` D2 EXPANSION PROGRAM AT WASHINGTON DULLES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BY FELIX C. BARTHOLOMEW ABSTRACT Lessons Learned: An examination of the Program Management policies and procedures that contributed to the successes and accomplishments achieved during Phase I Construction of the Capital Construction Program and the application and use of the successful management techniques as part of Phase II. INTRODUCTION In 1987, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) turned over control of Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (Reagan National) and Washington Dulles International Airport (Dulles) to the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (Airports Authority), an independent agency created by the Commonwealth of Virginia and the District of Columbia, with the consent of the Congress of the United States. Immediately thereafter, the Airports Authority embarked upon Phase I of the multi-phased Capital Construction Program (CCP) and the Office of Engineering hired Parsons Management Consultants (PMC), a joint venture company 1, to provide Program Management and Support Services in conjunction with the Program. The services include Program Planning, Design/Engineering Management, Construction Management and other technical support services at Reagan National and Dulles Airports. The primary aim of the Capital Construction Program was to build a new 35-gate terminal and related facilities at Reagan National and to expand the existing terminal and facilities at Dulles. The goal at Reagan National was to improve services and customer convenience and at Dulles, the goal was to expand the facilities to meet the anticipated future demand for increased passenger services and cargo facilities. In addition, the existing facilities at both airports had to be maintained and remain fully operational during construction (i.e., construction was to have no impact on passenger service and flight schedules). Phase I, which is approximately 85% complete, consists of the construction of a new terminal (Terminal B/C) and related infrastructure at Reagan National; and the expansion of the Main Terminal facilities and construction of related infrastructure, 1 Parsons Transportation Group; Parsons Brinckerhoff Construction Services, Inc.; DMJM Aviation; and Delon Hampton Associates, Chartered. Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 1
including the new Customs and Immigration facilities at Dulles. With the concurrence of the signatory airlines, the Phase I Construction was expanded to include a number of additional projects, including a new Airport Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) and Terminal Radar Approach Control System at National; and a new permanent Midfield Concourse (Tier 1) at Dulles. The Capital Construction Program, nevertheless, continued to proceed in accordance with the Airports Implementation Plan and Program Schedule. Between 1987 and 1999, the number of annual enplanements at Washington Dulles International Airport increased by 86.0 percent, from 10,750,000 passengers to 20,000,000 passengers; and, in the year 1999, Dulles, with a 25.7% increase in the total number of passengers served, was the fastest growing major airport in the world. The industry average growth rate, for the year 1999 was approximately 2.9%. The immediate need for a continuation of the expansion of the facilities and infrastructure at Dulles was therefore apparent, and in October 2000, the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority agreed to pursue Phase II of the Capital Construction Program. The Phase II Program, which is also referred to as the D2 Development Program, will focus primarily on future growth at Dulles. Phase II Construction will include further expansion of the existing Main Terminal and Midfield Concourse (Tier 1), and the construction of a new concourse and related facilities. The major projects include the construction of a second Midfield Concourse (Tier 2); an automated People Mover System and a Maintenance Facility; a high speed Baggage Conveyor System; a fourth Runway with associated Taxiways; and a new Airport Traffic Control Tower. Other major Phase II projects will include the construction of the new South Utility Building; a North Flank Parking Garage and a West Flank Parking Garage; and two underground Pedestrian Tunnels. One tunnel will connect the North Flank Garage to the Main Terminal and the other will connect the Main Terminal to the Midfield Concourses. The construction of additional Aircraft Parking Aprons, a Hydrant Fueling System, Public Parking Lots, Air Cargo Facilities, Utility System Upgrades/Improvements, Roadway System Improvements, Airfield Pavement Panel Replacement, and Airportwide Sign System Improvements are also included in Phase II. Through the present time, the Phase I Construction has been proceeding on schedule and is currently within the approved program budget. Together with Phase II, the total estimated cost of the Capital Construction Program, including several additional projects, is $6.9 billion. The original estimated cost of the Phase II Program is $3.4 billion. The following documents some of the management policies and procedures that contributed to the successes and achievements of the Phase I Construction in three key areas Program Management, Design/Engineering Management and Construction Management. Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 2
