Alternate: Creation and Implementation of the Best Practices Guide for Quality Plan Submittals in Nevada

Creation and Implementation of the Best Practices Guide for Quality Plan Submittals in Nevada AUTHOR/CO-AUTHOR BIOS: ERNIE C. BUO, P.E., is a Senior Civil Engineer at the Clark County Water Reclamation District in Las Vegas, Nevada. He has actively held the position since May of 2016. Ernie Buo was one of the volunteer members of the 'Nevada Quality of Plan Submittals Task Force' organized by the Nevada Board of Engineers and Land Surveyors (NVBEPLS) to collaborate, draft, and finalize the 'Best Practices Guide for Quality Plan Submittals.' Ernie holds a degree in Civil Engineering and a Masters in Business Administration (MBA). Ernie has over 20 years of progressive experience designing water and wastewater infrastructure and reviewing civil improvement projects submitted by the development community in the Las Vegas, Nevada area to ensure conformance to the various design and construction standards and the service rules for the Las Vegas Valley. Ernie has extensive experience in handling, processing, and responding to different Zoning land development applications for conforming and non-conforming Zone changes, use permits, design reviews, administrative reviews, waivers of development standards, waivers of conditions, extension of time requests, easement vacation applications, temporary maps, and leads the coordination meetings with developers, engineers, agency representatives, and zoning planners for high-impact projects. Ernie is instrumental in training and mentoring the development services engineering staff to ensure work consistency and growth for their career development. LESLIE LONG, P.E., is the Manager of the Development Services Group at the Clark County Water Reclamation District in Las Vegas, Nevada. Leslie Long is a seasoned professional with over 30 years of expertise in the municipal utility sector. Holding degrees in Civil Engineering and a Masters in Public Administration, both from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), Leslie has cultivated a deep understanding of the intricate balance between engineering and public administration in the field of utility resource management. Throughout her distinguished career, Leslie has consistently demonstrated a commitment to innovation and sustainable development. As the manager of Development Services for the Clark County Water Reclamation District, she plays a pivotal role in guiding the District's initiatives towards effective government and the design and construction of sound infrastructure. Beyond her professional achievements, Leslie's dedication to mentorship and community engagement shines through. Her commitment to nurturing the next generation of leaders for the Clark County Water Reclamation District underscores her belief in the importance of knowledge transfer and the cultivation of a brighter, more sustainable future. INTRODUCTION: The Development Services Group for the Clark County Water Reclamation District (District) was experiencing excessive plan submittals from the engineering community for development projects and initiated a tracking mechanism to document the various reasons. The main reason for the excessive submittals was that the Engineer of Record was not addressing the previous comments provided by the District, followed by a close second that the asset input (manholes and pipe) data were incorrect. The District was not the only utility agency experiencing excessive plan submittals and in July 2021, the Quality Plan Submittals Task Force (QPSTF) was formed through the leadership of the Nevada Board of Engineers and Land Surveyors to address concerns surrounding the plan submittal process for the engineering community. The outcome of the QPSTF was a Guide to assist the process by offering the best practices to make the submittal process more efficient, effective and to provide more transparency throughout the plan review process. The best practices in the Guide are intended to illustrate ways that the public can better serve their constituents and ways that professionals can serve their clients. Each best practice details the benefits and challenges of a quality plan submittal and includes recommendations for implementing them. The best practices Guide seeks to improve predictability, efficiency, timeliness, and quality. WHAT YOU WILL LEARN: 1.Discover the reasons for excessive submittals, as tracked by the District, and how it impacts all parties. 2.The best practices guide was organized to improve communication amongst Public Agencies and the development community and to standardize the submittal process. 3.Identify and understand the roles and responsibilities of the Clients, Professionals, Public Agencies, and Utility companies. UTILITY COLLABORATION AND UTILIZATION: The task force identified communication as one of the most important areas of concern in the submittal process. It was noted that smaller public agencies are sometimes more effective communicators than large public agencies, primarily because smaller agencies often speak with a single voice whereas large agencies often speak with multiple voices. The guide encourages effective communication between the clients, the engineering community at large, and the Agencies involved in the plan review process. The following Best Practices within the guide were highlighted to be used to improve communication between stakeholders in the plan submittal process: 1.Designate a single point of contact or an electronic portal for managing submittal communications. 2.Develop a user Guide, separate and distinct from a checklist, for submittals. 3.Establish procedures for concurrent submittals. 4.For complex projects, consider scheduling a pre-submittal meeting, a meeting after first review, and a mandatory meeting if reviews exceed three. 5.For non-complex projects, consider a meeting after first review and a mandatory meeting if reviews exceed three. 6.Designate project technical review team. 7.Hold regularly scheduled inter-departmental meetings. 8.Establish workarounds for proximity of professional staff. The task force recommended that each public Agency create a brief reference guide to help applicants navigate the submittal process. The reference guide should contain all applicable information regarding the submittal process, including who reviews the submittal with contact information (including outside agencies) and which boards and commissions make decisions and/or recommendations. The reference guide includes step-by-step directions for the submittal review process, as well as any applicable forms and fees. The guide is not intended to specify submittal requirements or the plan requirements but is to describe what is required for the applicant to navigate the submittal process. The guide is written in plain English so that non-professionals can understand the agency's submittal process. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Identifying and understanding the roles and responsibilities of the Clients, Professionals, Public Agencies, and Utility companies is an important first step in ensuring the plan review submittal process runs smoothly. The guide will be most effective if each participant adopts policies and practices that support their roles and responsibilities. Goals were discussed and set for all participants of the plan submittal process so that ninety percent (90%) of the projects should be completed in three (3) or less plan review cycles. SUMMARY: The presentation will discuss the various reasons the District was experiencing excessive submittals for plan review that mirrored similar reasons from other utility agencies in the Las Vegas Valley. Rather than each utility agency dealing with the reasons for excessive plan review submittals with the engineering community, the Nevada Board of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors created a Quality of Plan Review Task Force (QPSTF) for all effected parties to develop and implement best practices for plan review submittals. The outcome of the QPSTF was a Guide to assist the process by offering the best practices to make the submittal process more efficient, effective and to provide more transparency. The plan intake checklist and the plan review checklist are included for the engineering community to reference for transparency and to reduce the number of plan submittals. These two checklists will be reviewed and discussed during the presentation. TOPIC REFERENCE: 4.Communications and Public Involvement, and/or 9.Workforce Development/Succession Planning/Knowledge Management KEYWORDS: Plan review; Metrics; Best Practices