BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1549
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
SB 1549 (Vargas) - As Amended: August 6, 2012
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote: 9-0
Transportation 12-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG) to use alternative contracting methods for public
transit projects. Specifically, this bill:
1)Authorizes SANDAG to use one of two alternative contracting
methods, each consisting of specified procedures, and referred
to respectively as "design-sequencing," whereby each phase of
a project can commence construction when the design of that
phase is complete, and "construction manager/general
contractor" (CM/GC), whereby a construction manager is
procured to provide preconstruction services during a
project's design phase and construction services during the
construction phase.
2)Requires SANDAG, in order to use an alternative project
delivery method, to make a written finding that it's use in
lieu of the traditional design-bid-build contracting method
will reduce project costs, expedite completion, or provide
other benefits otherwise not achievable.
3)Provides that Caltrans, for projects on state right-of-way, is
responsible for specified project development services and
documents.
4)Requires SANDAG, upon completion of a project using an
alternative delivery method, to prepare a specified project
report and post that report on its website.
FISCAL EFFECT
SB 1549
Page 2
Costs for SANDAG to administer and report on the alternative
contracting method will be absorbable and are not state
reimbursable. To the extent the use of either of these
alternative methods is successful, there should be significant
savings on those projects selected by SANDAG.
COMMENTS
1)Background and Purpose . The traditional public works
contracting method is known as design-bid-build, whereby
project design is done under contract by an
architectural/engineering firm, then upon completion of the
design phase, the construction phase is put out to bid and the
contract is awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.
In the last 10-15 years, the state has selectively used an
alternative contracting method known as design/build, whereby
entities with both design and construction management
capabilities compete for a single contract for both project
phases, typically for a fixed price. The intent of the
design/build alternative is to reduce the contracting agency's
risk with regard to project costs and schedule, expedite
project completion, and minimize change orders and claims.
Design/build has some drawbacks, however, including that the
contracting agency relinquishes significant control over the
details of project design. In addition, at the point when the
design/build entity bids on a project, there are still many
unknowns, and thus a degree of risk, which are factored into
their bids. Therefore, even though the contracting agency is
transferring risk, they are still paying for it in some
manner.
The use of CM/GC seeks to achieve the best of both worlds, i.e
maintaining design control while minimizing overall risk.
Under CM/GC, SANDAG would engage a design and construction
management consultant to act as its consultant during the
preconstruction phase and as the general contractor during
construction. During the design phase, the construction
manager acts in an advisory role, providing constructability
reviews, value engineering suggestions, construction
estimates, and other construction-related recommendations.
Later, SANDAG and the construction manager can agree that the
project design has progressed to a sufficient enough point
that construction may begin. The two parties then work out
SB 1549
Page 3
mutually agreeable terms and conditions for the construction
contract, and, if all goes well, the construction manager
becomes the general contractor and construction on the project
commences, well before design is entirely complete. The CM/CG
process is meant to provide continuity and collaboration
between the design and construction phases of the project.
Design-sequencing was first authorized in 1999, which
established the original design-sequencing pilot program
within Caltrans for up to six projects. Under the traditional
means, construction of any portion of the project cannot
commence until after plans and specifications for the entire
project are completed and the construction contract is placed
out for bid and then awarded to the lowest responsible bidder.
Design-sequencing is intended to expedite project completion
by allowing construction on one phase of the project to be
started while other phases of the project were still under
design.
2)Opposition. Professional Engineers in California Government
(PECG) believes that if design-sequencing authorization is
provided for the State Highway System it should be done on a
statewide basis and not limited to SANDAG. PECG also suggests
that the use of CM/CG, an "untested procurement methodology,"
should be limited to a trial of no more than four projects.
The American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) objects
to provisions that name Caltrans the responsible agency for
performing project development services and construction
inspection services for projects on the State Highway System.
3)Related Legislation . AB 2498 (Gordon), pending in Senate
Appropriations, authorizes Caltrans to use CM/GC for up to
four projects, using a process similar to that prescribed in
this bill.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081