Click for next page ( 41


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 40
40 Table 14. Summary of Procurement Processes Project Delivery Method Procurement Process DART Green Construction Man- RFP with selection based upon multiple scored qualitative criteria: Line ager/ General Contractor a) project approach, b) project personnel, c) team composi- tion/subcontracting, d) firm/team experience, e) oral presentations, and f) proposal risk assessment and lowest responsive price; price weighted most heavily in the overall assessment Portland Mall Construction Man- Multiphase selection: Phase 1--150 points in 4 categories to estab- Segment ager/ General Contractor lish a competitive range: a) firm experience and project team [25 pts], b) project approach, safety and management plan [50 pts], c) price [50 pts], and d) DBE and workforce training programs [25 pts]; Phase 2-- interviews with proposers in the competitive range; and Phase 3 BAFO BART Extension DB Prequalification; RFP with proposals selected based upon minimum to SFIA price and meeting minimum specified technical requirements Dulles Metrorail DB Unsolicited proposal that led to CA; DB contract for a phase of overall project negotiated within the bounds of the CA Largo Extension DB RFQ followed by short-listing; RFP with selection based on techni- cal proposal and separate sealed price proposal; technical proposal considered: a) management plan, b) key staff, c) preliminary safety plan, d) quality plan, and a preliminary critical path method schedule AirTrain JFK DBOM RFQ followed by short-listing; RFP with multiphase selection: Phase 1--evaluation of non-price proposal based on multiple qualita- tive criteria; Phase 2--evaluation of NPV of design, construction, and operations services; Phase 3--establishment of a competitive range; Phase 4--BAFO Southern New DBOM RFQ followed by short-listing; RFP with selection based on 300 Jersey Light Rail points for technical proposal and 700 points for price (points awarded System based upon percent of bid to low bid) Not surprisingly, price was a dominant or heavily- Indeterminate Pricing weighted selection factor in every case except the Dulles Each case study is, to some extent, an example of the Metrorail. Note, however, that while selection of the procurement of design and construction services based design-builder in the Dulles Metrorail project was not on indeterminate pricing, inasmuch as the final design dependent directly on price competition, steps were of the project was not fully defined before contracts taken by MWAA to ensure that the price was reason- were awarded to the contracting teams. In all of the DB able. This finding increases the substance of the inde- and DBOM arrangements, agencies required the pro- terminate pricing question, which was fundamental to posers to advance the RFP design to a point where they this study. Interestingly, two cases--Largo Extension could provide a fixed price for final design and construc- and AirTrain JFK--had procurement processes that tion (and, for DBOM, operations). Where operations deviated somewhat from the planned approach. In both services were requested, it was common to include cases, the initial prices provided by the proposers ex- means to adjust the prices of some commodity items ceeded those expected. In the Largo project, WMATA over extended periods of time via indexing techniques. instructed the proposers to submit their BAFOs. Subse- The Dulles Metrorail project was a bit different. Of quently, the Authority finalized a deal with its selected the DB and DBOM contracts surveyed, it was the only contractor. In the AirTrain JFK project, the Port Au- one where the contracting entity was able to both ad- thority directed the proposing consortia to submit re- vance the design and then negotiate the contract prior vised proposals at lower prices. After receiving the sec- to contract award. As a result, there was no direct com- ond proposals, the Authority short-listed two proposers petition at the prime design-builder level, and there and selected one of the remaining two. The procure- was no other DB price for MWAA to consider in evalu- ment documents provided both owners with the latitude ating the reasonableness of DTP's price. Rather, MWAA to adjust the process as necessary to identify and select and its consultants were able to evaluate, on an open- a preferred bidder. book basis, DTP's assumptions and conduct their own assessment of what the project should cost. The other DB and DBOM projects selected the contractor through a competitive process.