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT The Phase II Construction, which is concentrated primarily on airside projects at Dulles, will present many challenges that will require extensive scheduling and greater coordination between projects than was experienced during Phase I Construction. The greatest challenge anticipated during the construction of Phase II was: how to keep the airport and related facilities fully functional, including minimizing any disruption to the movement of aircraft and air traffic, while simultaneously implementing a number of major airside construction projects. The Automated People Mover system (APM), for example, will require the APM tunnel system to be constructed under five existing taxiways. Construction of the APM system will also necessitate retrofit at existing facilities, including the Main Terminal, the International Arrivals Building and the permanent Midfield Concourse (Tier 1). In addition, according to the current Program Implementation Schedule, the second Midfield Concourse (Tier 2) will need to have in place a fully functional APM system and high speed Baggage Conveyor System, associated Taxiways, Aircraft Parking Aprons and a Hydrant Fueling System before it can become fully operational. Program Planning The successes experienced during the Phase I Construction started with the Airports Master Plan that carefully and thoroughly outlined the various projects included in the Construction Program. The Master Plan is complemented by an Implementation Plan and a Program Schedule that carefully identifies each design and construction project with clarity and with precision. The Schedule defined the design and construction periods for each project and established the total estimated cost for the Program in terms of the current dollar value (i.e., cost estimates with no escalation). This is not meant to indicate that the Master Plan and the Implementation Plan and Program Schedule were never revised. It does indicate, however, that the level of effort that was put into the development of the Master Plan has resulted in revisions to the projects that have exhibited no material impact on the Master Plan, the Implementation Plan or the Program Schedule. In addition, the revisions to the Master Plan have caused no major changes to the original scopes of work, or the intent of the Capital Construction Program. Team Building The activity that has contributed to the successes of the Phase I Construction is the concept of team building. Team building was initiated by and between the Authority s Vice President of Engineering and PMC s Program Manager and has resulted in a seamless management organization structure. Team building created a synergistic relationship that has caused the managers and staffs of the Engineering Division and PMC to identify problems during the early stages of planning and development. The relationship has also helped team members to mutually resolve Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 3
differences, thereby eliminating any possible roadblock in the path of progress during the design/engineering phase and the construction phase. Team building, together with a commitment by the managers and staff of both parties to improve performance and the quality of work, has served to build a sense of trust and understanding among team members. Team building has also caused team members to establish priorities, share common goals and objectives and to be proactive in seeking solutions to various problems. In addition, the managers and staff of the Airports Authority and the Management Consultants have expressed a firm commitment to ensuring that the design/engineering and the construction of each project are completed on schedule and within the approved project budget. Partnering Another management activity that has contributed a great deal to the successes of the Phase I Construction has been Partnering. At the onset of construction, the program management realized the need for greater cooperation and communication among the management and staff of the Airports Authority, the Management Consultants, the Architect/Engineering Consultant and the Prime Contractor, and implemented an effective system of Partnering. Partnering has helped to establish a good working relationship among the key staff on each project and has prompted the parties actively engaged in work on the project to mutually develop and communicate goals, streamline procedures and value the differences and priorities that each entity has brought to the project. These activities are also aimed at reducing growth as it relates to cost and schedule, preventing disputes and minimizing claims. Partnering has also created a congenial atmosphere in which the collective efforts and energies of all the parties are focused simultaneously on the successful completion of the respective projects; and these efforts have contributed greatly to the successes of the Construction Program. Partnering among all the parties was primarily responsible for the Airports Authority being able to establish an opening date and plan opening day ceremonies for the new Main Terminal at Reagan National eighteen months in advance of the scheduled/actual project completion date. Risk Management A key management decision that has contributed to the successes of the Phase I Construction has been the implementation of a Risk Management Program by the Airports Authority. The Risk Management Program includes an Owner Controlled Wrapup Insurance Program (OCWIP) that makes available to all eligible contractors and subcontractors that perform job-site construction services - Workers Compensation and Employer s Liability Insurance; Commercial General Liability and Excess Liability Insurance; and Builders Risk Insurance. The OCWIP is a structured insurance program that provides for a high level of protection ($200,000,000 in airport contractors liability Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 4
