TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA · TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA July 10, 2018...

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA July 10, 2018 – Registration 9am to 10am Meeting 10:00 am – 2pm EST Holiday Inn Tampa Westshore ‐700 N Westshore Blvd, Tampa 33609 Royal Palm Ballroom 1) Call to Order

i. Safety Briefing ii. Pledge of Allegiance iii. Attendance Roster ~ Please check in at Registration Desk iv. Introductions

2) Approval of Minutes from April 2018 meeting (Exhibit 1) 3) Chair Welcome – Doug Geiger

4) Executive Director Report ‐ Allen Douglas

i) 2018 FES/ACEC – FL Annual Conf.; 8/1 to 8/4, Marco Island

5) Subcommittee Reports

i) Liaison Committee – Nina Sickler

District Liaisons (Exhibit 2 – includes: D1,4,5,6 & Turnpike)

ii) Production Subcommittee – Paul Foley

Task Teams

(a) Consultant Grading (Exhibit 3)

(b) Design positions

iii) DBE/SBE Subcommittee ‐ Aniruddha (Rudy) Gotmare

iv) CEI Subcommittee – Jennifer Olson (Exhibit 4)

v) Alternative Contracting Task Force / FICE FTBA Subc. ‐ Robert Carballo

vi) Specification Review Subcommittee – Gus Quesada (Exhibit 5)

vii) PD&E / Planning subcommittee ‐ Jeff Novotny

viii) Expressway Subcommittee – Joe Gomez (Exhibit 6)

6) Transportation Director Report – Andy Lauzier

i) On‐Ramp to Innovation: EDC‐5 Announcement (Exhibit 7)

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA July 10, 2018 – Meeting 10am – 2pm EST Holiday Inn Tampa Westshore of 2

7) Relations Committee Items – Doug Geiger

i) 6/18/18 Meeting

ACEC‐FDOT Transportation Conf feedback

E&O procedure (Exhibit 8)

PM training

CITS FDOT online training

8) Procurement Related Items – Doug Geiger

i) Discussion of Interview format; ACEC firm initiated.

ii) Scrutinized Companies (Exhibit 9)

iii) Exceptions:

Design; D1: Ad 19115 Round‐a‐bout ‐ Oral presentation.

Design; D3: FPID 443360‐1; US 98 at CR 30A East Inlet Beach Ped Crossing – Expedited Selection.

Pre‐Event: Statewide; Disaster Recovery and Bridge Insp – Waive 10 days on Planned Project and use

Expanded Letter of Response.

GEC/Design; D5: Ad 19516 Innovative Approaches to Multimodal Corridors – Oral presentations.

9) Check‐in Items – Doug Geiger

i) Cap on Salaries

ii) Escalation in Contracts

iii) Identify negative inconsistencies for execution of work or selection

10) FDOT Regional Meetings – Nina Sickler

i) District 1 and 7 – April 11, 2018 ‐ Feedback

ii) Next Districts 2 & 3 or 4, 6 & TPK

Guest Speaker – Florida House of Representative Jackie Toledo, PE (R‐Dist 60) (Tampa) 2018 Committee Assignments: Commerce Committee, and Civil Justice & Claims, Energy & Utilities, Health Innovation and Transportation & Infrastructure Subcommittees Melanie Brown, Director of Government Relations, at Johnson & Blanton (ACEC‐FL Legislative Consultants)

11) Next Transportation Committee Meetings –

October 9 ‐ Hyatt Regency Orlando International Airport ‐ $229 + tax expires October 8th

Jan 8 – Embassy Suites Lake Buena Vista SOUTH ‐ $165 + tax expires December 17th

April 9 – Ft. Lauderdale

July 9 ‐ Tampa

12) Adjournment

of 6

TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES April 3, 2018

Riverside Hotel Fort Lauderdale

Download the Packet for the April 3 Transportation Committee Meeting

The April 3, 2018 meeting of the ACEC-FL Transportation Committee was called to order by Doug Geiger, PE at 10:03 am. Participating:

Kumar Allady RADISE International Xavier Arroyo Pevida Highway Designers, LLC Bob Behar R.J. Behar & Company Inc. Nick Benedico Tetra Tech Martin Benzaquen Gannett Fleming, Inc. Steven Blount H.W. Lochner Inc. David Booher Quigg Engineering Inc. Nicole Borisenko RS&H Jennifer Brockman Adaptive Consulting Engineers, LLC Murry Bullion SAM Surveying and Mapping, LLC Darrel Burnett Metric Engineering Inc. Thomas Capell KCI Technologies, Inc. Robert Carballo Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Jessica Carden Gannett Fleming, Inc. John Carrigan RS&H Inc Rick Chesser RS&H, Inc Kevin Coughlin Wade Trim Inc. Ignacio de Almagro III Baslee Engineering Solutions (BES), Inc Charles Dewey HNTB Corporation Sean Donahoo AIM Engineering & Surveying Inc. Harold Dubon Carnahan, Proctor and Cross Inc. Karina Enrico-Jackson Johnson, Mirmiran and Thompson, Inc. Benjamin Faust DRMP Steve Ferrell HDR Engineering, Inc. Johana Fiallos Gannett Fleming Inc. Paul Foley Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. Ryan Forrestel American Consulting Engineers of FL Doug Geiger RS&H, Inc Dickie Glass Popli Design Group Scott Gomber Eisman & Russo Inc. Joe Gomez Keith and Schnars Rudy Gotmare Scalar Consulting Group Inc. Donna Grace EAC Consulting, Inc. Dean Groves Weston & Sampson Engineers, Inc. Jason Hahn Johnson, Mirmiran and Thompson, Inc.

EXHIBIT 1

https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/fleng.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/Hobbs/TC_meetingpacket_040318.pdf

of 6

Nick Harrison American Structurepoint Inc. Jacki Hart RS&H Daniel Hart H2R Corp Tom Hayden Environmental & Geotechnical Specialists Inc. Frank Heck HNTB Corporation Frank Hickson Infrastructure Engineers Inc. Jim Horton Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure Andrea Jernigan-Gwinn Civil/Site Engineering Inc. Alan Klevens TranSystems Corporation Susan Lake RS&H Joseph Lauk Patel, Greene & Associates PLLC Andy Lauzier HDR Engineering Inc. Erik Leschak American Consulting Engineers of FL Jennifer Lewis Michael Baker International, Inc. Jamea Long Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. Satya Lory Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. Jason Lyle Patel, Greene & Associates PLLC Martin Marquez HNTB Corporation Joseph Martin EAC Consulting Inc. Dewey Martin Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. Jorge Maspons PE Consulting Engineering Aaron MCDaniel Michael Baker International Inc. Stephen McGucken Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. Tina Meskel Meskel & Associates Engineering PLLC Richard Minichiello Terracon Consultants Inc Mark Moshier Keith and Schnars PA Yassi Myers TLP Engineering Consultants Inc. Jay Nagle HDR Engineering, Inc. Timothy Noles Hardesty & Hanover LLC Jeff Novotny American Consulting Engineers of FL Leonardo Offredi Eisman & Russo Inc. Paula Olano Gannett Fleming Inc. Jennifer Olson Target Engineering Group, LLC. Mark Owen GAI Consultants Inc. Ed Palacio AECOM Herb Potter Adaptive Consulting Engineers, LLC Gus Quesada New Millennium Engineering Drew Roark VHB Sandy Scheda ESA Scheda Ann Schiola McKim & Creed Inc. Ben Searight RS&H Patrick Senne Maser Consulting PA - Non-ACEC-FL Member Firm (Meeting Allowance) Panneer Shanmugam RADISE International Thomas Shaw Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. Nina Sickler Pond & Company Chris Smith Patel, Greene and Associates, PLLC Whitney Stevens Ardaman & Associates Inc. James Sumislaski Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. Manny Then WGI David Tinder New Millennium Engineering, Inc. James Toombs AIM Engineering & Surveying Inc. Rachael Wallace RS&H

of 6

Tyler Wallum Volkert Inc. Allan Wander SAI Consulting Engineers, Inc. JD Whitaker Scalar Consulting Group Inc.

Allen Douglas – ACEC-FL Executive Director

Samantha Hobbs – ACEC-FL Director of Govt Affairs and Exec. Policy

1) Call to Order a. Safety Briefing b. Pledge of Allegiance c. Skipped individual introductions due to time for Guest speaker and all were asked to sign in at the

registration desk

2) There was a motion it was seconded and carried unanimously to approve the January 9th meeting minutes.

3) Chair Welcome – Doug Geiger announced the speaker today as Marc Gambrill, P.E., MPA, A.A.E.; Chief Development

Officer at Broward County Aviation Department

4) Executive Director Report ‐ Allen Douglas (Exhibit 2)

i) Transportation Conference; May 30 & 31, 2018 – Hyatt Regency Orlando International Airport – Registration is open ‐ Register before Tuesday, May 8th, to receive the hotel discounted rate.

ii) Douglas reviewed the 2018 Legislative Report.

iii) FDOT is fully funded and the trust is intact.

iv) CCNA- there was not a bill filed this year, and procurement task force bill was successfully killed.

v) On the last day of Session – a proposed amendment for prevention of Design/CEI working in the same district floated around, the Senate never took it up. ACEC-FL is determining its origin as it may have come from a local project. Representative Drake did not propose the amendment.

vi) Miami-Dade- In 2017 the Legislature enacted a law to reduce tolls by 5%. A report ty the Governor stating they met these requirements needs to be filed before October 1st; otherwise the current Board will be dissolved.

vii) Constitution revision committee continues to meet and there are 25 amendments.

viii) NSPE and FES will have separate billing for memberships. Firms or individuals do not have to be members of both.

