Pavement Type Selection – Updated Guidance on Use of Alternate Bidding

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Executive Session Office of Asset Management
Advertisements

AD/AB - LCCA 2 nd Session Wednesday, January 29th.
ASPHALT PRICE ADJUSTMENT PRICE ESCALATION IN THE 21 ST CENTURY.
Best Value Procurement MnDOT State Aid for Local Transportation Minnesota Local Road Research Board MnDOT Office of Construction and Innovative Contracting.
1 Luis Rodriguez, P.E. Federal Highway Administration Life Cycle Cost Analysis Virginia Concrete Conference March 6-7, 2014.
Pavement Type Selection (Designs, Costs & Bidding) 9 th Annual Concrete Conference for the Maryland Transportation Industry March 24, 2009 Timonium, MD.
Overview of New Rules Keith Waye Government Contracting Small Business Administration.
Bridge Preservation Update Wade F. Casey, P.E. Bridge Management Engineer Federal Highway Administration AASHTO SCOM Meeting Louisville, KY July 20, 2011.
MEPDG Overview & National Perspective CRSI Expert Task Group Meeting July 29, 2008 Gary Crawford Federal Highway Administration Office of Pavement Technology.
Alternate Bidding in Missouri Transportation Estimators Association Annual Conference November 2-4, 2005 – Daytona Beach, FL Interstate 44 … South-Central.
State Aid Design-Build Project Delivery for Minnesota Cities and Counties.
Alternative Project Delivery
Roadmap to Success How to become a business partner with MCPS!
Procurement and Tendering Presentation to [NAME OF CLIENT] [YOUR NAME] [DATE]
Pavement Type Selection – Updated Guidance on Use of Alternate Bidding Virginia Concrete Conference Richmond, VA March 6, 2014.
FHWA Life Cycle Costs Analysis and Pavement Type Selection Guidance Maryland Concrete 2014 Conference March 18, 2014.
Life Cycle Cost Analysis in Pavement Design - In Search of Better Investment Decisions - Office of Asset Management Federal Highway Administration Executive.
1 Bid evaluation - Works  Clarification of bids ( if necessary)  Determination of responsiveness “Substantial” responsiveness No material deviations.
Value Engineering. Definition Value Engineering (VE) is defined as a systematic process of review and analysis of a project, during the concept and design.
2005 AASHTO Value Engineering Conference Using VE in Design Build Presented by: Jerry R. Blanding Innovative Contracting Engineer FHWA – NRC July 21, 2005.
 Materials – Highest & Best Use  Public Health  Safety  The Environment  Safety  Reliability  Performance  Flexibility  Productivity Improve Mobility.
Economic Analysis: Applications to Work Zones March 25, 2004.
Regulatory Streamlining Implementing the Task Force Recommendations March 26, 2013 Regulatory Streamlining Implementing the Task Force Recommendations.
Jobs Act March 2011  Jobs Bill Updates  Parity  Comp Demo  MAS Set-asides  Misrepresentations  Subcontracting Payments & Plans.
FHWA Update Butch Wlaschin, P.E. Director, Office of Asset Management AASHTO Highway Subcommittee on Construction 2010 Annual Meeting Burlington, Vermont.
MARCH 9, 2006 Boating Safety and Enforcement Grant Program Regulations Stakeholder Workshop Proposed Conceptual Regulations Department of Boating and Waterways.
Policies and procedures for developing acquisition plans; determining whether to use commercial or Government resources; whether it is more economical.
Greg Kelley, Assistant Deputy Director Los Angeles County Department of Public Works SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUSTAINABLE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION ROUND TABLE.
Alternate Bid on Pavement Projects Overview Keith Shannon Director, Office of Materials and Road Research Mn/DOT – ACEC Annual Consultant Conference March.
1 DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY AMERICA’S COMBAT LOGISTICS SUPPORT AGENCY DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY AMERICA’S COMBAT LOGISTICS SUPPORT AGENCY WARFIGHTER SUPPORT.
BLOCK 4 SELECTION OF THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Pavement Data Collection Project evaluation Select feasible alternatives Reconstruction Restoration Recycling.
OTC Pres: Bid & Award Phase 4 12/08 Page 1 Project Delivery Performance Improvement Report to the Oregon Transportation Commission Eryca McCartin, Office.
ITS Device Standards & Procurement Project PURPOSE  Develop a series of Standards & Strategies designed to guide and provide consistency across the development.
Department of Property and Procurement Division of Procurement Property & Procurement Economic Development Seminar Friday & Saturday, May 6 & 7, 2016.
Small Business and Subcontracting. Subcontracting for Small Business 6 steps to successful subcontracting 6. Report Contractor performance 1. Consider.
CHANGE ORDER/CLAIMS MANAGEMENT MODULE 9. Change Order Management.
Subrecipient Monitoring
AASHTO 2016 NTPEP Annual Meeting May 9, 2016
CONTRACT AWARD TO ALTA PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES TO CONDUCT SAFETY OUTREACH AND UPDATE THE SUGGESTED ROUTES TO SCHOOL MAPS FOR THE SAFER.
Commercial Item Acquisitions: A Brief Update
Light Rail Transit Project
Robinson Park Recreation Center Renovation
Small Business and Subcontracting.
ETA Financial System Hot Topics
2015 Leadership Conference “All In: Achieving Results Together”
(Additional materials)
2 CFR 200- aka Uniform Guidance.
Session #2: Local Board Review of AEFLA Applications
WHOI Procurement Uniform Guidance 2018
Life Cycle Cost Analysis
FIVE PROJECT PHASES 5C-3 Sun. 8:00-10:00am 21/ 2/2016.
What PIs working on federally sponsored projects need to know.
Request for Proposal & Proposal
AASHTO RESEARCH ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROVIDENCE, RI JULY 27, 2016
What PIs working on federally sponsored projects need to know.
Laurie Leffler, Division Administrator
Traditional Steps Leading To A Bid Document
PROJECT DELIVERY METHODS
Uniform Guidance – What Administrators and PIs Need to Know
A Pricing Perspective on Contract Cost/Price Analyst
Successfully Integrating NEPA and Environmental Permitting into a DoD Hazardous Waste Treatment Facility Construction Project to Meet Budget and Schedule.
GPP Training Toolkit An Introduction European Commission
Managing Perkins Funds
Revolutionize USACE Civil Works
MULTISPORTS CENTRE PRESENTATION
SPR-B Research Coordination Webinar
OmegaPS Users’ Group Meeting OUGM19
Overview of The Bidder Response Form and Changes to the IT RFP Template March 8, 2019.
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES AB 1600 UPDATE
TOTAL COST CONTROL ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Presentation transcript:

Pavement Type Selection – Updated Guidance on Use of Alternate Bidding Virginia Concrete Conference Richmond, VA March 6, 2014

Session Outline 1 Background on FHWA Policy & Guidance on Alternate Bidding for Pavement Type Selection 2 State Usage 3 FHWA Technical Advisory Key Message: Introduce topics to be discussed. Background Information: None. Interactivity: None. Notes: None.

Background on FHWA Policy & Guidance Information Federal Register Oct 8, 1981 PTS Policy If designs equivalent then alternate bidding permitted Federal Register Nov 9, 1981 Clarification Discourages use of price adjustment clauses w/ AB 23 CFR, Part 626 Non-Regulatory Supplement April 8, 1999 FHWA does not encourage use of AB for PTS due to issue of equivalent pavement designs

Background on FHWA Policy & Guidance Information FHWA Memo Nov 13, 2008 Clarifies & consolidates FHWA policy AB is not encouraged Use of commodity price adjustments should not be used SEP 14 approval needed if using price adjustments NCHRP Report 703 – Guide for Pavement Type Selection March 2011

Cost within specified % of lowest estimate PTS Method #1 Identify feasible alternatives Perform LCCA Cost within specified % of lowest estimate Eliminate alternative NO YES Consider subjective factors: constructability, adjoining pavement, competition, traffic control, budget, etc. Make Decision 8 states

Alternate with lowest LCC PTS Method #2 (MI) Identify feasible alternatives 1 rigid, 1 flexible Perform LCCA Alternate with lowest LCC Eliminate alternative NO YES Make selection decision

