1. Light Rail Transit Project
Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority
Mid-City Exposition
Light Rail Transit Project
Design-Build
Contract Award
March 2, 2006

2. Best Value Procurement
A combination of price and technical (non-price) considerations.
▪ Provides greater assurance of performance resulting in:
▪ Enhanced Community and Stakeholder responsiveness.
▪ Cost effective design.
▪ High quality construction.
▪ Timely Project delivery.
▪ Recommended Proposer need not be the one with the overall lowest
Price in order to provide the Best Value

3. Best Value Evaluation Criteria and Weights
TECHNICAL FACTORS (70%)
Management and Organization Structure; Qualifications and
Experience
Construction Plan, Project Management Plan, and Overall Approach
to the Work
Contracting Plan
Construction Safety Proposal and Record
Quality of the Community, Public and Business Mitigation
Commitments
PRICE (30%)
Design Fee and additional cost
Professional Services Fee and additional cost
Construction Fee
Insurance Costs

4. Technical (non-price) scores
Scores determined by five independent subcommittees, one for
each major evaluation criterion
19 individuals served on these committees (3 or 4 per committee)
Each person served on only one subcommittee
Subcommittees chaired by one member and scores verified by
him/her
All three proposers were consistently rated in the Good to
Exceptional range in all 5 evaluation criteria

5. Sealed price proposals opened only after all technical scoring was completed
No visibility of prices by any of the 19 technical subcommittee
members
Price proposals checked for completeness

6. Best Value Scores then were calculated per the RFP formula
Technical (non-price score) worth 70%
Price worth 30% 

7. Best Value Total Score Scores Total Score FCI/Fluor/Parsons 96.5
Kiewit/Stacey and Witbeck JV
79.2
Mid-City Constructors JV (Granite/Brutoco)
80.8

8. Procurement Background
September 2005, Authority Board authorized solicitation of
proposals for Negotiated Design-Build Contract.
January 2006, Proposals received and evaluated.
February 2006, Authority Board authorized CEO to negotiate with
top ranked proposer, FCI/Fluor/Parsons.
February 2006 negotiations focused on the following:
Exceptions to the RFP identified by FCI/Fluor/Parsons
Clarification of elements of their proposal.
Review of price proposal to determine if fair and reasonable.

9. ---Through a competitive procurement ---
Structure of Price Proposals
Authority Estimated Allowances for Design and Professional
Services Costs
Authority Estimated Allowance for Construction Cost
Elements of Price Proposals
Profit (Fee) on cost for Design
Profit (Fee) on Professional Services
Includes Costs estimated by Proposer over Authority Allowances for Design and Professional Services (if any)
Profit (Fee) on Construction
In this manner, profit (fee) is fixed for the entire project
In addition, costs are fixed for Design and Professional
Services
---Through a competitive procurement ---

10. Fair and Reasonableness Determination
Price competition (3 well qualified Proposer Teams) within the Best
Value Process
Price evaluation completed for the highest ranked proposer
complies with Federal Standards (allowability)

11. Price Evaluation Findings
Design:
• Proposer documented 9% more hours to perform the Work over
Metro’s estimate
• Labor rates consistent with current “market” rates
• Fixed Price risk included in the Proposer’s hours
• Profit (Fee) percentage appropriate for fixed price risk

12. Price Evaluation Findings (continued)
Professional Services:
• Proposer bid exceeded the Authority’s estimate
• Four areas accounted for the difference:
• Escalation
• Surveying
• Quality Control
• Construction Vehicles
• Detailed review of the costs showed the Proposer’s cost backup
for those areas to be appropriate and extremely well documented.

13. Process for Establishing the Final Cost of the Construction Packages
Construction Packages are prepared for final cost estimating as
engineering and design is completed for each discrete portion of
the project ("Packages")
Total Price for Construction = fixed cost for all packages plus
Contractor's Fixed Construction Fee 
Contractor submits detailed cost estimate for each Package
(includes details of all labor and materials quantities and unit
prices)
Authority reviews cost estimate

14. Process for Establishing the Final Cost of the Construction Packages (continued)
If cost for the Package is consistent with Authority's evaluation
and budget, CEO recommends Board to authorize Notice to
Proceed with construction
If cost is not mutually agreed, Authority has the right to bid
out Package (s)
Regardless, Contractor serves as the overall
Construction Manager and Engineer of Record for all Packages
Contractor's Fixed Fee is reduced for any packages that
Contractor is not awarded

15. Contract Award and Notice to Proceed

16. Action Required Next Steps
Authorize the CEO to award and execute Contract No.1-06 with
FCI/Fluor/Parsons in an amount not to exceed $420,207,000.
Authorize the CEO to Issue a Notice to Proceed for Design and
Professional Services in an amount not to exceed $77,757,000.
Next Steps
Upon Authorization of award, conform Contract No
After California Transportation Commission meetings, March 9 &
16, 2006, execute final contract and issue Notice to Proceed for
Design and Professional Services.
As design packages are completed, establish the cost of
the Construction Packages.