5) Subcommittee Reports – Rosters (Exhibit 3)

i) Liaison Committee – Nina Sickler

• District Liaisons (Exhibit 4 – D4,5,6 & Turnpike)

• District 2

• Quiet, change in membership, Will Watts become Director for FDOT, this created one opening that they will be looking for someone in April and will have a decision in May

• Alternate Selection- appreciate that we opened that up • District 1

• Busy preparing for regional meeting

• Technology changes are happening

• They will have a poll the audience format for the meeting

• 50 attendees per district, 203 signed up so far

of 6

• Jan 4th- last meeting

• Investigating PDE lump sum, but not much momentum

• SWAT project as lump sum for a trial

• Schedules were unreasonable, but it was already negotiated

• Like alternate selection

• Q+A questions getting out of hand- discussing limiting to 15 questions

• Want to make PDE docs available for designers chasing work, while still in PDE phase

• CEI MOT form changes to discuss with Central Office

• March meeting for rain days

• May 21st next meeting

• District 3

• Last meeting was week after ACEC

• very happy about alternative selection

• Informal meeting

• Staff resources- wanted feedback from consultants

• CCD- very excited, date and site selected, fundraiser in April, possibly another event (clay shoot)

• Next Tuesday is next meting

• No issues

• Need two new members, due to term out in August

• District 4- see exhibit in meeting packet



• District 7

• Jan 5th meeting

• Consultant grading consistency, fair evaluation for LOI

• Drone for survey- frowned upon, evaluators should disregard

• Design/Construction workshop, reoccurring issues, E+O areas of responsibility defined, consultants should have the option to defend before E+O

• Regional meeting coming up, looking for panelist

• Friday next meeting- Bill Jones has resigned maybe will be there?

• Professional services are not quickly as the would like

• Staff vs. qualifications- make resumes easy to follow

• Will need a replacement (large firm) for the committee

• Turnpike- see exhibit in meeting packet

• Poll of Firms receiving Grades regularly

• Relations- only a few are having issues getting consultant grades

• After the April 11th Meeting there will be a statewide meeting

ii) Production Subcommittee – Paul Foley

• Task Teams

(a) Consultant Grading

• Grading task team- last meeting 2/14

• Design only, trying to be objective- “3”- meeting scope

• 5-point scale (0.5-point increments)

of 6

• Grading is a firm grade for long and shortlisting, not just design, so 10-point system wouldn’t work

(b) Design positions

• Better align negotiation handbook w/how we pay

• Negotiation handbook based on years of experience

• Have come up with proposed changes and will present to production committee, then the larger group

• Technical positions vs. management positions and complex vs. noncomplex

• Department uses resume, asking department to use resume and org chart

• Org charts will be important during negotiations

• OM definition improved

• Issue with one category for PM not falling in-line with Project and getting downgraded in cost control. New categories should fix this issue

• Adding 6 categories, removing 2, net 4

• Principal engineer

• 3 PM categories

• Senior engineer

• SPE/Engineer/ Project engineer

• ORG CHART IS IMPORTANT

• Distribution of registered vs. nonregistered (different in every district)

• Dist. 1, 7 and TPE does not have registered vs nonregistered limits

• 40/60 split in D4, should not be included in negotiated

• What we have proposed is what we negotiate

(c) Award Submittals for Transportation Conf. has closed

• March 27th- 22 submittals to review

iii) DBE/SBE Subcommittee ‐ Aniruddha (Rudy) Gotmare

• DBE grades released

• If you are about to graduate, work with CO about your grade for when you graduate

• If DBE/SBE graduates during project, Prime should still get credit for commitment for that full project.

iv) CEI Subcommittee – Jennifer Olson (Exhibit 5)- see exhibit in meeting packet

v) Alternative Contracting Task Force / ACEC-FL FTBA Subc. ‐ Robert Carballo

• Report was emailed Wednesday April 4 by [email protected]

vi) Specification Review Subcommittee – Gus Quesada (Exhibit 6) – see exhibit in meeting packet

vii) PD&E / Planning subcommittee ‐ Jeff Novotny

• Did not have official meeting

• Group members joined designers

• Looking at SWAT scopes

• Talking about design and putting PDE at the front

• Looking @ overlap and what design elements can be tracked

• There is a SWAT task team

viii) Expressway Subcommittee – Joe Gomez (Exhibit 7) – see exhibit in meeting packet

mailto:[email protected]

of 6

6) Relations Committee Items – Doug Geiger

i) 3/26/18 Meeting

• Procurement – Staffing and Org Chart ‐ Standardization

• Template for org chart online

• Submittal will go forward without org chart if you do not use template

• Wage Rate report for Negotiations

• Lodging fee change

• Standard contract language change

• CEI – Cost perception and increased use of Hybrid for larger projects

• DO NOT RECRUIT PEOPLE OUT OF THE DOT OFFICE WHILE THEY ARE IN THE OFFICE

• Adding more information from the long/short list so they can learn why you weren’t selected

7) Procurement Related Items – Doug Geiger

i) New AFP

ii) Update for Overhead, FCCM and Direct Expense Rates 2/1/2018 (Exhibit 8)

iii) Exceptions:

• CEI for I‐275 Sunshine Skyway from Bridge #150189 over Tampa Bay ‐ LOR and Interview.

• CEI for Gateway I‐275 (Howard Frankland) ‐ Expanded LOR, Presentation and Q&A.

• GEC for I‐75 & I‐4 Interstate Program Management for Dist 1‐ Presentation and Expanded Q&A

8) Check‐in Items – Doug Geiger

i) Cap on Salaries – No projects mentioned

ii) Escalation in Contracts – No issues mentioned

iii) Identify negative inconsistencies for execution of work or selection – No issues mentioned

9) FDOT Regional Meetings – Nina Sickler

i) District 1 and 7 – April 11, 2018

ii) Next Districts 2 & 3 or 4, 6 & TPK

iii) Notes:

• Principal vs. Senior during life of contract- you can’t move existing staff- CO is enforcing, others are not

10) Next Transportation Committee Meetings –

July 10th – Holiday Inn Westshore – Tampa – Room Block Open $119 + tax (June 22 Room Block Closes)

October 9 – Orlando

Jan 8 – Orlando

April 9 – Ft. Lauderdale

July 9 ‐ Tampa

11) The Meeting Adjourned at approximately 1:30pm.

FDOT D-1 / ACEC-FL LIAISON MEETING MEETING NOTES

May 21, 2018 Attendees: Name Affiliation Phone No. AttendedL.K. Nandam, PE FDOT District One - Secretary 863-519-2201 YesJohn Kubler, PE FDOT District One – Director of

Transportation Development863-519-2311 No

Carol Finn FDOT District One – Administrative Services Manager

863-519-2697 No

Elizabeth Leopold FDOT District One – Professional Services Contracts Supervisor

863-519-2901 Yes

Richard Lilyquist, PE FDOT District One – Director of Operations

863-519-2???? Yes

Jamie Brabant D-1 Contract Analyst III 863-519-2302 NoHerb Potter, PE Adaptive Consulting Engineers 863-258-6540 NoPaul Foley, PE Kisinger Campo & Associates Corp. 813-554-1905 YesMark Owens, PE G-A-I Consultants 321-319-3121 YesVince Zaliauskas, PE HighSpans Engineering, Inc. 239-433-3000 YesKen Muzyk, PE Faller Davis and Assoc., Inc. 813-261-5136 No

This was the twelfth meeting with District One. Discussion topics:

1. Last Meeting January 4th. Feedback received March 20th.

2. Feedback on the Regional Meeting held April 11th.

3. Overall Liaison Committee topics (4‐11‐18 Discussion)

a. FDOT has published examples of allowable information on CEI Organizational charts

in LOR

b. FDOT has indicated wage rate report used is due date of AFP or submittal date of

AFP

c. Requested input from ACEC on cutoff date for submittal of payroll registers during

negotiation (mostly CEI).

d. Requested input from District Liaison committees on use of Drones for proposals

e. Requested if there is any feedback on makeup of District Liaison Committees

4. Issues with Consultant recruitment practices and hiring of FDOT personnel.

5. TRC Shortlist Recommendation Summary Notes – District One used as a good example

6. Feedback on 15 minute design marketing meetings

7. Follow up on March’s Operations Engineer’s Meeting relating to rain days for hybrid

inspectors

8. Promotion of CEI personnel who gain the requisite experience while on the same project

9. ACEC‐FL Transportation Conference May 30‐31 – attendees

10. Negotiations on some TWO design projects – Consultant reports staff hours are submitted,

FDOT marks up and that is the end of negotiations

11. Utility Clearance Expectations 12. Budget for design TWO projects versus major design projects

EXHIBIT 2

FDOT D-1 / ACEC-FL LIAISON SUMMARY NOTES May 21, 2018

Page 2 of 3

Feedback on 4-11-18 Regional Meeting o ACEC members noted that there did not seem to be as many design PM’s attending

the meeting. o L.K. thought the panel discussions were very good. o There were some technical glitches with poll the audience.

