CACC SEC4 2006

Section IV - Other Issues: 

Section IV - Other Issues Non-Traditional Contracting Practices Architect/engineer (A/E) Consultant Procurement Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Transportation Enhancement (TE) Projects National Recreational Trails Program Emergency Relief (ER) Projects Metrication Owner Controlled Insurance Programs (OCIP) /Wrap-up Insurance Project Labor Agreements p. 163-186

A. Non-Traditional  Contracting Practices: 

A. Non-Traditional Contracting Practices HQ Memo - Innovative Contracting Practices and Special Experimental Project No. 14, 02/13/1990 (p A-125) HQ Memo -"Transportation Research Circular No. 386, Innovative Contracting Practices, " 02/19/1992 HQ Memo - "Special Experimental Project No. 14, " 05/04/1995 Applies to all Federal-Aid highway construction projects p. 163-172

Special Experimental Project No. 14Innovative Contracting: 

Special Experimental Project No. 14 Innovative Contracting Initiated by HQ memo of 2/13/90 Objective - Evaluate project specific contracting practices which Maintain product quality Reduce life cycle cost Practices proposed for evaluation Cost-plus-time Bidding Lane Rental Warranty Procedures Design-Build

Experimental Methods: 

Experimental Methods Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) No Excuse incentive (bonuses) Lump sum bidding Best Value Alternate pavement type bidding Bid Averaging – not acceptable Reverse auction bidding – not acceptable p. 164-166

Non-Experimental Methods: 

Non-Experimental Methods Cost-Plus-Time Bidding (A+B) Lane Rental Alternate Bids Warranty Clauses Design-build p. 166-172

Cost-Plus-Time Bidding: 

Cost-Plus-Time Bidding Commonly referred to as A+B bidding Award to the lowest A+Bx where: A= Traditional bid component B = Contractors bid for the number of days to complete critical work x = an amount based on road user cost per day Include incentive/disincentive (I/D) provisions in the contract p. 166-167

Example of A+B Bidding: 

Example of A+B Bidding Kentucky Road User Cost (x) = $5,000 / day A B Bx A+Bx 1 $15.636 450 $2.250 $17.886 2 $16.070 426 $2.130 $18.200 3 $15.628 523 $2.615 $18.243

Why A+B Bidding?: 

Why A+B Bidding? Public Expectations Get In! ( do it right the first time) Don’t delay me! Get Out!!! ( Finish on time) STAY OUT!!!!

The Appropriate Club for the Situation: 

The Appropriate Club for the Situation Should not be used routinely Reserve for projects with great urgency Short duration “Clean” plans Resolved potential ROW and utility conflicts Little chance for field changes

Lane Rental: 

Lane Rental Assess a rental fee for each lane taken out-of-service during construction. Goal: minimize road user impacts during construction. p. 167

Maine DOT’s First Lane Rental Project: 

Maine DOT’s First Lane Rental Project $6.6 million I-295 roadway and bridge rehabilitation Combined A+B bidding and lane rental Did not include a bid item for rental MDOT Planning estimated RUC at $60,000/day; I/D amount used was $12,500 Lane Rental varied from $500 -$2,000/lane/hour

Why Use Lane Rental?: 

Why Use Lane Rental? Natural supplement to A+B for selected projects Appropriate for short term, hourly, daily, intermittent type lane closures. Long duration closures should probably use A+B bidding, I/D or LD. Provides the contractor with the motivation to minimize traffic disruptions

Alternate Bids: 

Alternate Bids 23 CFR 635.411(b) Federal Register 8/15/95 “Alternate Design for Bridges” Applies to NHS highway construction projects Minimize overall project cost through increased competition Allows alternate designs and/or construction methods Pg. 167-169

Alternate Bids: 

Alternate Bids Design Studies, VE Standard Plans Bidding Documents, Contract Plans

Alternate Bids: 

Alternate Bids Bridge Type Pavement Type Additive

Warranty - a definition: 

Warranty - a definition An assurance by the seller that the product will perform as specified for the buyer for a specific period of time

Warranties for Federal-Aid Contracts: 