insurance) at a lower premium than that which is available through private insurance programs. Therefore, the OCWIP has eliminated the contractors obligation to purchase the government mandated construction liability insurance from private insurers and has allowed the Authority to institute and enforce strict safety procedures while providing for prompt investigation and notification of settlement of claims. One additional advantage of the OCWIP is that it has eliminated the disparities in the costs of the various private insurance programs that are available to contractors and subcontractors. In addition, the OCWIP has leveled the playing field, by offering contractors and subcontractors affordable insurance and by providing an equitable system that has resulted in a competitive approach to the process of soliciting construction contracts. In accordance with the OCWIP, the Authority is credited for the cost of the insurance coverage prior to the execution of a construction contract. In addition, the OCWIP has resulted in cost savings to the Authority that far outweighs the costs associated with the creation and administration of on-site emergency facilities, first aid programs and other special safety programs. DESIGN/ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT The experience and skills of the Design/Engineering (D/E) Task Managers, the performance of the Architect/Engineering (A/E) Consultant and the level of completeness of the project construction documents are primarily responsible for the successes and accomplishments that are a part of Design/Engineering Management. The allocation of adequate time, that allowed for the performance of complete design reviews by the staff of D/E and the development of a full and complete set of quality construction documents, including plans and specifications and the engineer s estimates of construction cost, was equally important. Managing Design/Engineering At the beginning of the Phase I, a preliminary design and construction schedule and a design-to estimate of construction cost are developed for each project; and design and construction budgets are established based upon the design-to construction estimates. As a result, the D/E Task Managers are challenged to manage the production of a set of quality construction documents that reflect the design intent of the respective project within the established schedule and the approved budget. At the completion of each phase of design development (30%, 60%, 90%, and 100% level of completion) the construction documents are reviewed by the D/E staff. If, at the time of the review, the engineer s estimate of construction cost exceeds the designto construction estimate by more than 2.0%, the A/E Consultant is then required to develop a remedial proposal that would bring the estimated construction cost more inline with the established construction budget. Periodic review submissions and regular on-board review of the construction documents at the various levels of design completion are a means of alleviating the development of final construction documents that are not in-line with the approved construction budget. Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 5
Managing Changes in Design From time to time, during the design development of the Phase I construction documents, the Airports Authority and/or the Airlines have forwarded to the A/E Consultant or the Task Manager, requests for changes to the scope of work or modifications to the project plans and specifications. Before such requests could be accommodated, however, the Task Manager is required to thoroughly assess the potential impact of the proposed change on the project schedule and on the total estimated cost. Based upon this assessment, the Task Manager makes a recommendation to the Project Manager and the Manager of Design/Engineering. The Task Manager is also required to exercise control over requests for changes to the design and/or modifications to the scope of work that are made after the construction documents have attained the level of substantial completion. In almost every instant, a late request for a change to the design and/or a modification to the scope of work has had a significant impact on the project s estimated cost and schedule; and should therefore be avoided at all cost. Transition from Design/Engineering to Construction One noteworthy contribution during the Phase I Construction has been the reassignment of key Design/Engineering professionals to the Construction Management group, to review and coordinate the design/engineering and construction activities on major construction projects. The bridge between the design/engineering and construction phases facilitates the smooth transition of the project responsibilities from design/engineering to the construction phase. The re-assignment of personnel permits the D/E staff to participate in partnering meetings with the prime contractor and subcontractors. It also allows them to utilize their knowledge of the project s design intent while performing services during construction including the review of change requests and change notices; and reviews of as-built construction drawings. It is important to note that, at times, the construction professionals are also re-assigned to the Design/Engineering staff and as such, are able to use their expertise in construction to assist with constructibility reviews during the development of the construction documents. