1. (a) Project scope.

   1. (1)

      1. (A) The primary goal in the development of the project scope is to define, obtain, or develop all pertinent information required to describe performance-based criteria for the short-list proposers to use in preparing the proposals and for the design-builder to use in preparing the final design for the project.
      2. (B) Examples of items to consider include:

2. (i) Operational requirements;

   1. (ii) Performance expectations;

      1. (iii) Design standards;

         1. (iv) Project limits; and
         2. (v) Regulatory requirements.
      2. (C) The Arkansas Department of Transportation should develop language that describes the requirements of a project feature instead of creating design drawings and technical specifications.

   2. (2)

      1. (A) The project scope for a D-B project is significantly more detailed than a professional services contract for a similar type DB-B project.
      2. (B) The D-B scope addresses the design and construction aspects of the work that, in most cases, pursues both design and construction processes along parallel paths and can lead directly to construction of a feature with limited opportunity for department refinement through the design portion of the process.

   3. (3) The project scope may include, but not be limited to, the following items:

      1. (A) Services to be provided by the department;
      2. (B) Project schedule including major project milestones;
      3. (C) Project management plan, inclusive of quality management plan or plans;

      4. (D) Final engineering and final design services:

         1. (i) Roadway design;
         2. (ii) Structures and bridge design;
         3. (iii) Geotechnical analysis;
         4. (iv) Design surveying;
         5. (v) Plan for acquiring any additional right-of-way;
         6. (vi) Permitting;
         7. (vii) Utility coordination; and
         8. (viii) Maintenance of traffic/traffic control;
      5. (E) Specifications;
      6. (F) Environmental constraints and permitting issues;

      7. (G) Construction engineering:

         1. (i) Construction inspection;
         2. (ii) Off-site work and inspection;
         3. (iii) Material sampling and testing;
         4. (iv) As-built drawings;
         5. (v) Construction surveying; and
         6. (vi) Requirements on types and frequency of:
3. (a) (a) Reports;

4. (b) (b) Submittal of shop drawings; and

   1. (c) (c) Level of detail and type of documentation of construction materials;

      1. (H) Project office and information technology requirements;
      2. (I) Disadvantaged business enterprises participation;
      3. (J) Professional liability and bonding;
      4. (K) Warranty;
      5. (L) Public involvement;
      6. (M) Construction issue resolution and resolution of nonconformance items; and
      7. (N) Partnering expectations.

   2. (4)

      1. (A) The project scope should be tied by direct reference to existing department manuals, memoranda, and guidelines as well as federal references.
      2. (B) The project scope provisions should be developed to be generally cooperative but superseding the cited references where conflicts exist.
      3. (C) The project scope provisions should be provided only where required to fill in the detail of a more generally referenced document or where a project requirement is specifically to supersede the more general document.
      4. (D) In that manner, the project scope provision would provide the specific criterion that is not present in the more general reference or delineate specific options or choices that the more general reference will allow within the document.
      5. (E) Project-specific information typically contained in preliminary engineering and project environmental documents can be included to the RFP or transferred directly into the relevant project scope section.
      6. (F) The project scope language should convey the envisioned design sequences and the intended result with the goal to ensure the design intent is covered without redundancy, conflict, or discrepancy.

   3. (5)

      1. (A) The department should be careful not to utilize too many restrictions in specifying the design procedure and approach as it could negatively impact innovation or design flexibility.
      2. (B) Any outside requirements on the project from third-party partners also should be included in the RFP as it could impact the short-list proposers’ approach to the project.

   4. (6)

      1. (A) Each project component to be designed and constructed by the design-builder should include provisions defining the requirements for the particular component.
      2. (B) The D-B project scope will involve all of the technical considerations for design and construction that would be required for any typical DB-B project, however, the development of a D-B project scope varies from the DB-B process primarily in the timing of decisions and the attention given to details.

   5. (7)

      1. (A) The RFP should only include prescriptive specified material or construction processes where required, and those requirements should be outlined either by the project scope or project-specific special specifications/provisions.
      2. (B) For a D-B contract, performance specifications should be more appropriate as they will describe to the short-list proposer what is expected as an outcome and not how to perform the work.

