*
*ITE Intermountain Annual Meeting 2016
*Loran Frazier, PE, MBA, RSW (retired still working)
* (406)728-4611
*
*While at MDT, promoted Design/Build with Montana
Legislature
*Did a trial run with three projects for legislature
*Reported back to legislature and got D/B approved
*Used D/B for quick repairs on Beartooth Highway landslide
Retired from MDT and worked for Knik Arm Bridge and Toll
Authority
Got project ready, advertised and short listed
proposers for a $1.2 billion FDBOM project
Recently worked on a team that designed and constructed
three D/B projects in Montana.
* FDBOM: Finance Design/Build Operate
Maintain - A P3 Project
88,995 residents *
291,826 residents *
Mat-Su in top 1% of fastest
growing “counties” in U.S.
Municipality of Anchorage is
the largest city in Alaska
* April 2010 Census - US Census Bureau
Crossing
Location
*
41
*Project Alignment
42
*
*Point MacKenzie Road to A/C connector
*2-4 lane bridge with 4-lane foundation
*Cut-and-cover tunnel under Government Hill neighborhood
*4 years to construct (+/- 1 year)
Total Cost Estimate ≈ $716 million
43
*
*4-lane facility from Burma Road to Ingra/Gambell Connector
*New connection to Ingra-Gambell
*Needed by about 2030 based on recently updated traffic
forecast
Total Cost Estimate in 2011 dollars: ≈$375 million
*
*Arctic Environment
* Extreme Weather
* Short Construction Season
*Tides
*Active Seismic - Earthquakes
*Unexploded Ordnance
*Geotech
*Glacial
* Clay & Silt Layers
*Hazmat
*Permits - Mitigations - Work Shutdowns
*Costs
*Site Access
*Political & Funding
*
Build Project on Paper
For Permits and Concept and Risk Management
Construction Concept Team
*
*
Construction above -10 MLLW
requires alternative construction
methods involving:
*
Construction above -10 MLLW
requires alternative construction
methods involving:
• Temporary causeway
• Temporary trestle
• Temporary jack-up barge
• Temporary dredged channel
KAC and Beluga Whales
*
*Drilled shaft
*Temporary pile work in months with low beluga density
*Construction monitoring
*Acoustic monitoring
52
*
Knik Geologic Profile
53
54
*
Owner Private Partner
• ROW
• Permitting
• Haz Mat
• Construction
• Ops & Maint
• Traffic & Rev
Public-Private Partnership
Indicative Risk Transfer (Availability Payment)
55
Owner Private Partner
• ROW
• Permitting
• Haz Mat
• Construction
• Ops & Maint
• Traffic & Rev
Public-Private Partnership
Indicative Risk Transfer (Availability Payment)
56
*Keep competition fair
*Rate firms against pre-established rating criteria
only
*Don’t assign points by comparing proposals
against each other
*Can have confidential conversations with bidding
firms, but have witness or counsel present and
keep record
*Keep all proposal and SOQ information secure
*
*
*Advertise in the right places
*Stipend amount was key to getting competition
*Assess project risks
*Solve as many issues as possible
*Provide as much information as possible about
remaining issues to proposers
*Geotech, R/W, permits
*Be reasonable about shifting risks
*Good communications with proposers is
essential for good results
*
Design/Build: demolition of existing rest area buildings;
construction of two new facilities on either side of the
highway. Fully accessible (ADA), CMU block construction, site
lighting, roadway construction, landscaping, directional
drilling, level II septic system
Greycliff Rest Area
Sweet Grass County, Montana
Bearmouth Rest Area
Granite County, Montana
Design/Build: demolition of existing rest area buildings;
construction of two new facilities on either side of the
highway. Fully accessible, CMU block construction, site
lighting, roadway construction, landscaping, boring, level
II septic system.
Design/Build: demolition of existing rest area
building; construction of new facility. Fully
accessible (ADA), CMU block construction, site
lighting, milled/overlaid & treated new sections of
roadway, landscaping, directional drilling, level II
septic system, self closing gate, cattle guard
Raynolds Pass Rest Area
Madison County MT
Issues:
*Unknown soils
*New to team
*Quantities
*Domes
Comments:
*Great teamwork
*Good project
*Overall good data provided
*Minor field fitting
*
*
Issues:
*Role Expectations
*Unknown soils
*Water Table
*Communications among Owner Rep
*Floor shrink cracks
*Quantities
*Sub’s performance
*Contract Timeframe
Comments:
*Good Project
*Good Team
*Minor Field Fitting,
*Worked through issues
*Reasonableness and
Fairness Prevailed
*Good Design Data
Issues:
*Unknown conditions
encountered – clay seam
*Mapping issues – ground,
power pole
*Remote site – getting
road materials
*Weather
*Change of project
manager
Comments:
*Issues addressed fairly and
reasonably
*Minor design modifications
needed in field
*Field fit ground and lights
*Overall a good quality
project
*Great project; great team
*
*
• Risks
• Costs
• Partnerships
• Teams
• Results
*
*Cost of going after project
*Are proposal costs worth the risk for reward?
*$100K+ with no stipend
*$20K for potential $4K profit
*Quantities – accurate enough for bid
*Enough fee to cover work
*Liability
*Strategy to handle unknowns
*Owners decision process
*
*Project cost
*Get quality product
*Attract quality teams
*Finish job
*Timely completion
*Cost overruns
*Avoid legal challenges
*
*Get Competition
Advertise in the right places
Stipend
*Qualification Screening
*Define/communicate what is wanted
Features
Specifications
*Decision/Dispute Resolution Process
*
*Define selection process
Follow predetermined criteria
Score against criteria
*Identify and provide information for potential issues
Geotech
Site Access
Permits
Right-of-Way
*Courts have been ruling that unforeseen
conditions are treated the same as other
contracts
*Some specifications are so onerous that courts
have ruled against them
*Time frame limits design/build team – has to rely
on information provided by owner
*
*
*Non-delegable duties to properly design and
construct.
*Engineers held to standard of care for a design professional.
Builder for workmanship and quality. Can’t delegate
obligations to subs.
*Owner relies on design/build team for areas they
do not have expertise and can expect reasonable
workmanship.
*Failure to warn, assume liability. Can go both
ways.
*
*Define authority
*Do homework/minimize unknowns
*Confidential discussions
*Define requirements and expectations
*Fair selection
*Adequate stipend
*Communications with DB team
* Constructor and Engineer
*Realistic understanding
* Train staff of process
*Budget for unknowns
*Partnership with proposer
*Assess risks
*Communicate questions/
define assumptions
*Clarify project
communication roles
*Plan on field fitting
* Include some contingency
*Communicate – team &
owner
*Partnership with owner
OwnerDesign/Build Team
*
(How it goes depends on the partners.)
*Evolving Liability for Design-Build Contracts:
Joel B. Castro
*Design-Build Project Delivery in Practice:
Fasken Martineau
*Design-Build, Contracts, Law, and Risk
Management: J. Kent Holland Jr. PLLC
*Evan Caplicki and Fred Kessler, Nossaman LLP
*