Overall Liaison Committee topics

The liaison committee met after the regional meeting on 4-11-18. Topics discussed:

o CEI organizational charts in LOIs contained additional text. Samples were placed on the FDOT web site showing what is permissible and what is not. We then discussed LOIs in general. Elizabeth noted someone submitted a letter that did not used the form for pages 2 and 3. They occasional get non-conforming letters and notify the submitter by email. They also randomly check LOIs each quarter.

o Discussed wage rate report and noted the date it is run. District One uses the 12 month average districtwide report.

o The liaison committee wanted the district liaison committees to provide feedback on what the cutoff date should be for payroll registers. ACEC noted that when there was no CDAF or escalation, our CEI personnel were not usually given increases until they were selected for a new project. It was the District’s preference that payroll registers should be due when the AFP is due.

o The liaison committee wanted the district liaison committees to provide feedback on the use of drones for proposals. The district will get back with us, but in general it was noted the cost of drones is not that much - $1000 to $2000. The complication is that you need a certified pilot and are required to file a flight plan.

o The liaison committee wanted the district liaison committees to provide feedback on the makeup of the liaison committee. Our current makeup consists of the secretary, two directors and 5 consultants representing small and large firms, DBE, CEI, and Orlando, Tampa, and SW Florida. FDOT would like to bring in the Consultant Project Management Engineer and District Construction Engineer to our discussions.

Recruitment of FDOT personnel o Brian Blanchard has asked ACEC members not to recruit FDOT personnel. ACEC

asked if District One has had any issue with this. It was the District’s preference that you not recruit their personnel while doing business with them, i.e. while you are on the clock as say a GEC.

TRC shortlist notes

o This was discussed with the relations committee with good and bad examples shown. District One was used as the good example. L.K. noted this was also discussed at the Secretary’s staff meeting.

FDOT D-1 / ACEC-FL LIAISON SUMMARY NOTES May 21, 2018

Page 3 of 3

Feedback on District One 15 minute TRC meeting

o ACEC has not had any negative feedback, but we are early in the process. It was noted to not use it as a qualification presentation meeting but to discuss the project. If you wish to present your qualifications there are other opportunities.

Promotion of CEI personnel o If there is a position open for a promoted staff member, that would be ok. But for a

job that say requires two inspectors and an aid, they would not allow the aid to be promoted and have three inspectors. You could move one inspector off the job and replace them with an promoted aid.

Negotiation on TWOs / Budget for design TWO contracts o ACEC had some firms say they would submit hours for a job and have them marked

up by FDOT and sent back and that was the extent of negotiations. In conjunction with the last topic, the budget was also limiting on some TWOs. FDOT noted that they are limited to $300,000 per TWO and that may contribute. They noted they are trying out Continuing Services Contracts ($5m limit versus $1.5m limit) to avoid this but that that might affect the number of BDI contracts (also $1.5m limit) available.

o ACEC noted that for major design projects, budget did not seem to be a problem.

Utility Clearance Expectations o ACEC noted that it was brought to our attention that non-scoped items were being

requested. A design change was requested after the utilities were cleared and a lot of utility coordination had to be redone and was not compensated.

Rain days o Particularly on hybrid projects, the inspectors are being sent home on rain-days.

Consultants make sure to pay their inspectors full time for fear of losing them. It will therefore be a direct or indirect cost to FDOT. There generally is something else the inspectors can do during rain-days such as reports, etc.

o This issue was brought up in January and the District was to discuss in March at their Ops meeting. The District was discussing 5-21 at their Ops meeting. The District thought they were doing a better job at finding other projects / tasks for inspectors during rain-days.

District topics o The District noted that LOIs should focus on the information requested in the 15

minute TRC tape. This is still not occurring. o The District is only receiving 3 to 4 letters for the CEI ads.

O:\PGF\FICE\D1\D-1 ACEC Liason 5-21-18notes.docx

District 4 ACEC FL Liaison Committee Meeting Notes Friday, April 13, 2018, 3:00 PM

1. Action Items from the January 2018 Meeting

a. None

2. Statewide Liaison Committee Activities

a. Job Classification Task Team – ACEC FL recommendations –

i. FDOT uses resumes for defining job classes, ACEC FL recommending resumes plus org chart (has been vetted and agreed to by Central Office). There was a concern that the data base may be distorted when having a person in multiple roles.

ii. 1) Chief vs Principal Engineer – adding Principal Engineer 15+ years experience and Chief Engineer 15+ years and 20+ years experience. Three levels for PM 3 ‐ 20+ years, PM 2 ‐ 10+ years, PM 1 ‐ 5+ years. Add Sr. Engineer 20+ years. These different tiers are to be used for negotiating the Operating Margin. The definition of PM should include the years of experience as PM.

iii. Provide definition of complex vs. non‐complex project (use the Negotiation Handbook definitions). D4 is considering using the complex vs. non‐complex definition by plan component.

b. Task Team – Staff Hour estimates on SWAT projects – on‐going, have added designers to the Task Team. D4 projects currently follow the SWAT process and therefore do not differentiate.

c. CEI Issues – 1) CEI Evaluations, 2) Hybrid Contracts (rain days, maximum size contracts, increased use on larger contracts) – Currently occurred in D7, 3) Request for the Consultant Engineer to review contract schedules or claim, but allowing time to be charged for the review – There is currently no budget available for a Consulting Engineer (PE) to be able to charge time to a project. D4 in favor of compensating a Consultant Engineer for reviewing construction schedules and claims. 4) 3‐D Design – on going – D4 requesting input on what components in the plans are best suited for 3‐D. 5) MOT Certification Forms – This topic will be discussed a later date with Central Office (David Sadler).

d. Staffing and Org Chart Standardization – The FDOT website provides definition

on what is allowed: http://www.fdot.gov/procurement/SubmittalExamples.shtm

e. Standard Contract language change – Effective on all new contracts.

f. Lodging fee change – Maximum $150 is allowed.

g. The use of drones in Project Presentations – use federal and state guidelines for drone usage. Drones are allowed once the work has been awarded. Clarification is needed from Central office for consistency.

h. Consultant recruitment practices – It is highly discouraged to have Consultants who provide services on FDOT premises actively recruit FDOT employees. FDOT will take action against this practice. However, FDOT employees are allowed to initiate contact with Consultants for employment opportunities outside business hours.

3. New FDOT Issues:

a. D4 CADD User Group – example of establishing a team of designers (FDOT and Consultants) to exchange ideas, best practices and develop training forums – FDOT Central Office is looking to partner with ACEC FL for training courses. Looking at having FDOT/Consultant collaboration on future training opportunities.

b. Emphasis on PD&E and RW Schedules – in the spirit of expediting project delivery I would like to emphasize to the industry that there needs to be a stronger commitment to meeting these schedules. – D4 looking to expedite project delivery with an increased emphasis on right of way (RW) schedules and LDCA dates. Requests for moving public hearings and LDCA dates will require strong justifications and measures to be taken to avoid moving these dates. PD&E teams should proactively anticipate and address project issues that may potentially impact project schedules, improve communications at regular progress meetings, and assign resources to mitigate negative float. It was noted that 75% of the projects with right of way (RW) acquisition have a RW schedule with 24 month duration. Projects that require more than 24 month RW duration will require the approval of the DDE and Program Management Administrator. It was noted that early coordination with Construction and RW / Legal need to be scheduled in order to avoid RW schedule delays. The RW Review Meetings have been successful in reducing RW schedules.

c. Feedback on the D4 Consultant Forum – Generally positive feedback was provided.

d. Letter of Response: Prime Consultant to include the subconsultant’s name as it

reads in the prequalification letter – Firms are not identifying the subconsultant’s full name in the project matrix.

e. District 4 approach to the Alternate Selection process – Looking to utilize on DW Contracts, recently included DW Materials Lab Contracts, DW Drainage, DW Design

f. CEI ‐ Increase focus on finishing construction projects on time utilizing the tools

that are already in place such as non‐pursuit of work and LDs. Jobs finishing late undermine the Department’s credibility and impact the public. FHWA is scrutinizing cost overruns for CEI and MOT for projects that do not finish within contract time ‐ This initiative will help with keeping CEI costs down as well. D4 is currently trying to meet this year’s FTC goal, however, there are currently 4 projects, which are impacting in achieving the goal. The focus is on construction time.

4. New Local ACEC FL Issues:

a. Alternate Selection Methods – D4’s Proposed Plan – See item 3b.

b. Definition of Complex Project deviating from Negotiation Handbook – D4 will look into this.

c. PE vs. Non‐PE distribution for the project staff hours. Recent negotiations still using the 40%‐60% distribution – this is tied to project complexity, however, it was noted the 40‐60 distribution is being used as a starting point in negotiations.

d. Project Management (PM) staff hours for prime consultant on DW Miscellaneous Design Contracts – D4 allows PM hours for contract maintenance. Invoicing related issues do not qualify for PM staff hours and therefore, will not be allowed for billing purposes. The Department does not compensate consultants to prepare invoices, timesheets or to discuss performance issues with the Department.

e. Cost control factors – i. Staff classifications impacts ii. Inconsistency in determining cost control factor (varies project to

project). This depends on the complexity of the project, the need of specialized staff, staff hours distribution, burdened salary rates without operating margin compared to the Department’s salary database, overall concessions given by the Department or the Consultant during negotiations, and the negotiator’s approach. Per Negotiations Handbook, there is no standard operating margin.

f. It has been noted that Task Work Orders and Amendments for some contracts

are not being entered in CITS in a timely manner, as well as, rates or

classifications are not being entered correctly in CITS resulting on delaying the

invoice process. This is happening with the Districtwide Projects where we have

different work orders at the time and Design projects where we have various fee

schedules – It was noted that this is a result of lack in staffing, staff turnover

and errors to contract amendments.

g. Consultant Evaluations are now being done by Group Type. Is it possible to

request or access the Evaluations with the contract’s overall grade? – Not

available to Consultants, it is available to FDOT. Also how frequently are the

evaluations being distributed? No longer being distributed.

h. Posting of LORs on‐line for Design and PD&E, they are currently posted for CEI

projects – This can be handled through a Public Reports request.

