Civil Integrated Management (CIM) for Departments of Transportation, Volume 2: Research Report (2016)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

88 Validation Survey Questionnaire A P P E N D I X E As part of NCHRP Project 10-96, the Center of Transportation Research (CTR) of the University of Texas at Austin and the Construction Engineering and Management Program at the University of Colorado at Boulder are conducting research to develop a guide for Civil Integrated Management (CIM) implementation at DOTs. This guide will help the agencies assess their use of digital project delivery and asset management, identify practical benefits and costs, and determine methodologies and areas for increasing their adoption of CIM. The research team has developed a draft of the Guidebook for review and comments. The purpose of this questionnaire is to validate the structure and content of the Guidebook draft by gathering feedback and/or suggestions from subject matter experts and stakeholders whom NCHRP has approved for review. The questionnaire consists of seven questions designed to capture the effectiveness of the Guidebook. With the approval of NCHRP, the research team would like to invite you to participate in this early review process and provide comments to help us enhance the overall quality and usability of the Guidebook. If there are (any) important issues not adequately addressed by the seven questions, please do not hesitate to include them. Your input is valuable to the research. Thank you for participating. General questions (Format) 1. Do you have any high-level comments on the overall appearance/readability of the Guidebook? Are there any text or figures which are not clear and easy to read? Do you have any suggestions on improving the visual appearance and readability of the Guidebook? 2. Are there any portions of the structure and/or organization of the Guidebook that are difficult to follow? Did you have difficulty locating specific sections in the document? Subject area (Content) 1. CIM encapsulates numerous tools and practices that enable the transition to digital project delivery. Chapter 2 provides the definitions of CIM tools and functions that warrant attention for understanding their benefits and help develop systematic guidelines. Does Chapter 2 adequately cover the key topics related to CIM? Are there any descriptions that need clarification? Do you have any other suggestions to improve Chapter 2?

89 2. Chapter 3 demonstrates how different CIM functions rely on the information generated through a general workflow model. Are any of the explanations lacking clarity and consistency with the project delivery processes in your agency or in your general experience? Are we missing any critical CIM-related functions or project phases? Do you have any other suggestions to improve Chapter 3? 3. Chapter 4 proposes a three-step implementation framework to help agencies enhance their reliance on digital project delivery and asset management. Please answer the questions in the following five sub-categories: a. Assessment (Stage I): Does the three-level maturity model address the key CIM practices in a highway facility’s life cycle (from scoping to asset management)? Are the CIM capabilities of each phase adequately described? Can you comment on the potential utility of this model in developing detailed guidelines for your agency? b. Investment analysis (Stage II): Are the investment requirements and benefits presented in a clear and understandable manner? Do you agree with the parameters chosen for prioritizing CIM investments? c. Implementation considerations (Stage III): Are the lessons learned and recommendations properly organized? Are all the major issues covered in this section? d. Illustration examples are provided to demonstrate the utility of the framework. Are they easy to read? Do they assist in practical understanding of implementation the process? e. Case examples provide empirical data on benefit-cost analysis implementation and issues. Is each of them adequately described? Are they helpful terms of in contextualizing analyses described in the Guidebook? 4. Chapter 5 provides a synthesis of supplemental information from the literature review, case studies, and surveys. Can you suggest any improvement to the content organization and/or presentation? Do you think we should include/delete/modify any topics in this chapter? 5. Appendix section provides a catalog of CIM resources. Do you think there are any other important references/resources that have to be presented here? Do you think the team should share any other information?

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

TRA N SPO RTATIO N RESEA RCH BO A RD 500 Fifth Street, N W W ashington, D C 20001 A D D RESS SERV ICE REQ U ESTED ISBN 978-0-309-37572-6 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 3 7 5 7 2 6 9 0 0 0 0 N O N -PR O FIT O R G . U .S. PO STA G E PA ID C O LU M B IA , M D PER M IT N O . 88