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 17
17
Authority or the contractor to default on their normal Procurement
responsibility to amicably and fairly settle their differ-
ences by indiscriminately referring them to the DRB. History
The Authority and contractor would be encouraged to
The concept for rail to DIA developed in 1990 when
resolve potential disputes without resorting to the DRB
the Virginia Commonwealth Transportation Board
procedures.
(CTB) adopted a Dulles Corridor Transportation Pro-
A dispute would be referred to the DRB only when it
gram with rail service as its goal. In 1995, the Com-
appeared that the normal Authority/contractor dispute
monwealth of Virginia enacted the PPTA. This act al-
resolution effort was not succeeding, and before insti-
lows private entities to enter into agreements with the
tuting action under the "Disputes" clause of the General
Commonwealth to construct, improve, maintain, and
Provisions. However, a dispute would be referred to the
operate transportation facilities.
DRB only when the contracting officer and the contrac-
In 1998, an unsolicited conceptual proposal for a rail
tor jointly agreed to do so and agreed to the scope of the
project came from Raytheon Infrastructure, Inc. (now
DRB review.
URS) to the Virginia Department of Rail and Public
Project Performance Transportation (DRPT). The proposal included design,
construction, operation, and maintenance services for a
Work proceeded as planned, and the segments NW- new rail line and a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. In
2, NW-3, and NW-4 opened slightly ahead of schedule accordance with PPTA implementation guidelines, the
on December 6, 2010. Project personnel were inter- conceptual proposal was posted and published. A com-
viewed, and it is reported that no preconstruction peting proposal was received in January 1999 from the
claims or significant changes occurred. TysonDulles Corridor Group, a consortium consisting
of Bechtel and West*Group.
IV. DULLES CORRIDOR METRORAIL PROJECT The Initial Review Committee considered both pro-
posals and determined that the Raytheon proposal mer-
Project Overview ited further review. In February 2000, CTB adopted a
resolution approving Raytheon's conceptual proposal
The Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority
and invited a detailed proposal. An Advisory Panel was
(MWAA) is in the process of constructing a 23-mi exten-
formed to handle subsequent matters in accordance
sion to the existing Metrorail system, with the project
with PPTA implementation guidelines. By October
being commonly known as the "Dulles Corridor Metro-
2000, Raytheon announced the formation of Dulles
rail Project." When completed, the project will be turned
Transit Partners (DTP), a consortium of Raytheon,
over to another agency, the Washington Metropolitan
Bechtel, and West*Group (West*Group eventually
Area Transit Authority (WMATA), for operation and
withdrew from the consortium), an occurrence that the
maintenance and will be known as the "Silver Line."
Advisory Panel acknowledged.
The project will provide transit from East Falls Church,
In late May 2002, DTP submitted its detailed pro-
Virginia, to Washington Dulles International Airport
posal, and by June 2002, DTP had submitted a draft
(DIA) and west to Ashburn, Virginia. Importantly, the
environmental impact statement (EIS) to DRPT. The
new line will provide service to Tyson's Corner (a major
Draft EIS proposed several transportation alternatives,
commerce center in Northern Virginia), the Reston
including bus, combined bus/rail, and exclusively rail
Herndon area, and will be a one-seat ride from DIA to
options. The full Metrorail system emerged as the Lo-
downtown Washington, D.C.
cally Preferred Alternative to increase nonvehicular
The project is broken into two phases and is expected
access to Tyson's Corner, Dulles, and Loudon County.
to have a total cost in excess of $5 billion. The first
WMATA, the CTB, Fairfax County, Loudon County,
phase will be approximately 13 mi, and have four sta-
and MWAA all approved or endorsed the project in De-
tions in the Tyson's Corner area. Utility and right-of-
cember 2002. DRPT and DTP began to negotiate a com-
way acquisition work along the Phase 1 corridor started
prehensive agreement (CA) in January 2003. The CA
in August 2007, and Full Notice to Proceed with final
was executed in June 2004.
design and construction under a DB contract was au-
The CA called for, among other things, DTP to per-
thorized in March 2009. Phase 1 is expected to be com-
form preliminary engineering on Phase 1 and then pro-
pleted by 2013. Phase 2 will extend the transit system
vide a fixed-price proposal to DRPT to complete the
to DIA and eastern Loudon County, Virginia.
final design and construct Phase 1. DTP performed the
This case is an example of how the Virginia PPP pro-
preliminary engineering and ultimately submitted a
curement statute provided the authorization for Phase
Final EIS in December 2004, which received FTA ap-
1 of this complex project to reach fruition. The case
proval in March 2005.
study will provide an overall background to the corridor
MWAA became involved in the project when, in De-
transit project while focusing upon Phase 1 of the pro-
cember 2005, it submitted a proposal to the Common-
ject and procurement.