5. General Discussion Next D4/D6/FTE Regional Meeting will be held in October 2018; with D6 as the host.

ACEC-FL Transportation Committee Meeting

July 10, 2018

District 5 Liaison Committee Report

ACEC-FL MEMBERS FDOT MEMBERS Yassi Myers, TLP Engineering Consultants Michael Shannon, District Secretary Jennifer Brockman, RK&K Loreen Bobo, Director of Transportation DevelopmentEdward Gonzalez, RS&H Alan Hyman, Director of Transportation OperationsRick Baldocchi, Avcon Michelle Sloan, Procurement Manager

Lorie Matthews, District Transportation Support Manager

The following summarizes the activities of this committee since the last ACEC-FL Transportation Meeting in April of 2018 and highlights items discussed:

Meetings – Held two meetings on April 13 and June 5th 2018. Topics discussed are below.

Design Consultant Construction Grade (follow-up) o Coordination and discussion with FDOT Design PM to include Design EOR by the CEI

when developing the grades. Loreen provided an update and mentioned a committee is looking into adding “constructability” grades.

R/W Mapping Invoicing

o Based on this committee’s request, the District evaluated allowing interim invoicing for R/W Mapping in lieu of payment only upon phase submittals. See attached FDOT memo from John Cheney (District Surveyor and Mapper) to the consultants outlining the acceptable percentages for interim invoicing.

Procurement o D5 mentioned the number of selection protests has increased recently. The day of the D5

ACEC-FL meeting 5 protests occurred in one day. There was only one protest for professional services (CEI). This was brought up as an observation to the group. Any suggestions to address the rising number of protests by the contractors is welcomed.

o Discussed the Central Office directive that a one paragraph selection summary be prepared highlighting what made the shortlisted firm’s LOR standout. This will help the consultants during the debriefing meetings. The District is not in favor of this however will provide for all projects. The need for a Scope of Services meeting will be at the discretion of the FDOT Project Manager. In the event a Scope of Services meeting is not held, the order of presentation/interview will be provided to the shortlisted firms.

o Projects added to the current year Consultant Acquisition Plan will continue to have an industry forum for consultants. In addition, the District is considering a Fall and Spring CAP to cover advertisement changes and additions.

ACEC-FL D-5 Liaison Report (7/10/18)

o District indicated that they are not getting as many LOR’s for CEI projects, the same 6 firms submit on these projects. The issue might be having difficulties getting the inspectors certified.

District Quarterly QC Meetings – o The July 2018 meeting is cancelled. The next meeting is currently scheduled for September

18, 2018. The District will continue with holding the meetings quarterly and considering holding these meetings twice a year only starting in 2019. District utilizes these meetings to communicate with the Consultant community regarding issues related to production and construction; the latest design bulletins; staff changes, upcoming projects, etc. This committee utilizes these meetings to communicate our efforts with the Consultants. These meetings are very well attended by the Consultant community.

Additional Discussions o Joint community volunteer activities was discussed as a possible opportunity for the

consultant industry and the Department. The Department understands that one of the main reasons for the Annual ACEC Transportation Conference is building and strengthening the relationship between the consultant community and the Department. However, the District indicated there may be a better approach to accomplish this through partnering on a community project which benefits both the consultant community and the community as a whole.

Upcoming Meetings: Next D5 Liaison Meeting August 20, 2018

DISTRICT SIX QUARTERLY FDOT‐ACEC FL LIAISON COMMITTEE MEETING

DATE: May 23, 2018

TIME: 1:00 PM LOCATION: EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM

Attendees:

Jim Wolfe – District Six Secretary

Harold Desdunes – District Six Director of Transportation Development

Brian Arena – District Six Transportation Support Manager

Catrina Wilson – District Six Procurement Manager

Mark Moshier – Keith & Schnars

Bob Carballo – Stantec

Robert Behar – R.J Behar

Gus Quesada – New Millennium Engineering

Judy Solaun‐Gonzalez – District Consultant Project Management Engineer

New Business 1. Member Rotation – Robert Behar, P.E. request for term limit:

a. Will be picking someone who is DBE. Next meeting will find the next person.

2. FDOT – ACEC FL Relations Committee March 26, 2018 Summary of Discussion – Professional

Services Submittal Examples: Consultant Wage Rate Support Date; Lodging/Hotel Expenses;

Scrutinized Companies.

a. Three issues – submittal requirements – wage rate report. Run the report the same day

as the AFP are due.

b. One District‐wide was used for the alternate selection so far for District 6. No issues

c. Scrutinized companies – No issues

d. Organizational charts, resumes, technical proposal follow the new standard for

acceptable and unacceptable content.

3. FDOT – ACEC FL Liaison Committee April 11, 2018 Summary of Discussion – See Agenda for any

topic of discussion (Bob Behar and Mark Moshier attended the D‐4 Video Conference Bridge):

a. Q & A was really good. Follow the format from D‐4.

b. Q & A for the next FDOT – ACEC FL Liaison meeting will be here in D‐6.

c. Number is still 4 for the number of people to attend the ACEC‐FL Transportation

Conference – May 31‐31, 2018.

d. Consultant Grading Task Team ‐ New grading scale. Half point was being talked about.

No one has contact D‐6 regarding the grading scale

e. Consultant recruitment process – Consultants are recruiting FDOT employees at our

offices.

f. Consultant should not be marketing at our office. How can we prevent this from

happening?

DISTRICT SIX QUARTERLY FDOT‐ACEC FL LIAISON COMMITTEE MEETING

DATE: May 23, 2018

TIME: 1:00 PM LOCATION: EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM

g. TRC shortlist summary recommendation notes should be available and posted for

Consultants to see.

4. Use of Drones on contracts:

a. Not clear on the rules for using drones in presentations or on contracts.

b. Questions were raised if it is feasible to have drones on contracts.

c. Don’t know what the restrictions are in using this device.

5. CEI Issues:

a. CEI – Statewide meeting to be held June 4th in D4. Consultant will be attending this

meeting.

b. Update on the 3D design and implementation

c. Concerns with changing the procedure in allowing the Contractors to grade the CEI work

d. Concern with sending home Inspectors when it rains. Not happening here in District 6.

6. Post Design Services Invoicing and Payment (Bob Behar)

a. Seen an increase of post design lately.

b. Have to supplement contracts with more funding.

c. Some PM’s check the invoice for CEI/post design

d. There is still an issue. Less experience staff out there.

7. Follow‐up: a. New AFP Update

i. Has officially been released for Consultant to use

Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise / FICE Liaison Subcommittee

July 2018 Report

Subcommittee Members:

FICE

Nick Benedico (chair), Tetra Tech

Jason Lyle, Patel, Greene & Associates

Gus Quesada, New Millennium Engineering

Jim Sumislaski, Kimley-Horn

Bo Sanchez, Volkert

Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise

Paul Wai, Executive Director

Christina Colon, Director of Transportation Development

Maria Connolly, Director of Transportation Operations

Sheree Merting, Professional Services

I. Activities since April 2018

A. Subcommittee meeting was held on May 21st at Turnpike Headquarters. Items discussed were:

1. CEI Items

a. The CEI Subcommittee met with Ananth Prasad and discussed quality control, cost

savings, and the 360 survey

b. 3D Implementation in specs, design, plans is progressing

c. Met at District 5 on June 6th to discuss MOT inspection, CPAM review

2. Transportation Development

a. Use of Drones

Drones are being used by consultants for bridge inspection and aerial

photography for marketing purposes. FTE does not allow drones over live traffic.

FTE is not currently developing policies on the use of drones.

b. QC Initiatives

FTE is placing additional emphasis on quality control, and is enforcing what the

consultant states in their QC Plan. Consultant evaluations will reflect the

consultants’ level of quality and if they followed their plan.

c. Design-Build

FTE does not have a target percentage of contracts for design-build. Upcoming

D-B projects include Polk Parkway and Central Polk Parkway.

FTE is still seeing a large number of components on D-B project submittals (one

contract has had 539 components) for preliminary, RFC, and RFC revisions, which

increases the staff level of effort required for a D-B contract.

3. Professional Services

a. Alternative Selection Methods

FDOT is considering a revised procedure for contracts under $2 million, which

would not be applicable to most FTE contracts.

b. Consultant Evaluation

Inconsistency between districts continues to be an issue (e.g. a “3” being average

vs. being good).

