Colorado River Return Project

• Year: 2002
• Title: Colordao River Return Project
• Author: Boyle Engineering Corporation
• Description: Colorado River Return Project
• Publications - Doc Type: Other

.Project .Management Plan
�i Project Management Roles
As shown in the Organization Chart in the previous section, the project will be managed
by Blaine Dwyer and Tom Roode who are both based in Boyle's Lakewood office.
As the overall Project Manager, Blaine will be responsible for day -to -day coordination with
the State and with any other external contacts and communication. He will also be
responsible for the overall quality of the study and its budget and schedule control.
As Assistant Project Manager, Tom will be responsible for daily internal coordination of our
study team and the organization and coordination of our work products.
This division of responsibilities is identical to their roles on other similar studies including a
reconnaissance study of the 120- mile -long Lake Powell Pipeline Project that will be
completed in a similar six -month schedule (see Section IV — Project Experience for detailed
information on this project).
Work Flowchart
Section A — Schedule includes a detailed bar chart schedule for the project. Presented
below is simplified flowchart developed to support our Project Management Plan. The
State's 11 tasks are grouped in three distinct phases:
• Phase I Project Preparation - This phase comprises tasks 1 through 7b and culminates
with reviewing the scope and making adjustments if necessary. Because this scope
adjustment is listed as Task 3 in the State's RFQ, it is likely that the intention was to
consider the need for scope adjustments after Tasks 1 and 2 involving data and
compilation of user demand forecasts, but before Tasks 4 and all of the remaining
tasks. Given the short duration of the study we propose that the study team
aggressively compile and submit draft task memoranda for Tasks 4, 5 given that the
vast majority of information for characterizations of the physical environment (Task 4),
institutional setting (Task 5), and alternatives to the CRRP (Task 6) already exists or can
be quickly prepared at least in draft form for State review. Similarly, the identification
of plan elements (Task 7a), at least a draft list, can also be quickly prepared. It has
been our experience on other major water resource planning studies that very early
identification of Plan Formulation Methods (Task 7b), and evaluation criteria, can
greatly improve the efficiency of collecting correct field and other data. Therefore, our
Project Management Plan defers the completion of Task 3 — Scope Adjustments (if
needed) to conclude the first phase of the study within two months of project
initiation. This approach to Project Management will also help assure that there are
no scope modifications required for Phases II and III.
• Phase II Alternatives Evaluation - This phase is where the detailed evaluation of the
alternative plans takes place using the procedures and processes defined in Section
10. From the perspective of a Project Management Plan, the key issues in this phase
y are the definition of issues constituting "fatal flaws" and efficiently obtaining
concurrence on the number of alternatives (and permutations of alternatives) to
/ fo -A.4 consider and how structural and non - structural elements could be combined. Section
r'. 10 describes types of alternatives that might be considered. Assuming that the Phase I
process moves smoothly, the foundation for an efficient Phase II process will be laid
and the Phase II can be completed within 2 '/2 months.
20