Warranties for Federal-Aid Contracts 23 CFR 635.413 STA may use warranty provisions on NHS projects Must be for a specific product or feature Not for routine maintenance Must be for items within the control of the contractor May be used for Design/Build Pg. 169-170

Current Warranty Use: 

Current Warranty Use Asphalt Concrete / Rubberized Asphalt (3-8 yr) AL, CA, CO, FL, IN, ME, MI, MO, OH, NV, WI Asphalt Crack Treatment (2 yr) MI Bridge Components (5-10 yr) WA, ME Bridge Painting (2-10 yr) IN, MA, ME, MI, NH Chip Sealing (1-2 yr) CA, MI ITS Buildings (2-3 yr) VA, NC Landscaping, Irrigation (1 yr) WY Microsurfacing (2 yr) CO, MI, NV, OH Pavement Marking (2-6 yr) FL, MT, OR, PA, UT, WV Roofing (10 yr) HI

Agency Reasons for Using Warranties: 

Agency Reasons for Using Warranties Reduce STA personnel on projects Eliminate early maintenance costs Replace loss of state expertise Increase quality Encourage innovation Industry standard

Design-Build: 

Design-Build Design-Build 23 CFR 636 23 USC 112 (b)(1) Competitively Bid (Low bid) Construction Contracts 23 USC 112(b)(2) Qualifications based Selection, Engineering / Design Services Pg. 171-172

Design-Build Regulations: 

Design-Build Regulations The Design-Build Final Rule went into effect 01/09/2003, establishing 23 CFR 636 States could use design-build without HQ approval for : ITS projects > $ 5 million Other projects > $50 million SEP-14 continued for smaller projects

SAFETEA-LU, §1503: 

SAFETEA-LU, §1503 Required several changes to 23 CFR 636 NPRM published 5-25-2006 Proposed changes would allow the following activities to start prior to completion of NEPA Issue RFP Award contract Issue NTP for preliminary design Removes the thresholds for ‘qualified’ projects SEP-14 only required by D-B projects that do not meet 23 CFR 636 Also makes several revisions to facilitate the use of public-private partnerships (PPP)

Suitability : 

Suitability NEPA, and major ROW and utility issues must be clear Should have a “Strong design component” Reasons for selection should not be: Obligation of funds Compensate for inadequate agency resources

Innovative Contracting Best Practices Web Site: 

Innovative Contracting Best Practices Web Site Utah State University http://www.ic.usu.edu Practical information on warranties, A+B, Lane Rental and Design-build contracting What is it? Why should you use this? Criteria for project selection? Who is currently using it? Example provisions

B. Architect /Engineer Consultant Procurement: 

B. Architect /Engineer Consultant Procurement “Brooks Act” requires qualifications-based selection Only applies to Federally-funded A/E contracts Negotiation with the highest qualified firm pg. 172-176

C. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Projects: 

C. Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Projects Normally included in construction contracts If the scope does not meet “construction” (23 USC 112) then it may be a service contract Appendix A-140 pg. 176-178

D. Transportation Enhancement (TE) Projects: 

D. Transportation Enhancement (TE) Projects pg. 178-179 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Scenic Easements Scenic Highways Landscaping Historic Preservation Rehabilitation of Historic Transportation Structures Preservation of Abandoned RR Corridors Outdoor Advertising Archaeological Work Highway Runoff Transportation Museums

TE Projects (continued): 

TE Projects (continued) Procurement - Mr. Ptak’s 11/12/96 memo - Is the project on highway right-of-way? (pg. A-143) Davis-Bacon - 7/28/94 memo 1) On local road or rural minor collector? 2) Tied to a covered Federal-aid project?