4. PD&E/Design Task Team

Nick Benedico serves on the task team that is developing a scope of services template and

staff-hour guidelines for combined PD&E and design contracts. Rax Jung and Susan

Sadighi represent FTE on the task team, which meets bi-weekly.

5. Turnpike Opinion Survey

ACEC-FL asked if FTE had an interest in reissuing the consultant survey or developing a

survey for their staff. Since there was limited response to the previous survey conducted in

2016, FTE questioned the validity of the survey. They felt they get feedback directly from

consultants and their GECs.

6. Distribution of Information

FTE currently relies on their project managers to disseminate information (changes in

policies, design standards, updates, etc.) to consultants. ACEC-FL suggested that FTE use

Contact Mailer to ensure consistency and widespread notification to consultants and

subconsultants.

II. Future Subcommittee Meetings:

1. July 2018

Production Committee Grading Task Team Members Facilitator Paul Foley // [email protected] 813‐871‐5331 FICE Task Team Members Contacts if you have concerns or suggestions Joe Lauk (PGA – Districts 1 and 7) [email protected] 863‐533‐7317 x203 Michael Schwier (Mead and Hunt – Districts 2 and 3) [email protected] David Coleman (Inwood – District 5 and Turnpike) [email protected] 407‐971‐8850 Will Suero (HDR – Districts 4 and 6) [email protected] 954‐233‐4934 Nina Sickler (District 2 and also DBE Chair) // [email protected] 904‐396‐3556

EXHIBIT 3

11‐28‐17 Consultant Grading Last meeting little attendance so punted Want point system to add value to selection Want a more objective way to evaluate consultants Agreed on a ten point scale with 5 meets the standard 12‐19‐17 David Colman, Nina, Paul, Suzanne Phillips, John Olson, Mike Schweir, Greg Schiess, Tom Andres, Dan Sheer, Carla Summarized last meeting – 10 point system, not partial points awarded Try to consolidate some of the work types – work on Consultant grading and wait on D/B Discussed grading only major work groups versus all. Carla confirmed grading major is required and minor is optional. Limited to six major work types on a project. Carrie – administrative code requires grading scale 1‐5. Requires grading by work type. Carla says could change. 1‐16‐18 Assign teams to grading criteria Anything in ad advertised as major must be graded – limited to 6 major 5 meets the standard – plus what gets a 6, plus what gets a 7 Hold off on D/B 2‐12‐18 Carla – work on design. Others would be scope creep (i.e. PD&E) Worked on 3.0. John sent out was very detailed. To address the concerns, put a title on the grade. Bulleted items explained what the title meant. DCPE does not want completely objective but wants some subjectivity. Want to make sure qualifying professionals are listed on the project. Talked about using a 5 point scale with 0.5 points allowed. Rob Quigley for Sched and Management

6‐4‐18 Did decide to use ½ point scale with 5 points 3.0 met the department expectations Schedule and Management Task team wants to roll up schedule into one Management into A B C and D or just one management at all Dan talked to Rob about that Roadway 22 items to grade Structures Email all comments to Dan Bridge Inspection – Richard Kerr worked on Geotech Not started traffic ops, ITS, yet Survey and mapping – Dan Coleman volunteered Send Nina notes

Schedule and Management Grade ‐ Consultant Evaluation Metrics

Conventional Project – Phase Reviews

SCHEDULE

SCHEDULE EVALUATION CRITERIA Current:

A. Project Phase Submittals (40%)

B. Project Milestones (20%)

C. Status Reports/Schedule Updates (20%)

D. Other Project Deliverables (20%)

Performance Rating Scale (1-5) 5 Outstanding Performance - Always ahead of schedule without need for resubmission 4 Above Satisfactory Performance - Regularly ahead of schedule without need for resubmission 3 Satisfactory Performance - On schedule in accordance with agreed schedule dates 2 Below Satisfactory Performance - Behind schedule 1 Unacceptable Performance - Behind schedule. Performance affecting final completion.

PROPOSED:

A. Project Phase Submittals (70%)(40%)

B. Project Milestones (20%)

B.C. Status Reports/Schedule Updates (30%)(20%)


A. Project Phase Submittals (40%) (70%)

Grade Performance Measure5 Met all critical dates (BDR, PSR, BHR, Phase I, II, III, IV and Final, R/W maps, etc.)

according to the baseline schedule unless a delay or change was requested by the Department and was able to advance the project by 20% or more or make up delays due to others.

4 Met most submittal dates (BDR, PSR, BHR, Phase I, II, III, IV and Final, R/W maps, etc.) according to the baseline schedule unless a delay or change was requested by the Department or make up delays due to others. Met the project overall schedule (i.e. production date).

3 Maintained most critical path items of work, met the project overall schedule (i.e. production date) unless a delay or change was requested by the Department.

2 Missed many submittal dates which impacted the project overall schedule due to consultant.

1 Missed most submittal dates including overall schedule (i.e. production date) due to consultant.

B. Project Milestones (20%)C

2

2

B. C. Status Reports/Schedule Updates (20%) (30%)

Grade Performance Measure5 Always provided monthly schedule updates for all tasks. Always provided look

ahead for key upcoming tasks that need Department involvement. Always offered suggestions to make up schedule delays caused by others. Always readdressed entire scheduling due to Department and/or outside agency changes.

4 Always provided monthly schedule updates for all tasks when requested. Generally provided look ahead for key upcoming tasks that need Department involvement. Generally offered suggestions to make up schedule delays caused by others when requested. Generally readdressed entire scheduling due to Department and/or outside agency changes.

3 Provided schedule updates for milestones when requested. Generally provided look ahead for key upcoming tasks that need Department involvement when requested. Offered suggestions to make up schedule delays caused by others when requested. Generally readdressed milestones due to Department and/or outside agency changes.

2 Sometimes provided schedule updates for milestones when requested. eprovided look ahead for key upcoming tasks that need Department involvement when requested. Rarely offered suggestions to make up schedule delays caused by others when requested. Occasionally readdressed milestones due to Department and/or outside agency changes.

1 Rarely provided schedule updates for milestones when requested. Rarelyprovided look ahead for key upcoming tasks that need Department involvement when requested. Rarely offered suggestions to make up schedule delays caused by others when requested. Rarely readdressed milestones due to Department and/or outside agency changes.


3

3

MANAGEMENT EVALUATION CRITERIA Current:

Performance Rating Scale (1-5) 5 Outstanding Performance - Consultant consistently exceeded the expectations. 4 Above Satisfactory Performance - Consultant consistently met, often exceeded, expectations. 3 Satisfactory Performance - Consultant consistently met expectations. 2 Below Satisfactory Performance - Consultant inconsistently met expectations. 1 Unacceptable Performance - Consultant consistently failed to meet expectations.

A. Administration of Contract (weight = 20%) 1. Effectively and proactively controlled the Contract. 2. Administered the Contract in an organized manner and was proficient in applying administrative, procedural

and technical skills to Contract. 3. Effectively coordinated with Department personnel to ensure effective Contract management, with required

submittals made timely, in the subscribed format, with no material errors. 4. Submitted properly documented invoices; subconsultants paid promptly; contract funds were tracked and

reported as requested to avoid rush amendments, out-of-fund conditions or supplemental agreements. 5. Complied with established DBE/MBE commitment. 6. FOR TASK DRIVEN CONTRACTS ONLY: Responded to the Department in a timely manner regarding tasks

requests. For accepted tasks, promptly developed an understanding of the assignment, prepared and submitted an accurate time/fee package, and efficiently initiated the assignment.

B. Management of Issues and Resources (weight = 25%) 1. Effectively resolved issues; made decisions based on solid logic and sufficient supporting detail. 2. Properly supervised staff and coordinated the effort of subconsultants. 3. Effectively minimized the unnecessary involvement of Department staff. 4. Effectively managed resources. Continuously provided experienced staff as proposed; was responsive to

Department staffing requests; if personnel changes occurred, the credentials of replacement staff were equal to or exceeded the qualifications of the original staff approved, and Department approval was received.

5. FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING PERMITS: Sufficiently identified, analyzed and verified that all permit conditions were addressed. Thoroughly documented and proactively worked to resolve permitting issues in a timely manner.

6. FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING UTILITIES: Sufficiently verified that utilities were coordinated properly and shown in the plans/schedules including providing a summary of changes at subsequent phase submittals. ADDITIONALLY, FOR PROJECTS INVOLVING CONSULTANT UTILITY COORDINATION: succeeded in getting the utility agencies to accept the schedule, and consistently tracked and communicated with the utility companies so they comply with the schedules. Took appropriate action when schedules were not met.

C. Communication, Documentation and Coordination (weight = 25%) 1. Provided the necessary project information to the Department and all project stakeholders in a timely manner. 2. Scheduled, conducted and documented meetings in a timely manner. 3. Immediately notified the Department of issues impacting schedule and costs; acted proactively by working

with various stakeholders to minimize impacts; and resolved issues in a timely manner. 4. Prepared thoroughly organized and completed project documentation including a clear filing system, and

clear documentation of oral communications. 5. Effectively tracked and monitored comment resolution and other action items to ensure timely resolution. 6. Properly and efficiently logged, documented, tracked and took appropriate action on all public initiated

inquiries from first contact through disposition or resolution. Coordinated effectively with the District Public Information Office, providing relevant data as requested for newsletters, media releases, public meetings, etc.