   6. (8)

      1. (A) The performance specifications may address capacity, life span, toughness, ride quality, durability, appearance, conformance with standards, and other measurable features or tenets of the project.
      2. (B) Project requirements should be described completely and in a manner that will be easily interpreted and understood.
      3. (C) The project requirements should also include how the department will measure compliance with the requirement.
      4. (D) The department should conduct adequate research and investigations during the project development leading to project-specific specifications and other project requirements provided in the RFP to determine the project requirements and to document their development in a clear and concise manner.

   7. (9) The department risk allocation decisions to be addressed in the project scope development should be based on the project risk allocation matrix (RAM) and primarily consist of:

      1. (A) What are the relevant items/products applicable to the project?;

      2. (B)

         1. (i) If the item/product is irrelevant, based on the project concept, are there factors or other project concepts that could make it relevant?
         2. (ii) For example, certain permits are not applicable unless the design-builder’s proposed delivery method requires work in the water; and
      3. (C) If the item/product is allocated to the design-builder, what are the limits constraining the design-builder’s decisions?

   8. (10)

      1. (A) In addition to the engineered components of the project, there are also administrative and operational components of the usual D-B contract relationship that are required of the design-builder to demonstrate project progress.
      2. (B) Project scope sections must address the administrative, project management, quality management, communications/public involvement, and construction maintenance requirements of the project.

   9. (11)

      1. (A) The department involvement in the project scope generally relates to design reviews and owner quality oversight functions such as owner verification, testing, and inspection (OVTI) and any independent assurance (IA) functions in accordance with the RFP requirements.
      2. (B) The RFP should require the design-builder to develop and implement a quality management plan (QMP), as part of an overall project management plan (PMP) meeting all the requirements of the DBA.
      3. (C) Many activities of the department personnel during execution of a D-B project do not change significantly from a DB-B contracting project, however, the authority and responsibilities may be quite different.

   10. (12)

       1. (A) The RFP should specify the format and minimum content requirements as well as the procedure for agency review and acceptance of the QMP, including any updates and changes submitted by the design-builder following initial plan acceptance.
       2. (B) In addition, the RFP should specify the minimum level of QC documentation that must be provided by the design-builder as well as the timeframe and format for providing the information.

   11. (13)

       1. (A) The short-list proposer personnel qualifications and minimum staff requirements should be included in the RFP and provisions should specify that the identified key personnel cannot be substituted solely at the discretion of the short-list proposer during the proposal process or after contract award.
       2. (B) The short-list proposer must be required to seek and receive the department permission for substitutions.

   12. (14)

       1. (A) Requesting and evaluating the qualification requirements during the selection process will allow the department, through the project evaluation team (PET), to address those types of issues during evaluation of the proposal.
       2. (B) When the short-list proposer qualifications are required in the proposal, it will allow the PET to discern whether qualified staff members have been included in the proposal.

   13. (15)

       1. (A) Warranties may be required by the department on the project and, if required, should provide a mechanism for reducing department involvement in the design and construction of the project.
       2. (B) The more the department prescribes the design or construction of a particular component, the less effective a warranty protection will become in terms of enforcement.
       3. (C) The warranty terms should be developed in concert with the ability of the industry to provide appropriate insurance or extend the bond at a reasonable cost.
       4. (D) Warranty terms should be established in the RFP for specific project components and based on the expected performance of that component.

   14. (16)

       1. (A) Project components that will be subject to significant wear during the life of the project, such as pavements or bridge deck joints, are good candidates for consideration of a warranty.
       2. (B) A warranty or post-construction maintenance contract should ensure that the component functions within the performance tolerance standard until the end of a stated warranty term and performance standards can be clearly and objectively measured so that future disputes can be avoided.
       3. (C) Components which include products which are requested for manufactured product warranties under current DB-B contracting methods should also be required under a D-B project.

