CM AT RISK VS. DESIGN BID BUILD

Transcription

1 CM AT RISK VS. DESIGN BID BUILD A TEXAS CASE STUDY ON PROCUREMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION September 28, 2010

2 Acknowledgement Mike Adams, P.E Executive Director of Engineering and Utilities City of Midlothian Coy M Veach, P.E., CCM Vice President Freese and Nichols, Inc. David W. Sloan, P.E., BCEE Senior Process Engineer Freese and Nichols, Inc. Bryant Caswell, P.E Associate Schrickel Rollins and Associates

3 Outline City of Midlothian, Texas Project Delivery Systems (PDS) Legislation History in Texas CM At Risk Structure, Schedule and Services Solicitation and Procurement Process CMAR vs.dbb Take Away Points Questions and Answers

4 City of Midlothian Ellis County, Texas Population 16,000 residents Strategicallylocated located equal distance from Dallasand and Fort Worth 25 miles southwest of Dallas and southeast of Fort Worth 2006 Long Range Water Supply and Master Plan projects population to steadily increase over the next 20 years Existing Tayman WTP production capacity of 13.0 MGD Current water demand dis 10.0 MGD Projected water demand is 36.5 MGD

5 Midlothian WTP Project Profile The Tayman WTP is completely build out New WTP to meet future demands and provide redundancy Membrane Filtration facility Funding TWDB Drinking Water SRF + City Funds = $ M Engineering = $4.2 M Funding Available for Construction = $25.6 M Owner Preferences Maximize local construction participation Operators involved in design/pre construction phase Desire for qualified contractor with experience Projected water demand may exceed available capacity in summer of 2012

6 Selected Water Treatment Process Raw Water Influent TRWD Rapid Mix Flocculators Sedimentation Basins High Service Pump Station Ground Storage Tanks UV/Ox Membranes Phase I 9 MGD Phase II 18 MGD Phase III 36 MGD

7 Project Delivery Systems In house design and construction Traditional Design / Bid / Build (DBB) Construction Manager Agency (CMA) Construction Manager At Risk (CMAR) Design Build (DB) Design / Build / Operate / Transfer (DBOT)

8 Legislation History In Texas 1995 SB 1 Largely an education reform bill 1997 SB 583 and 1999 SB 669 Provided Guidance 2001 SB 510 Counties, Cities and River Authorities but not for horizontal construction 2003 HB 3028 Revisions 2007 HB 1886 Authorization for alltypes of projects

9 Structure and Schedule CMAR OWNER ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER CMAR PRE CONSTRUCTION SUBCONSULTANTS CM/GC CMAR CONSTRUCTION Project Schedule PDR Design Contractor Selected $ GMP $ SUBCONTRACTORS Normal Construction Fast Track Construction

10 Typical CMAR Services CMAR assumes the risk of construction Providing suggestions on constructability, risk management, and materials during preconstruction. Preparing bid packages for the procurement of Subcontractors and Suppliers, including the Membrane Filtration System Preparing overall project schedule and updates. Preparing Opinion of Probable Construction Costs (OPCC) Guaranteeing the construction cost.

11 Profile of a CMAR Project Complex project, difficult to define or subject to change. Tight/limited budget or sensitive financial controls Tight schedule, fast tracking desired. Better risk management desired. Builder selection flexibility The Midlothian WTP #2 fits this profile

12 CMAR Project Flow Chart DBB Project Flow Chart Contract with Architect/ Engineer Prepare Preliminary Design Prepare CMAR RFP. Evaluate and Select CMAR CMAR Bids Advertising and Project Bidding Components Complete Final Design Contract with CMAR for Pre Construction Services Award Contract Negotiate GMP to Low Bidder Enter into Construction Phase Contract Complete Construction

13 Solicitation of a CMAR Request for Proposal Scope: Project should be reasonably well defined. Selection/scoring criteria Experience Schedule hdl Budget Other informationtoto support selection of CMAR One or two step selection process required. Midlothian selected the one step process.

14 One Step/Two Step Process One Step Process All qualification and fees are requested Fees include preconstruction, general conditions, bonds, and contingencies Evaluation based on qualifications and pricing simultaneously Two Step Process First step: Select maximum 5 proposers on the basis of qualifications (non monetary criteria) only. Second step: Request full proposal only from shortlisted proposers. Evaluation based on qualifications first, then pricing

15 Scoring Process One effective method dfor evaluation is using a scoring matrix based on weighted criteria and point scale Initial scoring done independently d and without t knowledge of the preconstruction fees Owner/Architect/Engineer Due Diligence Reviews: Financials stability, personnel and reference checks Setup a workshop: Compile scores Open fees and score the last criteria Reevaluate scores based on financials Determine if interviews arenecessary Revisit scores based on interviews.

16 Midlothian CMAR Scores

17 Guidelines for Interviews Short list to top contenders, release the rest. Establish a set of standard questions For the benefit of the CMAR Provide adequate time for CMAR to prepare. Be specific about expectations for the interview. i Make the sessions informal and relaxed. Set aside time to discuss the collective results after each interview. Document reasons for scoring changes be able to defend scores.

18 Selection and Contract At the completion of interviews Review and revise scores as necessary Make final decision on CMAR for recommendation to Board or City Council Publish results of selection process within 45 days Notify TWDB (funding agency) of recommendation Notify the selected CMAR firm and begin contract execution process Preconstruction ti services begins on contract texecution date and ends after GMP is established

19 Proposal Evaluation Flow Chart

20 CMAR = DBB Owner retains design professional as their advocate and trusted advisor. Advertisement and solicitation process allows everyone to compete on Best Value. Includes safeguards of accountability and transparency. Price is known before construction begins. Single point of responsibility for construction. Contractor/Builder is at risk for cost overruns and errors.

21 CMAR DBB Collaborative team with Owner, A/E and CMAR vested interest More control in the selection of Builder/Contractor. Allows negotiations with top ranked firms. Costing is open book and allows owner to participate in setting price. Ability to effectively fast track construction. Contingency is owned and managed by Owner

22 CMAR Myths No Construction Inspection required Less qualified Construction Inspector is acceptable No change orders during construction Greatest tcost savings to the Owner CMAR projects have shorter schedules

23 Take Away Points Assess the project and determine if alternate delivery is beneficial Solicit and procure CMAR in accordance to state rules and regulations Ownermustprovideinspections inspections, materials testing and verification inspections independently of CM Bondsare required Specify the point at which the Guaranteed Maximum Price will be set in the RFP. CM recommends, Owner selects subcontractors and suppliers.

24 Questions and Answers Theodore W. Chan, P.E. Project Manager Freese and Nichols, Inc N. Market Street Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75202