D. Execution of Work (Schedule, budget, quality control, scope of work) (weight = 30%) 1. Ensured project schedule submittals was submitted and reviewed in accordance with the Contract. 2. Reviewed the schedule monthly or as appropriate with the Department. Took appropriate action to reallocate

resources if the work items fell behind schedule in accordance with the critical path to minimize impact to the overall schedule.

3. Effectively managed the budget and if applicable, was reasonable regarding claims for and negotiations of supplemental agreements.

4. Developed a logical quality control plan, and adhered to the plan throughout the project. 5. Successfully met the scope and objectives of the project.

4

4

PROPOSED

A. Administration of Contract (weight = 2030%) B. Management of Issues and Resources (weight = 2535%) C. Communication, Documentation and Coordination (weight = 2535%) D. Execution of Work (Schedule, budget, quality control, scope of work) (weight = 30%)

A. Administration of Contract (weight = 2030%)

Grade Performance Measure 5 Submitted a thorough Quality Control Plan at the beginning of the contract and always provided

documentation that it was being adhered to. Exceeded DBE/SBE commitments. Ensured all scope items were completed, always kept Department aware of potential out of scope items as they became evident, always kept the Department aware of issues that would cause cost and schedule overruns, always submitted properly documented invoices, always paid subconsultant promptly, was always responsive to requests of TWO development on Task Driven Contracts. Processed multiple department initiated contract amendments expeditiously.

4 Submitted a thorough Quality Control Plan at the beginning of the contract and provided mostdocumentation that it was being adhered to. Met FDOT aspirational goal for DBE/SBE. Did all of the following except for one or two occurrences: Ensured all scope items were completed; always kept Department aware of potential out of scope items as they became evident; always kept the Department aware of issues that would cause cost and schedule overruns; always submitted properly documented invoices; always paid subconsultant promptly; was always responsive to requests of TWO development on Task Driven Contracts; processed multiple department initiated contract amendments expeditiously.

3 Submitted a thorough Quality Control Plan at the beginning of the contract and provided QC documentation upon request. Met DBE/SBE commitments. Ensured major scope items were completed; kept Department aware of potential major out of scope items as they became evident; kept the Department aware of issues that would cause cost and schedule overruns, usually submitted properly documented invoices; usually paid subconsultant promptly; was generally responsive to requests of TWO development on Task Driven Contracts; processed multiple department initiated contract amendments timely.

2 Submitted a Quality Control Plan late and provided QC documentation after multiple requests. Did not use all DBE/SBE that was committed to and did not meet FDOT aspirational goal for DBE/SBE (unless outside of Consultant’s control on Task Driven Contracts). Failed to provide many of the following on multiple occurrences: Ensured major scope items were completed; kept Department aware of potential major out of scope items as they became evident; kept the Department aware of issues that would cause cost and schedule overruns, usually submitted properly documented invoices; usually paid subconsultant promptly; was generally responsive to requests of TWO development on Task Driven Contracts; processed multiple department initiated contract amendments timely.

1 Submitted an unsatisfactory Quality Control Plan (or failed to submit one at all) and failed to provideQC documentation even after multiple requests. Did not use any DBE/SBE that was committed to (unless outside of Consultant’s control on Task Driven Contracts). Many scope items unresolved; required last minute supplementals for out of scope items; failed to keep the Department aware of issues that would cause cost and schedule overruns; invoices submitted without documentation; subconsultants complained about not being paid timely; always slow to develop TWOs for Task Driven Contracts; always slow to process Department initiated contract amendments.

5

5

B. Management of Issues and Resources (weight = 2535%)

Grade Performance Measure 5 Always kept Department aware of key issues and always provided information and

recommendations to resolve them, brought in specialized staff to resolve complex issues when necessary, always coordinated with subconsultants and staff to minimize Department involvement, increased staff resources to advance project when requested or resolve negative float due to delays by others, obtained all permits in a timely and efficient manner, always met utility scope requirements for RGB's, work schedules, and UWHC's and notified Department when UAO's were not responsive.

4 Always kept Department aware of key issues and provided information and recommendations to resolve most of them, worked with Department's specialized staff to resolve complex issues when necessary, always coordinated with subconsultants and staff to minimize Department involvement, increased staff resources to advance project when requested or resolve negative float due to delays by others, obtained all permits in a timely and efficient manner, always met utility scope requirements for RGB's, work schedules, and UWHC's and notified Department when UAO's were not responsive.

3 Usually kept Department aware of key issues and was sometimes instrumental in providing information and recommendations to resolve them, worked with Department's specialized staff to resolve complex issues when necessary, usually coordinated with subconsultants and staff to minimize Department involvement, increased staff resources to meet critical dates or delays caused by consultant, obtained all permits to meet critical dates, met utility scope requirements for RGB's, work schedules, and UWHC's to meet critical dates and notified Department when UAO's were not responsive.

2 Did not keep Department aware of key issues and relied mostly on Department to resolve them, depended upon Department's specialized staff to resolve complex issues, usually coordinated with subconsultants and staff to minimize Department involvement, had lack of staff resources and barely met production dates as a result, obtained all permits to meet critical dates, met utility scope requirements for work schedules, and UWHC's to meet critical dates.

1 Did not make Department aware of significant issues until late impacting production schedule and costs, Department had to manage subconsultants and staff, had significant permit and utility issues due to fault of consultant.

6

6

C. Communication, Documentation and Coordination (weight = 2535%) Grade Performance Measure5 Always kept FDOT PM aware of outstanding project issues and, when appropriate,

requested meetings to address project issues in a timely manner, always provided an agenda, sign in sheet, and minutes within 2 days of the meeting, always assisted with response to public inquiries within 2 days, always documented all critical joint project decisions and always sent to FDOT PM for their record. Always provided historical documentation to FDOT when requested within 1 day.

4 Did all of the following except for one or two occurrences: Always kept FDOT PM aware of outstanding project issues and, when appropriate, requested meetings to address project issues in a timely manner, always provided an agenda, sign in sheet, and minutes within 2 days of the meeting, always assisted with response to public inquiries within 2 days, always documented all critical joint project decisions and always sent to FDOT PM for their record. Always provided historical documentation to FDOT when requested within 1 day.

3 Generally kept FDOT PM aware of outstanding project issues and, when appropriate, requested meetings to address project issues in a timely manner, generally provided an agenda, sign in sheet, and minutes within 5 days of the meeting, was generally responsive to public inquiries within 5 days, generally documented critical joint project decisions and generally sent to FDOT PM for their record. Generally provided historical documentation to FDOT when requested within 5 days.

2 Kept FDOT PM aware of some outstanding project issues and, when appropriate, was available to discuss project issues, sometimes provided an agenda, sign in sheet, and minutes within two weeks of the meeting, responded to public inquiries within two weeks, sometimes documented critical joint project decisions and sometimes sent to FDOT PM for their record. Had difficulty providing historical documentation to FDOT when requested.

1 Did not notify FDOT PM aware of critical outstanding project issues and was rarely available to discuss project issues, rarely provided an agenda, never provided a sign in sheet, and rarely provided minutes of the meeting, rarely responded to public inquiries, rarely documented critical joint project decisions and never sent to FDOT PM for their record. Could not provide historical documentation to FDOT when requested.

D. Execution of Work (Schedule, budget, quality control, scope of work) (weight = 30%)

QUALITY GRADE REPORT

1. Compliance with Project Scope Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Delivered superior quality products/services, SA for unforeseeable item and timely resolution

without Department assistance. Provides solutions when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Identified critical elements to be added/removed from initial scope. Documented scope compliance elements in memorandum/checklist.

4 Exceeds Expectations Delivered high quality products/services, SA for unforeseeable item and timely resolution with

minimal Department assistance. Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Documented scope compliance elements in memorandum/checklist.

3 Meets Expectations Delivered good-value quality products/services, SA for unforeseeable item and resolution with

expected Department assistance.2 Below Expectations

Delivered minimum products/services, SA for foreseeable item and resolution with considerable, unwarranted Department assistance.

1 Poor Delivered low quality products/services, SA for more than 1 foreseeable item and

resolution with considerable, unwarranted Department assistance 2. Typical Section Package Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Delivered high quality product with less than expected Department assistance, no errors.

Used FDM, PPM and/or District Guidelines for preparation of documents. Coordination with and pre-submittal to PM prior official submittal.

4 Exceeds Expectations Delivered high quality product with expected Department assistance, few minor errors,

no major errors. Coordination with and pre-submittal to PM prior official submittal. 3 Meets Expectations

Delivered a quality product with expected Department assistance, average number of minor errors

2 Below Expectations Delivered acceptable product with considerable, unwarranted Department assistance,

major & minor errors 1 Poor

Delivered low quality product with considerable, unwarranted Department assistance, major & minor errors

Major error = wrong functional class, wrong road name, design criteria error, wrong county, Minor error = spelling, format, signature block Usual = one time follow-up to achieve resolution to project issues

Low quality = product is rejected by FDOT PM High quality = product goes thru process w/o any comments Keep the following in mind when grading:

1. Consultants knowledge (or lack of) Dept. and District procedures, 2. Aware of Department’s standards/ updates 3. Completeness of package, 4. FDOT PM involvement 5. Number of re-submittals

3. Phase Submittals Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent All applicable items from District submittal checklist are complete without re-submittal.