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT The successes achieved at Reagan National and Dulles Airports during Construction Management on Phase I Construction projects are attributable primarily to the teams of dedicated construction professionals that include the Construction Managers, Resident Engineers, Construction Inspectors, Office Engineers and Safety Inspectors. At the time of Contract Award for each construction project, the construction staff, under the leadership of the Resident Engineer has to become fully acquainted with the scope and extent of the work outlined in the project plans and specifications included in the Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 6
construction documents. The construction staff is also required to acquaint himself/herself with the inter-relationship between his or her respective project and any other project and has to become familiar with any constraints that might exist due to the adjacent project(s). The CPM Schedule Based upon the contract requirement, the General Contractor for every construction project is required to develop a cost-loaded CPM Schedule that is used by the Construction Manager to monitor actual progress and to determine the impact of changes to the scope of work and the total estimated construction cost. The Schedule must list every measurable construction activity and must include a corresponding dollar value for each activity so that, when added together the total value of the construction is equal to the Contract Amount. The Schedule, which is approved by the Construction Manager, is updated monthly and is utilized by the Resident Engineer to validate the contractor s monthly payment requests. As a result, the Schedule forces the contractor to maintain the agreed-to schedule for each construction activity. As a management tool, the CPM Schedule has proven to be a very valuable asset in helping to maintain the respective schedule for every construction project. Consequently, the CPM Schedule has also helped to maintain the overall Program Implementation Schedule. Managing Changes Another aspect of the Phase I Construction that remains a key element of the successes in the area of Construction Management has been managing the number of change notices and/or change requests proposed or submitted by the Airports Authority, the airlines and/or the contractors on the various construction projects. As with any major construction project, change is inevitable. However, when the proposed change, especially the ones that are outside of the agreed-to scope of work, affects the total estimated cost of the project, it becomes incumbent upon the Resident Engineer to ascertain the validity of the change notice and/or change request. A report of the RE s findings, together with a recommendation, is then forwarded to the Program Manager and/or the Construction Site Manager for review and concurrence. As a result of this procedure, frivolous proposals are generally rejected and only those changes that are deemed necessary to accomplishing the scope of work or the design intent of the project are approved. Safety Construction safety has also been one of the more important elements of Construction Management and the implementation of an extremely successful Construction Safety Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 7
Program remains the hallmark the Airports Authority s Capital Construction Program. The Safety Program was established to minimize the personal injury, to limit property damage and to reduce and control hazards and risks associated with construction. In general, the Program is aimed at achieving an accident-free construction environment. Safety has therefore been a very important and an integral part of every construction project. In order to address safety issues a Construction Safety Advisory Committee was formed. The Committee, which is comprised of management personnel from the Airports Authority, the Management Consultants and the Insurance Safety Consultant, is endowed with three primary functions: 1. Leadership: Provide coordination, leadership and direction for the Construction Safety Program. 2. Enforcement: Monitor the management of the Construction Program to ensure the program is maintained and enforced by all personnel responsible. 3. Recommendations: Recommend resolutions to safety issues not routinely resolvable by the Program Safety Manager, Insurance Safety Consultant, or Contractor s safety staff. The Safety Program consists of a Safety Manual that provides detailed information on the Airports Authority s safety requirements to all contractors and sub-contractors. The manual outlines the policies and procedure for accident prevention including the reporting requirements; and also includes Federal regulations, state and local governmental ordinances, industry standards and the Airports Authority s safety regulations and requirements. The Safety Program also consists of an educational element that uses safety videos that highlight the importance of a safe working environment. The Safety Manual further outlines the role and responsibilities of each employee and details the importance for participation in safety