   15. (17)

       1. (A) The technical provisions may include:

          1. (i) Traffic restrictions;
          2. (ii) Noise limitations;
          3. (iii) Special environmental regulations; and
          4. (iv) Other technical requirements.
       2. (B) The technical provisions section should be complementary to the standard specifications and the project-specific special specifications/provisions.
       3. (C) Some of the requirements are discussed in the following pages.

       4. (D) Traffic control.

          1. (i)
5. (a) (a) Construction staging and management of traffic that minimizes impact to the traveling public that utilizes the corridor and surrounding areas is a significant issue for any transportation project.

6. (b) (b) Of all the factors affecting design and construction, traffic control is often one of the limiting factors in determining:

   1. (1) (1) What can be designed;
   2. (2) (2) How the project can be constructed; and

   3. (3) (3) Project duration.

      1. (ii)
7. (a) (a) To quantify the restrictions, stakeholders who operate on and around the facility should be involved as much as feasible in developing allowable traffic restrictions.

8. (b) (b) If restrictions and closures are within or affect local government jurisdictions, the local traffic officials should be involved in defining the restrictions.

   1. (c) (c) Allowable traffic restrictions should be clearly defined in the RFP with the stakeholders’ consensus where possible.

      1. (E) Public involvement.

         1. (i) Public involvement is an important aspect of any project development process.
         2. (ii) It includes communicating to all interested persons, groups, and government organizations regarding the development of the project, therefore, it is imperative that the level of coordination/involvement, roles, and responsibilities required by the selected short-list proposer (design-builder) be clearly defined in the RFP.

      2. (F) Quality management.

         1. (i)
9. (a) (a) The RFP should address any project quality management requirements that will be required and the selected short-list proposer (design-builder) must follow in addition to the referenced specifications, policies, and procedures that will assist in providing quality products (plans, materials, construction, etc.) that meet the requirements of the project.

10. (b) (b) Quality management criteria should normally require at least four (4) independent roles, including:

    1. (1) (1) Quality control (QC) testing and inspection provided by the design-builder;
    2. (2) (2) Quality assurance (QA) testing and inspection provided by the design-builder utilizing an independent QA firm;
    3. (3) (3) Owner verification, testing, and inspection (OVTI) which may be provided by the department or an approved representative firm; and

    4. (4) (4) Owner independent assurance (IA) which may be provided by the department or an approved representative firm.

       1. (ii)
11. (a) (a) The department may designate a separate referee laboratory to resolve material testing disputes between the design-builder and the OVTI laboratory acting in the best interest of the department.

12. (b) (b) The referee laboratory role is normally provided by an independent party, of the department’s sole choice, which is not involved in the four (4) other quality roles on the project.

    1. (c) (c) An example of when the referee laboratory may be required would be where materials tests by both parties provide disparate results which would determine whether a product would remain in the project or must be demolished and reconstructed by the design-builder.

       1. (d) (d) The referee laboratory may be provided by the department, normally at a central office or state level (nondistrict) laboratory, but it cannot share laboratory space or personnel with either of the two (2) primary laboratories.

          1. (iii) The responsibilities for all four (4) roles and the minimum sampling, testing, and inspection frequencies should be defined in the RFP.
          2. (iv)
13. (a) (a) In some cases, the department may continue with its normal independent assurance and compliance monitoring and auditing programs outside the limits of the four (4) roles described above.

14. (b) (b) In addition, the project director (PD) or an authorized representative should maintain the right to audit records and conduct independent tests at any time in order to verify quality products and services are being provided within the project requirements.

    1. (G) Environmental services.

       1. (i) The preparation and processing of the project environmental documents (PED) required to comply with National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq., should normally remain the responsibility of the department and the resulting documents and approvals should be provided to the short-list proposers as part of the reference information documents (RID) included with and referenced in the RFP.

          1. (ii) Any special environmental considerations to be addressed by the selected short-list proposer must also be included in the RFP.
          2. (iii) Construction activities are regulated by environmental rules and regulations that are administered by federal, state, local, and special district governing agencies.
          3. (iv)
15. (a) (a) The time when these permits can be obtained vary with the type of project, its impacts, and the requirements of a specific permitting agency.

16. (b) (b) Therefore, the party responsible for obtaining required environmental permits and mitigation may vary depending on the type of project.