Responses to comments completed in timely manner. Responses coordinated with commenter resulting in less Department input.

4 Exceeds Expectations All applicable items from District submittal checklist are complete with only one re-submittal.

Responses to comments completed in timely manner.

3 Meets Expectations All applicable items from District submittal checklist are complete with no more than two re-

submittal

2 Below Expectations All applicable items from District submittal checklist are complete with at least three re-

submittal

1 Poor Package rejected due to incomplete and multiple re-submittals

4. Variations/Exceptions Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Determination of design issues during scoping and negotiation process, less than

expected Department assistance, no re-submittal

4 Exceeds Expectations

Early determination of design issues, less than expected Department assistance, one re-submittal

3 Meets Expectations

Early determination of design issues, expected expected Department assistance, no more than two re-submittals

2 Below Expectations

Late determination of design issues, considerable unwarranted Department assistance, more than two re-submittals

1 Poor

Late determination of design issues, substantial unwarranted Department assistance, more than three re-submittals

Early determination is identification of design issues prior to Initial Engineering or issues as a result of scope changes

5. Geometric/Engineering Reports Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Works independently Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Follows applicable chapters in PPM/FDM covering design criteria and plans production Includes cost estimate for each recommendation not yet implemented in the project Ensures the design report content correlates with construction plans Makes modifications or recommendations whenever scope change occurs

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Works independently Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Follows applicable chapters in PPM/FDM covering design criteria and plans production Includes cost estimate for each recommendation not yet implemented in the project Ensures the design report content correlates with construction plans

Makes modifications or recommendations whenever scope change occurs

3 Meets Expectations With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Works independently Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Follows applicable chapters in PPM/FDM covering design criteria and plans production Includes cost estimate for each recommendation not yet implemented in the project Ensures the design report content correlates with construction plans Makes modifications or recommendations whenever scope change occurs

2 Below Expectations With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Follows applicable chapters in PPM/FDM covering design criteria and plans production Includes cost estimate for each recommendation not yet implemented in the project Ensures the design report content correlates with construction plans Makes modifications or recommendations whenever scope change occurs

1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant does not: Provides recommendations when issues/problems occur outside of scope. Follows applicable chapters in PPM/FDM covering design criteria and plans production Includes cost estimate for each recommendation not yet implemented in the project Ensure the design report content correlates with construction plans Makes modifications or recommendations whenever scope change occurs

6. Pavement Design Package Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Contains all required contents for review by District Pavement Design Engineer (Sufficiency

Review Checklist) on initial submittal No re-submittal

4 Exceeds Expectations Contains all required contents for review by District Pavement Design Engineer (Sufficiency

Review Checklist) on initial submittal One re-submittal

3 Meets Expectations Contains all required contents for review by District Pavement Design Engineer (Sufficiency

Review Checklist) on initial submittal Two re-submittals


Contains all required contents for review by District Pavement Design Engineer (Sufficiency Review Checklist) on initial submittal

Three re-submittals

1 Poor Does not contain all required contents for review by District Pavement Design Engineer

(Sufficiency Review Checklist), package rejected. Four or more re-submittals

7. Roadway Drainage Design Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without expected guidance from FDOT staff , the consultant: Follows District Drainage Design practices and guidelines Ensures the Drainage Report content correlates with construction plans Includes all required documentation and calculations in Drainage Report

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Follows District Drainage Design practices and guidelines Ensures the Drainage Report content correlates with construction plans Includes all required documentation and calculations in Drainage Report

3 Meets Expectations With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Follows District Drainage Design practices and guidelines Ensures the Drainage Report content correlates with construction plans Includes all required documentation and calculations in Drainage Report

2 Below Expectations With more than expected support from FDOT staff, the consultant: Follows District Drainage Design practices and guidelines Ensures the Drainage Report content correlates with construction plans Includes all required documentation and calculations in Drainage Report

1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant: Follows District Drainage Design practices and guidelines Ensures the Drainage Report content correlates with construction plans Includes all required documentation and calculations in Drainage Report

8. Stormwater Management Facility Design Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, and permitting agencies procedures.

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, and permitting agencies procedures.

3 Meets Expectations With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, and permitting agencies procedures.

2 Below Expectations With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, and permitting agencies procedures.

1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, and permitting agencies procedures.

9. Environmental Permitting Services (Water Management District, Corps. Of Engineers, USCG, Local Permits, etc.) Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Thorough understanding of permitting agencies processes, criteria, permit package expectations Proactive in meeting with Drainage and Environmental staff and provide input on agencies

possible needs, feedback, requirements, etc. Proactively set up and conduct meetings with agencies and their staff to confirm and

document permit requirements and provide permit documentations (incl. invitations, agendas, meeting minutes, and follow-up items when needed)

Works independently, provide recommendations without FDOT assistance

4 Exceeds Expectations Works independently, provides recommendations with less than expected level of FDOT

staff involvement Come to meetings with agenda, ready to discuss issues with proposals and follows up on

all issues.

3 Meets Expectations Works independently, provides recommendations with only the expected level FDOT

staff involvement Has general awareness and knowledge of permitting agencies criteria and requirements


Requires more than expected level of FDOT staff involvement and guidance Has general awareness and knowledge of permitting agencies criteria and requirements

. 1 Poor

Requires considerable guidance and FDOT staff involvement Lacks general awareness and knowledge of permitting agencies criteria and requirements

10. Bridge Hydraulics Report including Scour Calculations and Deck Drainage Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental

Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, Department’s Structures Design Guidelines, and permitting agencies procedures.

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District

Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, Department’s Structures Design Guidelines and permitting agencies procedures.

3 Meets Expectations With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental


2 Below Expectations With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District

Environmental Permit Information Manual, Department’s Drainage Manual, Department’s Structures Design Guidelines, and permitting agencies procedures.

1

Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows District Environmental


Also keep the extent of the following items in mind for this quality grade:

Understanding of needed information for reports Discussion with permit and Drainage staff Coordinate with roadway on bridge alignment, cross-slopes, superelevation transitions, etc.

11. Earthwork and Soils Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent

Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Materials Manual and District practices in delivering the required products.

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Materials

Manual and District practices in delivering the required products. 3 Meets Expectations

With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Materials Manual and District practices in delivering the required products.

2 Below Expectations With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Materials

Manual and District practices in delivering the required products. 1 Poor

With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Materials Manual and District practices in delivering the required products.

The above item could be evaluated two ways:

1. For sub-consultant – Work Group 9 where the consultant will receive a quality grade if requested or deemed necessary.

2. For prime - It is seen as how well this is coordinated with sub. The following items are considered as part of this grading: Document all geotechnical information needed Develop X-sections with accurate soil/proposed template Level of information in the plans Coordination with lab staff and PM Proper selection of pay items 12. Utility Coord./Adjustments and Utility Agreements and Work Schedules Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Utilities Manual and

District practices in delivering the required products.4 Exceeds Expectations

With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Utilities Manual and District practices in delivering the required products.

3 Meets Expectations With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Utilities Manual and

District practices in delivering the required products.2 Below Expectations

With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Utilities Manual and District practices in delivering the required products.

1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant follows State Utilities Manual

and District practices in delivering the required products.The following items are considered as part of this grading: Understanding effort needed Minimizing the need for relocation of utilities Understanding utility guidelines Clear understanding of utilities in corridor (permit/easement)

Proactively resolve utilities conflicts Contacted all owners needed to complete work Coordinate with utility companies and achieve receipt of all agreements and schedules Prepare conflict spread sheet and resolved possible conflicts by discussing with utility or

providing a solution that may require a field conflict resolution as the preparation of the “Utility work by highway contractor” agreement.

Achieved certification by Final engineering/Biddability phase of all utility work. Proactive to process and advice FDOT PM of non-responsive utilities

Assisted utilities in utilities schedules Provided utility certification Item 12 could be evaluated two ways:

1. For sub-consultant – Work Group 3 where the consultant will receive a quality grade if requested or deemed necessary.

2. For prime – Either it is done as part of Work Group 3 or it is seen as how well this is coordinated with sub-consultant.

The following items are considered as part of this grading: 13. Traffic Control Plans/Maintenance of Traffic Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans

Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans. Prepared a conceptual plan and coordinated review with FDOT PM, District

construction and Operation center. Achieved TCP approval with minimal comments Prepared lane closure analysis w/seasonal impact if practical Awareness of interstate/special case requirements if applicable


With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Prepared a conceptual plan and coordinated review with FDOT PM, District construction and Operation center.

Achieved TCP approval with minimal comments Prepared lane closure analysis w/seasonal impact if practical Awareness of interstate/special case requirements if applicable

3 Meets Expectations

With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.


Achieved TCP approval with minimal comments Prepared lane closure analysis w/seasonal impact if practical Awareness of interstate/special case requirements if applicable


With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.


Achieved TCP approval with multiple plans submittal for review Prepared submittal with more than usual participation

1 Poor

With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.


