surface & stormwater management performance audit final report

Surface & Storm Water Management Performance Audit
Kitsap County, Washington
Final Report
SSWM Program staff acknowledged that its program has had a similar experience. As the
SSWM Program moves from drainage projects (which tend to be smaller, less expensive and
more immediate benefit) to longer term improvements to the basins (which tend to be bigger,
more expensive and more complex), the relative benefit-cost ratio of projects has been and will
continue to decrease over time. They further stated that they have not evaluated where the
breakeven point is after which projects are no longer cost-effective. They are confident that they
have not reached that point yet, but they cannot say when that point in time will occur.
Although the project rating sheet includes a cost benefit element as part of the ranking, the cost
benefit element is not a true cost benefit analysis and does not represent a major factor in
determining the project’s ranking. The cost benefit element is worth less than 5% of the total
possible points, and the cost benefit point factor is based on the project’s relative cost compared
to similar projects, not all projects. As a result, programmatic impacts have a much more
significant weight than costs.
On a related point, SSWM Program staff indicated that specific service level standards have not
been established and that the citizens of Kitsap County have not been formally surveyed to
determine their level of satisfaction relative to the projects being completed by the SSWM
Program.
Observation: The SSWM Program has a well established process for assessing and
inventorying the operational and physical condition of its infrastructure.
The SSWM staff estimates that within the last five years a very high percentage of its facilities
have been inventoried, inspected, and mapped in the County’s GIS system. The responsibility
for inspecting facilities is divided between SSWM and the Road Maintenance Division. SSWM
personnel are responsible for any pipe within the right-of-way greater than 48 inches diameter or
with more than 10 feet of fill. SSWM personnel are also responsible for structures, pipes outside
of the right-of-way, water quality facilities such as pollution control structures ponds, and
detention facilities. The Road Maintenance Division inspects all pipes within the right-of-way
except as noted, as well as ditches and cross culverts. The SSWM Program currently does
annual inspections of all facilities.
The SSWM Program applies a well established process of ranking the condition of its assets.
The SSWM Program adopted the method developed by the Federal Highway Administration’s
(FHWA) Culvert Inspection Manual, Supplement to the Bridge Inspector’s Manual. The FHWA
rating system provides a numerical method to characterize the condition of the asset and track
the trend of decline as the asset ages or is damaged. The inspector assigns a numerical score to
the asset that is defined in the method as the “Maintenance Urgency Index (MUI)”. The scale
ranks the asset on a scale of 0 to 9. An associated maintenance immediacy schedule and course
of action are associated with each numerical score. SSWM staff has consolidated this rating
system to a scale of 1 to 5. Road Department personnel inspect all drainage facilities within the
rights-of-way except as noted. The SSWM Program currently does annual inspections of all
facilities for which it has responsibility.
Page 37