E. National Recreational Trails Program: 

E. National Recreational Trails Program See the 4/1/99 HQ memo and guidance at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/rectrails/guidancememo.htm Generally procured using STA procedures Depending on location, Davis-Bacon may not apply Buy America applies pg. 179

F. Emergency Relief Projects: 

F. Emergency Relief Projects For detailed guidance see FHWA’s “Emergency Relief Manual” Must be on a Federal-Aid Highway or a Federal road (as defined in 23 USC 101) $100 Million available nationwide/year 100% participation, for the first 180 days for “emergency repairs”: restore essential travel minimize damage protect remaining facilities p. 180-182

Emergency Relief : 

Emergency Relief Perform “Emergency repairs” by negotiated contract or public agency force account. Use Competitive bidding unless another method is cost effective (23 CFR 635.204) Public agency force account may be used w/o formal finding (23 CFR 635.204b) $700,000 per incident minimum

G. METRICATION: 

G. METRICATION Metric Conversion Act of 1975 - “voluntary” 1988 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act - requires all Federal agencies to convert FHWA rulemaking - conversion deadline 9/30/96 NHS Designation Act, Nov 1995 Postponed deadline to Oct 1, 2000 Prohibited FHWA from mandating sign legend conversion nationwide indefinitely TEA-21 - removed deadline; made conversion optional (pg. 182-183)

Percent of 1997 Construction Program inMetric Units1996 AASHTO Survey *: 

Percent of 1997 Construction Program in Metric Units 1996 AASHTO Survey * 76% - 100% in metric units 51% - 75% in metric units 26% - 50% in metric units 0 % - 25% in metric units

Status of MetricationAs of 04/28/2005 : 

Status of Metrication As of 04/28/2005 SI IP (MT, NH, NY) Transition SI to IP (CA) Dual Units (NJ, VT)

H. Owner Controlled Insurance Programs/Wrap Up Insurance: 

H. Owner Controlled Insurance Programs/Wrap Up Insurance Owner purchases insurance on behalf of contractor for onsite work. Typically covers all contractors, subs, construction managers and owner Workers Comp, general liability, excess liability, professional liability, builders risk, railroad protective liability, etc. p. 184-185

Wrap-up Insurance (continued) : 

Wrap-up Insurance (continued) Potential Benefits May be cost-effective on mega-projects improved safety coordination benefits small firms or firms with less desirable safety records potential for reduced costs

Wrap-up Insurance (continued) : 

Wrap-up Insurance (continued) Potential Disadvantages May not be cost-effective on other than mega-projects benefits firms with less desirable safety records (places safer firms at a competitive disadvantage) potential administrative burden

Wrap-Up (continued) : 

Wrap-Up (continued) MI - Blue Water Bridge $90 M; Detroit I-75/I-696 $110M MA - Central Artery $14 B UT - State Construction Program $ ?? I-15 $1.5 B NM 44 $400M CO I-25 $1.5 B FL - Suncoast Parkway $210 M PA – Penn DOT I –99, 3 contracts

I. Project Labor Agreements: 

I. Project Labor Agreements A definition: A project specific, “pre-hire” collective bargaining agreement between contractors, or project owners, and all the labor unions representing the crafts that are needed for a construction project. p. 185-186

Typical PLA Coverage: 

Typical PLA Coverage Applies to all work on a project or at a location Signatory unions become representatives for all Supercedes all other bargaining agreements Prohibits strikes / lockouts Nearly all hiring through union referrals Binds all subcontractors at any tier Uniform work rules (overtime, hours/wk, conditions, etc.) Prescribed craft wages (> Davis-Bacon)

Purported PLA Advantages and Disadvantages: 

Purported PLA Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages No strikes or lockouts Labor costs are defined and set Reliable supply of labor Disadvantages Compliance with 23 CFR 635.117(b) ? Cost Effectiveness Labor conditions and costs are already set by DOL Discriminatory against open-shop contractors Will raise D-B rates / cost of construction

PLA Implementation : 

PLA Implementation February 17 2001, President Bush signed an Executive Order which prohibits the use of Government-mandated project labor agreements on Federal-aid projects. Construction contractors are free to enter into voluntary agreements. Used on Boston Central Artery and the Baltimore Fort McHenry Tunnel Projects Uses after 6/5/97 Golden Gate Bridge City of Duluth, MN I-287 NY State DOT

Any Questions?: 

Any Questions?

This isreally,Really,THE END!!: 

This is really, Really, THE END!!