Committee recommends a decision PTS Method #3 Identify feasible alternatives Perform LCCA Submit to selection committee. Committee evaluates engineering and economic factors Committee recommends a decision

Both rigid and flexible alternatives are feasible PTS Method #4 Identify feasible alternatives Perform LCCA Both rigid and flexible alternatives are feasible Eliminate alternative NO YES Prepare LCC Adjustment factor Alternate Bids to determine pavement type 10-25 states

Overview of Pavement Type Selection Components of Agency Processes Selection of alternatives Structural design Economic Analysis Primary/Secondary Factors Contractor-based processes Alternate Bidding Design Build Long Term Warranty Other ( PPP, Value Engineering, BV Contracting, Contract Maintenance)

State Usage State has advertised at least 1 alternate bid job State has not utilized alternate bidding State did not reply to survey

Technical Advisory Use of Alternate Bidding for Pavement Type Selection, T 5040.39 December 20, 2012 Elimination of SEP 14 approval for price adjustments, November 8, 2012

Question 1 Purpose of TA Guidance on use of AB for PTS on Federal-aid projects on NHS

Question 2 Does TA Supersede other Guidance TA Supersedes: Federal Register FHWA PTS Policy Statement 11/9/81 23 CFR 626 NR Supplement issued 4/8/99 HIPT Memorandum issued 11/13/08

Question 3 Background on AB for PTS Risk associated w/ material costs and performance 23 CFR 626 NR Guidance did not encourage use of AB Limited use due to: lack of national guidance, consistent approach to AB and open competitive bidding environment

Question 4 Scope/Applicability of TA Recommended practice for use on FA projects on NHS

Question 5 FHWA Position Suitable approach when, Engineering/economic analysis shows no clear choice between different pavement designs

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Equivalent Designs Similar level of service over same performance period (use of ME Design software) Similar life-cycle costs Performance period should include min one major rehab NPV < 10% of alternative

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Discount Rate Guidance available in LCCA in Pavement Design – Interim Tech Bulletin Sept 1981 Recommend use of NPV for future costs Recommend use of Real Discount Rate consistent w/ OMB Circular A-94

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Consideration of Uncertainty Determine total LCC for each alternative Consider use of RealCost software

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Maintenance and Rehab Strategy Should reflect realistic pavement management practices Should utilize realistic timing and extent of M&R activities Provide similar level of service over performance period NCHRP Report 703 Section 3.5 has reasonable approach http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_703.pdf

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Non-Economic Factors Agency may consider, Constructability Continuity of adjacent pavements Availability of local materials Experience

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Appropriate Application Only use when AB will likely influence determination of lowest bid Projects w/ substantial quantities of different pavement items not suited for AB

Question 6 When is AB Appropriate Work Zone User Delay Costs Not suited when user delay costs for initial construction and M&R exceed 20%

Question 7 Administration of AB LCCA Bid Adjustment Should be used for all AB projects Compute NPV of all unique costs over performance period Establish process w/ industry input Include LCCA bid adjustment in project specs Should not include non-agency costs User delay costs Vehicle operating costs Environmental costs. Etc

Question 7 Administration of AB Commodity Price Adjustment Not desirable Difficult to administer equal treatment May result in in different levels of material cost risk

Question 7 Administration of AB Quality Price Adjustments If used, Provide similar incentives/disincentives for all alternate pavement types

Question 7 Administration of AB Material Quantities Pay items based on weight/mass may result in cost overruns Recommend agency establish process to monitor costs to prevent any systematic bias

Question 7 Administration of AB Approvals Title 23 U.S.C. 112 FA construction contracts awarded based on lowest responsive bid SEP 14 Innovative Contracting Evaluated use of alternate pavement type bidding using LCCA bid adjustments Approval of LCCA bid adjustments no longer required per Nov 8, 2012 memo

Question 7 Administration of AB Change Orders Should not allow post-award change order for pavement type

Question 8 Program Effectiveness Monitor number of bidders and unit cost of projects Solicit input from respective pavement industry groups

Question 9 Reference Materials NCHRP Report 703 dated November 2011, Guide for Pavement Type Selection http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_703.pdf

Questions Gary Crawford Pavement Design and Analysis Team Tele: (202) 366-1286 E-mail: gary.crawford@dot.gov