#projects |
#Risks |
type |
delivery method |
size |
|
32 |
2446 |
Highway Reconstruction |
All |
All |
|
Number |
Risk |
Frequency |
Prob |
Cost |
Schedule |
1 |
right of way acquisition needed prior to utility relocations and construction |
100 |
0.46 |
3.51 |
1.38 |
2 |
slab replacement/repair impacts construction cost and schedule |
84 |
0.58 |
2.55 |
0.51 |
3 |
accurate and timely traveler information – during/after construction |
78 |
|
|
|
4 |
change orders |
59 |
0.33 |
3.68 |
0.77 |
5 |
construction change orders |
59 |
0.23 |
1.75 |
0.07 |
6 |
design exceptions not approved |
56 |
0.52 |
1.82 |
3.24 |
7 |
market condition |
56 |
|
6.73 |
|
8 |
differing site conditions |
53 |
0.31 |
7.52 |
2.00 |
9 |
changes in priorities require adjustments to construction project start/end dates. |
53 |
0.40 |
16.62 |
2.58 |
10 |
noise walls - lawsuits |
53 |
|
1.06 |
|
11 |
construction delays |
53 |
0.58 |
7.50 |
1.91 |
12 |
expectations – i.e. schedule |
50 |
|
|
|
13 |
constructability of drainage ponds |
50 |
0.25 |
10.35 |
|
14 |
potential changes to geotechnical design for foundations |
44 |
0.04 |
0.15 |
0.03 |
15 |
construction funding shortfall |
44 |
0.36 |
9.50 |
4.10 |
16 |
hctra agreements, third party agreement |
44 |
|
|
|
17 |
consistent message – even across stakeholders |
41 |
|
|
|
18 |
delay in obtaining permits |
41 |
0.75 |
2.00 |
4.50 |
19 |
right of way |
41 |
0.65 |
3.25 |
2.44 |
20 |
traffic management - baseline solution does not work (late) |
41 |
1.00 |
2.80 |
1.00 |
21 |
additional traffic control costs |
38 |
|
3.88 |
|
22 |
hazardous materials |
38 |
0.15 |
0.21 |
0.67 |
23 |
access management/ control of access areas |
34 |
0.03 |
0.00 |
|
24 |
difficult relocations |
34 |
|
0.75 |
|
25 |
potential delay in obtaining rod (record of decision) |
34 |
|
|
|
26 |
current txdot funding situation, including design and right of way funds |
34 |
|
|
|
27 |
right of way acquisition |
34 |
0.30 |
1.92 |
1.00 |
28 |
design changes or changes in lane configuration there may be environmental re‐evaluation |
34 |
0.50 |
0.34 |
0.01 |
29 |
refinement in wetland mitigation due to change in ponds |
34 |
0.69 |
0.48 |
3.50 |
30 |
landscaping and aesthetics cost may be reduced |
31 |
|
0.59 |
|
31 |
federal funding making all utilities compensable |
31 |
0.10 |
2.40 |
1.80 |
32 |
utility conflicts with foundations |
31 |
0.47 |
9.00 |
2.80 |
33 |
incident management |
31 |
0.50 |
0.14 |
0.50 |
34 |
continuity in traffic flow throughout multiple projects |
31 |
|
|
|
35 |
discovery of unknown utilities during construction |
31 |
0.50 |
0.66 |
0.72 |
36 |
hazardous materials (hazmat) |
31 |
0.02 |
0.01 |
|
37 |
additional right of way is required |
31 |
|
2.46 |
1.76 |
38 |
difference in economic conditions compared to revenue forecast assumptions for project opening (below) there may be lower traffic volumes |
31 |
|
|
|
39 |
railroad agreements |
28 |
0.75 |
|
3.13 |
40 |
environmental, cholame/wye segments unanticipated hazardous materials or contaminated soils encountered during construction |
28 |
0.42 |
3.38 |
1.17 |
41 |
utility conflicts with drainage system |
28 |
|
|
|
42 |
local agency coordination |
28 |
0.50 |
10.00 |
1.50 |
43 |
other construction projects in region limit supply of labor, bid costs are higher as a result. |
28 |
0.50 |
1.84 |
|
44 |
right of way unable to certify the project before advertising |
28 |
0.43 |
1.00 |
3.26 |
45 |
commodity price escalation increases project costs |
28 |
0.50 |
7.66 |
|
46 |
stormwater |
25 |
0.50 |
3.36 |
0.10 |
47 |
potential changes due to value engineering. |
25 |
|
-5.00 |
|
48 |
pond 6.1 partly within conservation easement |
25 |
0.50 |
0.23 |
1.17 |
49 |