programs and meetings. It also outlines the need for the cooperation and support of all personnel working at the construction site. The manual includes provisions for the securing projects within or contiguous to airport property and is incorporated an integral part of the Contract Documents for each construction project. In addition, the Airports Authority has authorized the Program Safety Manager to stop the construction of any project where, in his judgment, an action or some activity constitutes an immediate or imminent danger. Through December 31, 2001, the Capital Construction Program has produced approximately 19,800,000 man-hours of labor, or the equivalent of $2.50 billion in heavy construction. Through that time, the implementation of a comprehensive Construction Safety Program has resulted in a total recorded accident frequency or lost time Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 8
injury rate (i.e., the Number of Lost Time Injuries x 200,000/Employee-hours), of 0.63%. By comparison the national average, as compiled and recorded by the Office of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, for similar construction projects during the same period was 4.9%. Quality Assurance/Quality Control The strict adherence to the Construction Quality Assurance (QA) program and Quality Control (QC) procedures has been a contributing factor to the successes and achievements of the Phase I Construction. The Quality Assurance program focused primarily on two areas: 1. Assurance that the construction, including the materials testing and inspection, is being performed in accordance with the quality and standards defined in the Contract Documents. 2. Assurance that the internal operations, including the recording, maintaining, distributing and retention of documentation meet the standard of quality and the requirements established by the Airports Authority. Quality Control, a function performed by the general contractor, is incorporated into the construction documents and, as a result, it has become an integral part of the terms and conditions of the construction contract. The Contractor s Quality Control program consists of three elements: 1. Administrative: Maintenance of records and files, and the securing and scheduling of appropriate personnel/organizations to perform the required inspections and tests. 2. Inspection: Qualified individuals and/or specialists with expertise in the areas of concrete, structural steel, electrical, plumbing, mechanical and finish work to perform the required inspections. 3. Testing: Independent materials testing agencies certified to perform the required tests in the areas of soils, concrete, structural steel and electrical. Although not a test, any required survey will also be performed by an independent agency. During the performance of Construction Management on the Phase I Construction at Reagan National and Dulles Airports, the construction staff, including the Resident Engineers, Construction Inspectors, Office Engineers and Safety Inspectors, has been responsible for over-seeing the construction practices and procedures of the general contractor. The oversight responsibilities also include performing code inspections, validating field tests and verifying adherence to the established quality control procedures. By performing these functions in a conscientious manner and by enforcing Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 9
the terms and conditions of the construction contract, the construction staff is able to exercise enormous control over the quality of the construction. Through this effort, the QA/QC staff has also been able to contribute effectively to the successes of the Capital Construction Program. PROJECT CONTROLS The mission of Project Controls remains the same for the Phase II Construction as it has been for the Phase I Construction: To provide the Airports Authority and the Program Manager with timely and accurate information that would serve as the basis for making rational decisions relative to the project scope of work, the estimated cost and the schedule/date of completion. The Functions of Project Controls The primary functions of Project Controls during Phase I Construction were: 1. To establish the project budgets and cash flow requirements and to review the total estimated cost and/or the forecast amount for the respective design/ engineering and construction projects. 2. To monitor technical performance, to review and update the project schedules and cost estimates and to identify exceptions to the approved project budget and schedule. 3. To compare actual progress to scheduled or planned activities and to prepare monthly reports that document the status of the active design/engineering and construction projects. To successfully perform these functions, the Project Controls staff is required to be uniquely familiar with the various scopes of work and the schedules for the design/engineering and construction projects; to fully understand the inter-relationship between the project scope, schedule, budget and the total estimated cost; and also to be aware of any constraints that might surface due to adjacent projects. The staff, which includes Cost Engineers, Schedulers and Cost Estimators, is also structured to provide direct technical support to the projects Task Manager and Resident Engineer. Lessons Learned in Project Controls Lessons learned in Project Controls including Cost Control, Schedule Control and Cost Estimating include the following: Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 10