wealth of Virginia proposing that the Dulles Toll Road
be transferred to MWAA in consideration of MWAA
operating the Dulles Toll Road and using toll revenues
as a nonfederal source of funding to construct the pro-
OCR for page 18
18
ject and for other transportation improvements in the One of the important procurement features of the
Dulles Corridor. In March 2006, the Commonwealth of project involved the handling of certain subcontractors
Virginia entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and suppliers. During the course of the negotiations on
with MWAA agreeing to the transfer, and on December the DB contract, the parties concluded that portions of
29, 2006, the Commonwealth of Virginia and MWAA the work that were to be performed by certain subcon-
entered into a transfer agreement which, among other tractors were difficult to price realistically. These sub-
things, effected an assignment of the CA to MWAA. contracts involved work that was scheduled to be per-
formed several years after the start of construction, and
Scope of Work it appeared that the pricing prospective subcontractors
The scope associated with Phase 1 of the Dulles Met- were providing had substantial contingencies, due to
rorail Project is broad-based and includes administra- the combination of the level of design existing as of the
tion, design, engineering, procurement, transportation, proposal pricing date, implementation schedule, and
quality assurance, inspection, installation, construction market conditions. To deal with this situation, the par-
supervision, management, documentation, maintenance ties carved out this work from the fixed-priced compo-
demonstration, and testing services. The design-builder nent of the proposal and converted it to an allowance.
also has responsibility to provide labor, equipment and Therefore the $1.6 billion DB contract price with DTP
materials, machinery, tools, consumables, utilities, and includes approximately $600 million of allowances for
other services dictated or enumerated by the contract. the following:
Process Overview · Track work.
DTP finished the preliminary engineering and in · Wiehle Parking Garage.
January 2007 submitted a fixed-price DB proposal to · Station finishes and mechanical, electrical, and
MWAA for Phase 1. The parties negotiated the pro- plumbing work.
posal, and on June 17, 2007, MWAA and DTP executed · West Falls Church Yard sound and box platforms.
the DB contract in the amount of approximately $1.6 · Pedestrian bridges.
billion. · Site development.
To advance the project and eliminate risks that were · Installation of public art.
considered inherent in the right-of-way acquisition and · Communications and security.
utility relocation scope of work, MWAA and DTP agreed · Fire suppression.
that this work would be performed under the CA on a · Elevators and escalators.
cost-reimbursable basis, as opposed to being part of the · Spare parts.
DB contract. This eliminated the need for DTP to put · West Falls Church Yard service and inspection
contingencies in its lump-sum contract for what were building.
expected to be challenging and unknown conditions. · Traction power supply.
Having this work proceed under the CA also enabled · Automatic train control supply.
the project to mitigate the potential impact of this scope · Corrosive and stray currents.
of work, as DTP was able to start work on these activi- · Contact rail.
ties in August 2007--several months in advance of the · Replacement parking.
expected notice-to-proceed date (February 2008) for the
DB work. This approach was viewed as mitigating the The contract requires DTP to include MWAA in
impact to the project schedule that could come from oversight of the bidding and awarding of allowance item
having this work performed concurrently with the re- contracts. DTP was to develop prequalification criteria
lease of the DB package. Since MWAA would have ul- and submit them to MWAA 30 days before requesting
timate financial responsibility for right-of-way and util- bids for subcontracted work. DTP also has responsibil-
ity relocations, the cost-reimbursable contracting ity for drafting RFPs for allowance items. In the event
approach offered under the CA also enabled MWAA to that it was necessary to engage different subcontractors
have DTP serve as MWAA's representative in perform- for allowance item tasks, DTP was to develop separate
ing this work, with MWAA ultimately controlling the RFPs for those items. DTP was also to open the bids in
pace and disposition of the negotiations for land and the presence of MWAA and evaluate the bids according
relocations. to established selection criteria.
Because of delays to the FFGA, which called for the A key part of the allowance arrangement is that each
FTA to provide $900 million for Phase 1, the start of the party has taken some risk in the arrangement. MWAA
DB project was delayed beyond February 2008. The has taken procurement risk for the allowance subcon-
parties proceeded to have certain work performed under tractors, since the ultimate price for the DB contract is
the CA on a series of interim agreements, and an adjusted to reflect actual prices received from the bid-
amended and restated DB contract was executed on ding process and how those prices vary from the allow-
July 25, 2008, to address a number of issues that arose ance price within the contract for such scope of work.
from the delayed notice to proceed. On March 10, 2009, Once the bidding is completed and the subcontract
the FFGA was signed, and full release under the DB signed, DTP is to take full risk of the subcontractors for
contract was issued shortly thereafter.
