Strategies for Improving the Project Agreement Process between Highway Agencies and Railroads (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 48-75
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 48... ...
It is tiered and stratified to outline the broad understandings that the parties agree to overall. It then progresses through more detailed agreements down to streamlined and standardized project-specific agreements.
|
From page 49... ...
Most highway agencies are trying to meet project schedules, which can be delayed by lengthy railroad agreement processes. Both parties, therefore, face pressures to reduce their own costs and to protect their own assets.
|
From page 50... ...
The binding master agreement and standard agreements include contract provisions that allow the highway agencies to reimburse the railroads for reviews and other costs. Steps in the Partnership Process The partnering memorandum of understanding is intended to encapsulate the parties' understanding of how to operate in a spirit of partnering.
|
From page 51... ...
Agree to adopt a cooperative and joint continuous improvement attitude toward the project review process.Step 2: Implement the Partnering Memorandum In this step of the partnering process, the public agency and the railroad develop and eventually sign a memorandum of understanding formalizing their intentions to partner on the overall project agreement process (partnering MOU)
|
From page 52... ...
The feedback from the results of the implementation both at the program and at the project level will be used as input to improve the partnering process detailed in Figure 4.1.Applicable changes will be incorporated, plans will be revised, and changes will be made to the master agreements, project agreements, program agreements, practices, and provisions in the partnering process. Examples of Best Practices and Processes The implementation steps described in this section elaborate on the best practices that are incorporated into the memorandum described earlier.
|
From page 53... ...
Having someone in a highway agency that acts as a liaison and coordinates projects with the railroad helps the agency in the following areas: • Focus on organizational goals. Focus on the overall agency goals and prioritize activities across projects to ensure that the overall goals of the agency are achieved.
|
From page 54... ...
Obtains input from districts and divisions, prioritizes the project list, and prepares for meeting with agency senior management; 5. Meets with appropriate level of agency senior management and discusses and finalizes the list and the order of priority;6.
|
From page 55... ...
who is responsible for coordinating all project activities between divisions and sections within the railroad and the public agency, there are processes similar to those listed above where interacting with the railroads does not involve the PPM. The railroad PPM is likewise not the one to contact for obtaining flagging services.
|
From page 56... ...
; and • Keeps both parties informed about project status and issues, expedites issue resolution, and submits monthly reports detailing work performed in the previous month. The responsibilities of both sides are detailed in an agreement.
|
From page 57... ...
An enhancement of this model would be the inclusion of a financial incentive for meeting the project duration goal. For example, it is common practice for construction project agreements to include financial incentives to the contractor for completing the project before a specified goal date and a penalty for delay beyond a specified date.
|
From page 58... ...
In some cases, there may be some upfront effort required to develop the project plan, schedule meetings, and get the participation needed for the successful completion of the project. Conducting Quality Assurance Reviews and Feedback The quality improvement cycle shown in Figure 4.4 is an effective way of analyzing processes; identifying areas of improvement; monitoring performance; devising action plans to improve performance; and then revising goals, processes, and action plans to further improve performance.
|
From page 59... ...
may jointly review new agreements from initiation to execution. • For the preliminary engineering and construction stages, the QARG, district and division personnel, and, if available, railroad personnel Start with reviewing the steps involved with agreement initiation; Review the planning and coordination processes used, looking at each process at various milestone points in the project life cycle -- for example, at approximately 30%, 60%, and 90% of project development; and Look at project management and other activities that occur during the construction process, including dayto-day project activities; communication; process used to manage schedule, cost; and scope; time taken to resolve issues, billing, insurance, and other similar activities that could potentially delay a project.
|
From page 60... ...
The repository can be a simple file system on a server managed through permission controls or it can be a simple application permitting access through a website. The most common practice for communication between the railroads and highway agencies currently is via e-mails, attaching documents to e-mails where necessary.
|
From page 61... ...
The following are typical master agreement provisions: • Parties agree to authorize preliminary engineering (PE) within 30 days of notification of the railroad.
|
From page 62... ...