    1. (v) The description of the various parties and their respective responsibilities required for the project should be clearly defined in the RFP.

       1. (H) Utilities and permits.

          1. (i)
17. (a) (a) The department, through its preliminary investigation of existing utility facilities in the corridor, should provide available information relative to the location and ownership of existing utilities to the short-list proposers in the RID included with the RFP.

18. (b) (b) On any project, a determination should be obtained as to which firm or agency is responsible for the relocation of existing utilities.

    1. (c) (c) When utility relocation is included in the project scope for the selected short-list proposer (design-builder) to perform, the design-builder, in consultation with the utility companies, shall determine the specific utility conflicts with the final design of the project and make arrangements for the utility relocation or adjustment, as required.

       1. (d) (d) Information regarding prior rights and compensation for utility relocations should be clearly defined in the RFP to minimize costs of unknown risks.

          1. (ii)
19. (a) (a) The normal department internal procedures for a DB-B project should be utilized when the department is responsible for utility relocation and the completed relocation/adjustment information should be provided to the short-list proposers if completed prior to the release of the RFP.

20. (b) (b) If the relocation/adjustment cannot be completed prior to the execution of the DBA, all preliminary information available should be provided to the short-list proposers in the RID included with the RFP and final relocation/adjustment information should be provided to the design-builder when completed.

    1. (c) (c) The description of the various parties and their respective responsibilities for utility relocation/adjustments should be clearly defined in the RFP.

       1. (I) Right-of-way services.

          1. (i)
21. (a) (a) Right-of-way acquisition in this state is solely the responsibility of the department.

22. (b) (b) It is desirable that all ROW acquisitions are completed prior to the release of the RFP and at least completed prior to the execution of the DBA.

    1. (ii)
23. (a) (a) In other states and jurisdictions, it has been advantageous in some circumstances to allow the design-builder to acquire the required ROW for a D-B project.

24. (b) (b) In such case, the design-builder must acquire the needed ROW in accordance with all applicable:

    1. (1) (1) Federal requirements;
    2. (2) (2) State statutes; and

    3. (3) (3) Agency procedures.

       1. (c) (c) Should this alternative be allowed by state statute in the future and is a viable alternative for the project, the establishment of appropriate compensation and eminent domain proceedings must remain the responsibility of the department, and the description of the department and design-builder responsibilities for the project ROW acquisition must be clearly defined in the RFP.

25. (b) Modifications to department standard specifications.

    1. (1)

       1. (A) A project of the size/importance attractive to the department for consideration for D-B project methodology will likely include some project-specific requirements that would fall outside the standard department details and specifications.
       2. (B) Modifying the standard specifications to meet the specific needs of the project and incorporating those modifications appropriately into the RFP and the DBA is suggested as the best approach rather than preparing a standalone contract including unique project technical specifications.

       3. (C) This approach is suggested due to interdependency of the department standard:

          1. (i) Specifications;
          2. (ii) Guidelines;
          3. (iii) Manuals;
          4. (iv) Standard details; and
          5. (v) Other contract forms.
       4. (D) Modifying the standard specifications allows all other cross-references to remain valid through the respective linkages into the RFP and DBA.

    2. (2)

       1. (A) Modifying the current department standard specifications generally involves two (2) separate types of modifications.
       2. (B) If a brief modification, addition, or deletion of paragraphs is required of a standard specification, a special provision should be prepared to incorporate the modification.
       3. (C) If a large portion of a standard specification requires modification or a new product or construction type is required for the project, a new special specification should be prepared to meet the requirements of the project.

    3. (3)

       1. (A) A programmatic approach to future D-B development should allow the D-B core documentation to evolve with the department standard DB-B core documentation.
       2. (B) A project-by-project upgrading of the D-B special specifications and special provisions will be required but is anticipated to be far less laborious than rewriting a complete standalone contract for each D-B project.
       3. (C) In such case, a provision-by-provision comparison of the previous D-B project contract, contract modifications and special specifications and special provisions would be required to identify the specific changes from the previous D-B project.

Codification Notes: “ROW” means right-of-way.