1. Cost Control: Annual Budget/Cost Adjustments due to Inflation: The Phase I Construction had been scheduled over an extended period of time. As a result, the original cost estimates and the budgeted amounts that were established for the various design/ engineering and construction projects are required to be escalated annually to account for inflation. The annual inflation factor (IF) is based upon 3rd Quarter Economic Indicators that are developed by the Council of Economic Advisors for the Joint Economic Committee of the Congress of the United States. This method of adjusting the budgetary and cost estimates to accommodate the annual increase in cost due to inflation is believed to be more accurate than estimates that are based upon some anticipated inflation amounts, which are then applied through the mid-point of the project. 2. Schedule Control: Updating Project Schedules: Maintaining the date or schedule established for major critical project milestones remains paramount to the timely completion of the Phase I Construction. Each month, the respective A/E Consultant and/or General Contractor is required to submit an updated schedule that reflects the current status of design/ engineering and/or construction activities and include all approved and/or proposed changes to the project scope of work. The updated schedule is used to access the impact of the proposed changes on the respective project and on affiliated projects, including the possibility of a delay or an extension to the project completion date and/or the possibility of an increase in the total estimated cost. 3. Cost Estimating: Current Market Value: The Engineer s Estimate of Construction is generally based upon the prevailing rates reported by the industry. At times, however, due to current market conditions the total estimated construction amount proposed by the general contractors might exceed the total amount of the Engineer s Estimate. If a situation like this occurs, the Airports Authority would invite the general contractors to submit a best and final proposal. Because the project budget is usually based upon the Engineer s Estimate, the award of a construction contract for an amount that is greater than the Engineer s Estimate normally results in budgeting problems and/or schedule delays. To alleviate this type of problem, the Cost Estimators have added to the design-to construction estimate for each project, a risk factor which is designed to accommodate such risks as the availability of qualified contractors, the contractor s experience and the availability of skilled workers. A NEW CHALLENGE The initial planning, design/engineering and construction efforts in conjunction with the D2 Development Program were initiated in the fall 2000 and had been proceeding in accordance with the Phase II Implementation Plan and Schedule. The preliminary construction phasing and sequencing had been worked-out for a number of critical projects and several contracts for A/E design services on the major construction packages had either been awarded, or were in the design procurement phase. However, like the rest of the United States of America, the tragic events that occurred Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 11
at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, have had an immediate and a profound impact on the Airports Master Plan and on the Phase II Program Implementation Plan and Schedule. The tragedies of September 11 resulted in the complete shut down of Reagan National Airport and a temporary shut down of Dulles Airport and other airports around the country. Based upon the calamity inflicted upon the USA and the world by those events, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has imposed upon the nation s airports and on the airline industry a new set of security guidelines and safety procedures. The new security guidelines and safety procedures, including the use of computer assisted pre-screening devices and the fortification of cockpit doors, include a list of mandatory requirements that necessitates a comprehensive review of the existing layout and operations of terminal facilities at both Reagan National and Dulles. As a result of the new requirements, the Airports Authority has initiated a complete reexamination of the Airports Master Plan and the Phase II Program Implementation Plan and Schedule. In addition to the new FAA requirements, the recent airport security legislation that was enacted by the Congress of the United States will result in changes in security procedures that will have a significant impact on the layouts and operations, and on the costs of new airport facilities. In accordance with the new regulations, a high priority will be placed on all airport security procedures, including the processing and screening of passengers, inspection of carry-on luggage and on baggage handling. The immediate impact of the new regulations has resulted in airport terminals and landside operations areas that have to be reconfigured, queuing areas for ticketing and security screening that must be revised and hold-rooms and concession areas that must be modified. The use(s) of surface parking lots and structured parking garages, including the vehicular access to and from many of the nation s airport facilities, will also be reassessed. In order to accommodate the new security guidelines and safety procedures and the associated changes in airport operations, security enhancement studies and analyses are now being