Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 11

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 10
10 APM system that were purposely built into the second gen- ACRP Report 37. Examples include one significant third-party eration O&M contract. The terms and conditions of this O&M provider that has apparently left the market as evidenced contractual aspect provided much flexibility in the type of by their not bidding on recent O&M competitive solicitations improvements and the schedule for their implementation to commensurate with their past work. Another example involves ensure that work was done only when needed and as needed. a major APM supplier of new systems that has opened several This innovative approach changes the implementation of large APMs in the United States over the last several years, midlife system improvements to a process instead of an event but who has yet to venture into proposing on O&M services because typically such work is accomplished in one specific for other suppliers' systems. However, informal discussions time window under separate contract from the O&M contract. with this supplier indicate that providing O&M services for By doing what is needed when it is needed under the ongoing systems implemented by other suppliers may be in their busi- O&M contract, gains in efficiency should be made in terms of ness plan for the future. Another example involves a major dollars, effort, and (lack of) system disruption. supplier of cable-propelled systems that has apparently left the supplier pool in terms of providing new systems. However, this supplier continues to provide O&M services for their 3.1.3 O&M Contract Proposer Pool existing systems and in one case competed to provide O&M The O&M contractor pool, or those companies that are services for a system by another supplier. willing and capable of providing APM O&M services, is Efforts by an APM O&M provider to protect and main- small and likely to remain small, even with the recent trend tain its position within the provider pool are understandable of competitive procurement. Chapter 11 of ACRP Report 37 because installing an APM system represents a one-time best explains this by stating that "the APM industry is highly profit, whereas O&M services provide a revenue stream into specialized, with each supplier's system being proprietary in perpetuity--or for at least as long as the provider can success- nature. Thus, there has historically been no established com- fully retain the O&M contract. This difference in the revenue petitive market for APM O&M services, and the universe of streams is universal to all APM suppliers that are also O&M responsible third parties capable of providing such services providers. Recently, as competition has become more common, remains very limited despite the recent solicitations." Even some within the proposer pool have taken specific measures to among the initial APM suppliers, some small suppliers are help secure their positions. One example is taking a corporate not capable of providing O&M services for larger APM stance of not providing technical assistance or proprietary systems due to major technological differences such as cable parts directly to a competitor that is providing O&M services propulsion versus a self-propelled system or the raw scale for their system. However, such a stance typically does not differential of the APM system and/or size of the provider preclude providing technical assistance or proprietary parts company. directly to the owner via a separate small, on-call contract. Although the provider pool remains small, changes have Considering that the owner could then pass the technical occurred within the pool subsequent to the publication of assistance or parts to their contracted third-party O&M provider, one might wonder how effective such a corporate stance could be. Apparently, this corporate stance can be somewhat effective because recent industry experience has indicated that although such pass-throughs for proprietary parts do occur, they typically do not occur with the speed of delivery for the parts or reasonableness of cost for the parts compared to situations where the supplier holds the contract directly with the owner. 3.2Procurement of O&M Services: Contractual Options Chapter 10 (APM System Procurement) and Chapter 11 (Operations and Maintenance) of ACRP Report 37 include in- formation about contracting for O&M services. Section 10.2.5 includes a discussion of the designbuildoperatemaintain Photo: Lea+Elliott, Inc. (DBOM) method of APM procurement. The DBOM method, Two-Car Train in Maintenance Facility at Dallas-Fort sometimes referred to as "super turnkey," includes an initial Worth International Airport period of O&M services as part of the APM system procure-