Developmental Measure – Drainage Infrastructure For presentation at May 9, 2008 Operations Division Video Conference

Measure  The “Drainage” measure under consideration will be an indicator of : o The level of accomplishment of Mn/DOT’s infrastructure Inspection Protocol, and effective populating of the management tool “Hydinfra.” o The progress made against goals of Repair of Infrastructure Elements in Condition 4.  Develop a workplanning/gap estimating tool as a part of the measure development.

Measure Current Practice  All districts currently populate Hydinfra to some level. o Approaches to staffing of inspection activities vary considerably; use of district hydraulics or other dedicated personnel, to use of seasonal or student workers, to maintenance TSS staff, to outsourced work. o The protocol for conduct of inspections has been more tightly defined in recent years, and the bridge office provides training aimed at consistency o The status or “currency” of the Hydinfra database varies considerably between districts, with some high levels of system coverage, but aged or low quality data, to higher quality data with lower levels of coverage. Protocols (items captured, level of detail) have evolved over time to the current also.  Hydinfra data is used for program delivery/planning and maintenance to varying degrees and not in a systematic way

Proposed “Inspection Protocol” Measure Specifics  Adopt Hydinfra as System of Record for management of hydraulics infrastructure  Refine inspection protocols to accommodate foreseeable uses of the data. IE; o Office review of plans prior to field inspection o As-built (new construction)  Hydraulics info entered by construction personnel per project  New Pipes  Removals o Develop Ditch protocol o Consider entrance/approach pipes o Additional data such as “number of” separated joints o Inspection Cycles:  10 yr since new  5 yr condition 2  2 yr condition 3  1yr condition 4  5 yr ponds  “ditches” per associated pipe frequency o Etc.

 Adopt “Inspection Protocol” Measure: o % elements requiring inspection according to cycle time criteria inspected on annual basis.

 Adopt “Inspection Protocol” Targets: o Target:  100% annual inspection of elements in MS4 locations  90% of elements in non MS4 locations

 Adopt “Repair of Infrastructure Elements in Condition 4” Measure: o % of elements requiring repair according to target addressed annually.

 Adopt “Repair of Infrastructure Elements in Condition 4” Target: o Condition 4 (repairs)  % of Condition 4 elements “under road” addressed past season = 100%  % of Condition 4 elements (not under road) addressed past season= 50%, 75%???  (need to run reports, determine effort, expense required)

o Condition 3 (repairs) ????  (this is a cost effective preventive strategy)  10%????  (need to run reports, determine effort, expense required)

o Cleaning  % of cleaning needed accomplished past season  Target %???

Cost Estimate

 Cost estimates are under development by our team: o Initial/re-population of the Hydinfra data  Prioritize by condition rating  As-Built review o Ongoing inspections  Prioritize by cycle recommendations  (need to run reports, determine effort, expense required) o Repairs  Decision trees have been developed  Yield recommended fixes based on criteria such as  Conc vs metal  Under road vs not  Deformed vs not  Size  Misaligned vs not  Cover >10’  Shape  Are working on cost estimates/labor factors. Should be able to get system level estimates for labor and materisls.

Timing  Primary goal is to adopt refined inspection protocols so that this season’s planned inspections will be consistent with future needs/directions. ASAP  Secondary goal is to determine effort required and propose specific initiative(s) for getting database current