conducted at both Reagan National and Dulles. The Airports Authority has already concluded that greater emphasis must be placed on safety and security as a part of the planning and design of the second Midfield Concourse (Tier 2) and on all future terminal facilities at Dulles. One unique concept that would be worthy of consideration during the planning and design of new terminals at Dulles and at other airports is the possibility of installing explosive detection system (EDS) devices along the perimeter of the terminal, or in some location that is detached from the terminal structure. The EDS devices will accommodate the screening of checked luggage prior to passenger check-in, and/or prior to the issuance of a passenger boarding-pass. As a result, a passenger will not be allowed to board an airline if his or her luggage has not cleared the screening procedure. The new security regulations and the revised procedure for processing and screening passengers and checked luggage would certainly address the mandated security requirements for 100% screening. The new regulations would also increase the efficiency of other elements of passenger and baggage processing, including hold- Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 12
room baggage screening (HBS) and would certainly go a long way towards restoring the public s confidence in the airline industry. CONCLUSION To the Program Management Consultants team, the Capital Construction Program, Phase I Construction has been, in more ways than one, a challenging and a rewarding assignment. The greatest challenge to date, however, has been keeping the existing facilities, including the runways, taxiways, aircraft parking aprons and the terminal areas at Reagan National and Dulles fully functional during the construction of major design/engineering projects. During the design/engineering and construction phases the needs and safety of the traveling public had to be continually recognized at every level of completion. In addition, throughout the Program, the convenience and satisfaction of the traveling public remained paramount in the minds of the Airports Authority and the Airlines. During the Phase I Construction, which was focused primarily on the construction of a new Main Terminal at Reagan National and expansion of the existing Main Terminal at Dulles, another formidable challenge posed to management was the need to maintain all land-side operations during the construction phase. This effort included the maintenance of encumbrance-free public accesses throughout the terminals and similar vehicular access roadways to and from the terminals and airports facilities. The lessons that were learned during the Phase I Construction that have had the greatest of impact have resulted in a complete re-organization of the Program Management functions relative to the Phase II Construction. The Phase II Construction at Dulles is double the size of the Phase I Construction; and to better manage the various projects the Design/ Engineering and Construction Management staffs of the Airports Authority Engineering Division and the Program Management Consultants have been reorganized into functional groups. The functional groups include the following: Design/Engineering: Buildings, Tunnels, Airfield Civil, Landside Civil, Utilities and Major Services, and Communications. Construction: Buildings, Tunnels, Airfield Civil and Landside Civil. As a result of the re-organization, the Site Manager and the respective Project Managers at Dulles are now tasked with managing multiple project responsibilities, compared to the linear type of project responsibility that was established during the Phase I Construction. The re-organization into functional groups provides the Site Manager and Project Manager with a global perspective of the entire D2 Expansion Program; and affords the respective manager the opportunity to engage in more encompassing and program-wide coordination of project activities. The lessons learned while providing Program Management and Support Services during the Phase I Construction have been an invaluable experience and are applicable to Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 13
similar major capital construction programs. The experiences have clearly demonstrated that a sound management philosophy is directly proportional to the level of success achieved on the job and that proper management oversight will produce, at all times, an outstanding record of accomplishment. About the Author: Felix C. Bartholomew is a Professional Associate and Senior Principal Technical Specialist with Parsons Brinckerhoff Construction Services. He currently serves as a Project Controls Engineer on the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Capital Construction Program at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A special thanks to the following key staff at the Parsons Management Consultants, J.V. Without their kind assistance and support this paper would not have been possible: Design/Engineering Robert Kleinman, Mary Hibler Construction Management Ed Husson, Ken Lueth Gil Jones, Chuck Niemi Project Controls DeLon Sargent My thanks and appreciation are also extended to the following members of the staff of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority s Engineering Division: Rick McLaughin, Construction Branch Jim Needham, Construction Branch Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 14
Copyright 2002 by the Construction Management Association of America Page 15