The provisions of the master agreement are not new in that they have been included in the individual project agreements. There may be institutional constraints to developing a master agreement.
|
From page 63... ...
• Share information about any expected legislation, ordinances, or regulations that will have an impact on projects or operations. • Provide an opportunity to discuss any issues or questions about master agreements currently being used by the agency and railroad.
|
From page 64... ...
Safety improvement initiatives at existing grade crossings where either the technology of the grade crossing protection is increased or additional protection such as the implementation of four-quadrant gates is provided are good candidates for gaining the railroads' cooperation. Four-quadrant gates seal off a vehicle's ability to cross over the tracks.
|
From page 65... ...
Direct Payments to Railroads No direct monetary strategies were found to be in use by highway agencies to provide incentives to the railroads to cooperate on projects. The most common practice is to reimburse the railroad for project expenses such a project reviews, flagging, and force account work conducted on behalf of highway projects.
|
From page 66... ...
For instance, differing from highway agencies, the railroads • Generally do not accept mechanically stabilized earth walls, which are common in highway construction; • Require shoring around excavation in railroad embankments; and • Require more robust 100-year bridge designs for railroad bridges as opposed to lesser standards for highway bridges. Arguably, relaxing these construction specifications could save the highway agency money in the construction phase.
|
From page 67... ...
• The cost of creating and sustaining a central repository likewise could be made federally eligible. Accounting Rules Requirements A related change that could assist the partnering process is the development of a joint recommendation from the Class I railroads, representative state highway agencies, and the Federal Highway Administration on eligible reimbursement costs under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)
|
From page 68... ...
Because there is not a widely traded market for railroad rights-of-way or air rights, it can be difficult and subjective to determine the comparable fair-market value for such railroad property. Highway agencies reported several times during the research for this project that negotiating such values became contentious and led to significant project delays.
|
From page 69... ...
The following are suggested performance measures related to plan quality: • Whether changes in bridge type, size, roadway line, or grade or drainage structures or limits are requested after initial coordination; • Whether project bid letting is delayed by requested railroad changes; • Whether expected completion date is delayed by railroad issues; and • Number of railroad interventions with contractor activities related to safety or railroad operations. The following is a suggested performance measure related to cost: • Total annual cost in hours, consultant costs, and overhead for administering railroad agreements.
|
From page 70... ...
Strategies, tactics, and contract provisions to do so can include the following: • The highway agency requiring certain parameters as to bridge type and roadway alignment be determined before bidding the design-build project. The highway agency may need to coordinate in advance with the railroad as to type, size, line, and grade of the structure and include those parameters as given in the design-build contract.
|
From page 71... ...
• Creating actual or virtual ongoing communication between the state and local highway agencies and the railroads to continually share new best practices, problems, solutions, and innovations to the agreement process. • Sustaining dialogue between state and local officials and their railroad counterparts with other governmental stakeholders such as the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, possibly the Surface Transportation Board, and often state utility commissions in those states in which commissions play a role in the agreement process.
|
From page 72... ...
Such dialogue between multiple groups is necessary to sustain innovation in the highway–railroad agreement process. The parties of highway agencies, railroads, engineering firms, and federal officials need a means and forum to continue dialogue.
|
From page 73... ...
These groups exist to advance the state of the practice in transportation. The committees address many issues comparable to the highway–railroad agreement process.
|
From page 74... ...
Likewise, it is conceivable that if interest were strong enough, highway agencies and the railroads could contribute dues to create an organization to sustain improvements in the project agreement process and to periodically bring all parties together in conferences and forums. The impediments to such an organization are primarily in three areas.
|
From page 75... ...
A similar institute or center to promote the advancement of project agreements could be proposed to be housed at a neutral, engineering-focused university. Potential funding sources could be the state highway agencies through their extensive federally funded research programs, contributions from the engineering firms who design such projects, the railroads, and the federal highway and rail offices.References 1.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.