Items
25. Determine Financial Accounting for All Infrastructure
26. Determine Opportunities to Transfer O&M to Water Users
27. Opportunities for Outsourcing O&M of Reserve Works
28. Title Transfer of facilities
29. Effectiveness of O&M Planning
30. Integrate O&M Planning with the Budget Process
31. Benchmarking O&M of Water Storage and Distribution Facilities
Team Leads
25. Efraim Escalante, Executive Assistant Policy, Administration & Budget, Commissioner’s Office
26-30. Randy Chandler, Deputy Area Manager, Phoenix Area Office
31. Mike Roluti, Senior Advisor Power Liaison
28. Title Transfer of facilities
• Current Process– Voluntary participation– Negotiate Agreement at “field level”– Requires transfer specific legislation– Upfront Funding from Water Users– NEPA, ESA and NHPA Compliance Required– Valuation based upon Repayment and Revenue Streams to
Treasury.– Liability Conveyance is Major Benefit to Reclamation– Limited Budget Savings to date from Transfers (O&M Transfer is
where big savings comes from).• All Projects Unique with Own Complexities
• Most of “Simplest” Transfers completed– 18 Projects/Parts of Projects Transferred– 5 Transfers Authorized being Completed
Title Transfer
• Ideas for categorizing– Identify criteria & incentives where title transfer should occur
• Paid out or nearly so
• Beneficial to Government / costs are subsidized
• Conveyance facilities
• Non-significant facilities-minor diversion dams
• Agreement/Consensus that Transfer Leads to better water management
• Facilities only (No Land)
– Identify criteria where title is potential candidate but may have higher level of public interest
– Identify Procedural “barriers”
– Identify Economic/Financial barriers
26. Determine Opportunities to Transfer O&M to Water Users
• Identify facilities that can and should be transferred– Pumping plants– Conveyance facilities– Other
27. Opportunities for Outsourcing O&M of Reserve Works
• Identify facilities where O&M could be contracted out through procurement processes (bid)– Pumping Plants– Power Plants– Other
30. Integrate O&M Planning with the Budget Process
• Determine consistent meeting process where Reclamation & Water & Users discuss upcoming work & costs.
• Identify O&M costs to receive upfront and off budget
Research & Laboratory Services
Action Items
32. Identify Opportunities for Use of Federal/Non-Federal Laboratories
33. Identify Opportunities for Keeping, Consolidating, Eliminating Reclamation Laboratories
34. Continue PART Goal Implementation for R&D
35. Re-evaluate Steering Committee to Increase Core Mission R&D
36. Assess NRC Review of Desalination R&D
8. Scenarios
Consider the scenarios discussed in Chapter 5 of the NRC Report and what refinements, if any, to Reclamation’s organizational structure may be useful in meeting future challenges under each of the scenarios. (Mar – Dec 2006)
Excerpt from Chapter 5, NRC Report
Finding:
• While the committee recognizes that the major changes suggested by the alternative scenarios are inappropriate for immediate implementation, the continuation and intensification of identified trends, as described in this report, could lead to a need for dramatic changes in future scenarios presented in this report—(1) a centrally located project management organization, (2) outsourced operations and maintenance (O&M), and (3) federal funding and local execution—provide a basis for anticipating future trends and preparing for future change.
Recommendation:
• Reclamation should consider the suggested future scenarios as a basis for analyzing longer-term trends and change.
Next Steps
• Reassessing projected timeline given identified interrelationships with other action items.