approval of design exceptions |
25 |
0.15 |
0.26 |
0.08 |
50 |
construction sequencing – temporary drainage |
25 |
|
|
|
51 |
adverse weather |
25 |
0.34 |
7.68 |
0.29 |
52 |
maintenance of its during construction |
25 |
|
|
|
53 |
material availability |
25 |
|
0.05 |
0.52 |
54 |
contract delay / change in scope due to project staging conflicts |
25 |
0.38 |
1.26 |
0.96 |
55 |
utility relocations and conflicts |
25 |
0.55 |
0.54 |
3.00 |
56 |
phase 3 support cost risk for segment 3 |
22 |
|
3.99 |
|
57 |
unsuitable soils and muck |
22 |
0.50 |
0.50 |
0.75 |
58 |
hov operations during construction |
22 |
|
|
|
59 |
compressed construction schedule |
22 |
|
11.62 |
|
60 |
high condemnation rates |
22 |
|
|
|
61 |
planned realignment of general purpose lanes during construction there may be traffic shift |
22 |
|
|
|
62 |
timing of regional conformity for interim implementation (one-lane reversible) |
22 |
|
|
|
63 |
asbesetos on bridges |
22 |
0.40 |
4.47 |
2.40 |
64 |
weather days and holidays |
22 |
0.37 |
20.75 |
2.36 |
65 |
delays in right of way acquisition due to landowner objections to value |
22 |
0.90 |
0.00 |
0.95 |
66 |
credibility – keeping promises |
22 |
|
|
|
67 |
corridor lighting |
22 |
|
1.50 |
|
68 |
pleasing everyone |
22 |
|
|
|
69 |
coordination between i-95 and the fce project |
22 |
0.10 |
|
0.10 |
70 |
replacement strategy decision for ammo road and miramar way oc. |
22 |
|
|
|
71 |
meeting design criteria in highly developed corridor |
22 |
|
|
|
72 |
bridge coordination efforts with hctra, metro, and uprr |
22 |
|
|
|
73 |
escalation may exceed planned rates |
22 |
|
|
|
74 |
wetlands |
22 |
0.05 |
0.07 |
0.03 |
75 |
federal land transfer is unenforceable and results in delays to the project and increased cost. |
22 |
0.37 |
5.04 |
1.64 |
76 |
abandonment of alternate tunnel design during construction |
22 |
0.44 |
8.25 |
0.37 |
77 |
utility agreements and mud(s) |
22 |
|
|
|
78 |
material costs |
22 |
|
1.56 |
|
79 |
construction permitting issues (incl. work restrictions) |
22 |
|
|
|
80 |
completion of environmental assessment and fonsi (finding of no significant impact) |
22 |
0.78 |
42.78 |
3.57 |
81 |
schedule delays |
22 |
0.15 |
|
0.40 |
82 |
underestimating timing and process to finalize octa/rctc cooperative agreement (orca) in order to meet rfp document preparation |
22 |
|
|
|
83 |
re-prioritization of sequence/timing of construction due to funding limitations |
22 |
0.35 |
|
1.40 |
84 |
managing the limited number of appraisers |
22 |
|
|
|
85 |
interim adjustments kept to a minimum |
22 |
|
|
|
86 |
contractor access, staging coordination and constructability issues |
22 |
|
0.24 |
|
87 |
design exceptions |
22 |
0.20 |
10.00 |
1.20 |
88 |
public involvement issues |
22 |
0.50 |
1.50 |
4.50 |
89 |
outstanding task orders |
22 |
|
|
|
90 |
consultant contract authority exceeded before design is complete |
22 |
|
0.05 |
|
91 |
coordination and integration of operational elements (including fastrack) |
22 |
0.50 |
|
1.50 |
92 |
eliminate one toll gantry |
19 |
|
0.25 |
|
93 |
confined space during construction there may be reduced traffic safety conditions |
19 |
0.63 |
7.00 |
0.93 |
94 |
general damage to existing structures caused by construction (defined in workshop as 'general construction phasing above/below ground structures') |
19 |
|
|
|
95 |
cdot procurement delay |
19 |
0.20 |
|
0.95 |
96 |
change in tolling equipment technology |
19 |
|
0.10 |
|
97 |
field element are not compatible with tmc |
19 |
|
0.15 |
|
98 |
legal challenge |
19 |
0.16 |
0.00 |
0.33 |
99 |
structures contingency 1 |
19 |
|
41.72 |
|
100 |
uncooperative utilities causing schedule delays |
19 |
1.00 |
10.00 |
3.00 |