Achieved TCP approval with multiple plans submittal for review

14. Miscellaneous Structures Plans Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans

Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Identified the need to modify or replace miscellaneous structures prior to Initial Engineering

Proactively prepared typical sketches, providing solutions toward replacement or repair of such structures including cost estimates

Proactively coordinated with FDOT staff to review possible solutions to achieve approval prior to Constructability phase


With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Identified the need to modify or replace miscellaneous structures prior to Initial

Engineering Proactively prepared typical sketches, providing solutions toward replacement or

repair of such structures including cost estimates Proactively coordinated with FDOT staff to review possible solutions to achieve

approval prior to Constructability phase

3 Meets Expectations With expected level of guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department

standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Identified the need to modify or replace miscellaneous structures prior to Initial

Engineering Prepared typical sketches, providing solutions toward replacement or repair of such

structures including cost estimates Coordinated with FDOT staff to review possible solutions to achieve approval prior

to Constructability phase

2 Below Expectations With more than expected level of guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department

standards, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Modify or replace miscellaneous structures prior to Initial Engineering Prepared typical sketches for review and approval Coordinated with FDOT staff multiple times to review possible solutions to achieve


1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards,

Plans Preparation Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans. Modify or replace miscellaneous structures prior to Initial Engineering Prepared typical sketches for review and approval Coordinated with FDOT staff multiple times to review possible solutions to achieve


15. Right of Way Requirements and Coordination Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without any guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Right-of-

Way procedure Manual, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.

Review the existing ROW Maps provided or available in the District or County to understand the existing corridor available ROW and field review to advice possible concerns.

Identify need for a Maintenance map during Initial engineering process. Properly communicate Surveying concerns prior to start of field work to assure all

possible issues are addressed. Field verifies the survey prepared to assure ROW is compliant to corridor project needs.

4 Exceeds Expectations With less than usual guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards,

Right-of-Way procedure Manual, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.


Identify need for a Maintenance map during Initial engineering process. Properly communicate Surveying concerns prior to start of field work to assure all

possible issues are addressed. Field verifies the survey prepared to assure ROW is compliant to corridor project needs.

3 Meets Expectations With usual guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards, Right-of-

Way procedure Manual, Plans Preparation Manual or Florida Design Manual, and district practices in delivering the plans.


Identify need for a Maintenance map during Initial engineering process. Communicate Surveying concerns prior to start of field work to assure all possible issues

are addressed. Field verifies the survey prepared to assure ROW is compliant to corridor project needs.

2 Below Expectations With more than usual guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards,


Review the existing ROW Maps provided or available in the District or County to understand the existing corridor available ROW and field review for possible concerns.

Identify need for a Maintenance map during Initial engineering process. Communicate Surveying concerns prior to start of field work to assure all possible issues

are addressed. Field verifies the survey prepared to assure ROW is compliant to corridor project needs.

1 Poor With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department standards,


Review the existing ROW Maps provided in the District or County to understand the existing corridor available ROW and field review for possible concerns.

Identify need for a Maintenance map during Initial engineering process. Communicate Surveying concerns prior to start of field work Field verifies the survey prepared to assure ROW is compliant to corridor project needs.

16. Local Agency Coordination and Public Meetings Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Without expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department Public

Involvement procedures and district practices in the process of plans production. Establish communications with Local Agencies to assure local needs/desires are

considered during Initial Engineering. Discuss with local agencies their needs/desires and obtain Department’s concurrence.

This may require a JPA with agency or future project within another section (TOPS,

Drainage, and Maintenance). Evaluate corridor for potential public information meeting site. Prepare exhibits and identify issues of concern that would need an expert in attendance to

accentuate the work proposed. Have an understanding of the corridor stake holders and establish open communication

prior to meeting. 4 Exceeds Expectations

With less than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department Public Involvement procedures and district practices in the process of plans production.

Establish communications with Local Agencies to assure local needs/desires are considered during Initial Engineering.

Discuss with local agencies their needs/desires and obtain Department’s concurrence. This may require a JPA with agency or future project within another section (TOPS, Drainage, and Maintenance).

Evaluate corridor for potential public information meeting site. Prepare exhibits and identify issues of concern that would need an expert in attendance to


prior to meeting. 3 Meets Expectations

With expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department Public Involvement procedures and district practices in the process of plans production.

Establish communications with Local Agencies to assure local needs/desires are considered during Initial Engineering.

Discuss with local agencies their needs/desires and obtain Department’s concurrence. This may require a JPA with agency or future project within another section (TOPS, Drainage, and Maintenance).

Evaluate corridor for potential public information meeting site. Prepare exhibits and identify issues of concern that would need an expert in attendance to


prior to meeting. 2 Below Expectations

With more than expected guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department Public Involvement procedures and district practices in the process of plans production.

Establish communications with Local Agencies during Initial Engineering. Discuss local agencies needs/desires and obtain Department’s concurrence. This may

require a JPA with agency or future project within another section (TOPS, Drainage, and Maintenance).

Evaluate corridor for potential Public information meeting site. Prepare exhibits and identify issues of concern that would need an expert in attendance to

accentuate the work proposed. 1 Poor

With considerable guidance from FDOT staff, the consultant followed Department Public Involvement procedures and district practices in the process of plans production.

Establish communications with Local Agencies during Initial Engineering. Discuss local agencies needs/desires and obtain Department’s concurrence. This may

require a JPA with agency or future project within another section (TOPS, Drainage, and Maintenance).

Evaluate corridor for potential Public information meeting site.

Prepare exhibits and identify issues of concern that would need an expert in attendance to accentuate the work proposed.

17. Pay Items and Quantities Quality Grade Score

5

Criteria

Excellent Completed quantities and pay items as required per each phase submittal. No errors found with quantities Quantities and Pay items are consistent with plans Addressed phase review comments at production with no corrections All pay items are current based on Basis of Estimate

4 Exceeds Expectations Completed quantities and pay items as required per each phase submittal. Quantities and pay items consistent with plans with very minor comments to correct errors Addressed phase review comments at production

3 Meet Expectations

Completed quantities and pay items as required per each phase submittal. All pay items used are current with latest BOE Quantities consistent with plans with few comments Addressed phase review comments at production

2 Below Expectations Some pay items used not current with latest BOE Some quantities not consistent with plans Some phase review comments not addressed at production

1 Poor Incorrect transport report Most of pay items not current with latest BOE Most quantities not consistent with plans Phase review comments not addressed at production

18. Overall Content, Format and Assembly of Roadway Plans Quality Grade

Criteria

Score 5 Excellent

Correct plan sheet information with no errors Special component sets consistent with PPM Plans are up to date per latest standards No errors on computation book consistent with roadway plans Plan notes are used to address special conditions only No discrepancies between plan notes, details, standard indexes and specs. Coordination with department staff to get necessary signatures and approvals for production

complete, i.e., Utility clear, permit approval, rail clear, etc. Addressed all phase review comments at production complete QDI between 89 and 100)

4 Exceeds Expectations Plan sheet information with no errors Special component sets consistent with PPM Plans are up to date per latest standards Very minor errors on computation book consistent with roadway plans Plan notes are used to address special conditions only No discrepancies between plan notes, details, standard indexes and specs Coordinated with all applicable department staff to get necessary signatures and approvals for

production complete, i.e., Utility Clear, permit approval, rail clear, etc. Addressed all phase review errors and comments at production QDI between 79 and 88)

3 Meet Expectations Plan sheet information with minor errors Special component sets consistent with PPM Plans are up to date per latest standards Very minor errors on computation book consistent with roadway plans Plan notes are used to address special conditions only Minor discrepancies between plan notes, details, standard indexes and specs Coordinated with all applicable department staff to get necessary signatures and approvals for

production complete, i.e., Utility Clear, permit approval, rail clear, etc. Addressed all phase review errors and comments at production QDI between 66 and 78)

2 Below Expectations Plan sheet information with major errors Special component sets not consistent with PPM Plans are not up to date per latest standards Errors on computation book not matching roadway plans Plan notes are used to address which are the duplicate of standard specs. Did not coordinate with all applicable department staff to get necessary signatures and approvals

for production complete, i.e., Utility Clear, permit approval, rail clear, etc. Did not address all phase review errors at production complete QDI between 41 and 65)

1 Poor Plan sheet information with major errors Major errors for computation book not matching roadway plans Plans are not up to date per latest standards Inaccurate identification of utilities or other features on roadway plans Plans assembly not consistent with PPM Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 Major discrepancies between plan notes, details, standard indexes (No coordination with department staff to get necessary signatures and approvals for production complete, i.e., FHWA approval, permit approval, rail clear, etc. Did not correct phase review errors at production QDI of 40 or less)

Minor – Spelling, index of roadway plans not matching plan sheets, editorial, format. Major – Missing labels for geometric controls, X-section template data, quantities not correct, incorrect utilities and any design controls

19. Maintain and Update Construction Cost Estimates Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Scope of work and LRE consistent Submitted engineer’s estimate at bidability and production with no errors or comments Submitted lump sum items break down costs with no errors or comments Meeting Early schedule submittal dates for work program updates Meeting Early schedule submittal dates for phase review updates Complete trns*port estimate with no errors Early update ROW estimate for projects involving ROW

4 Exceed Expectations

Scope of work and LRE consistent with no errors Submitted engineer’s estimate at bidability and production Submitted lump sum items break down costs Meeting On time schedule submittal dates for work program updates Meeting On time schedule submittal dates for phase review updates Complete trns*port estimate with no errors On time update ROW estimate for projects involving ROW

3 Meet Expectations Scope of work and LRE consistent Submitted engineer’s estimate at bidability and production with minor errors Submitted lump sum items break down costs with errors Meeting On time schedule submittal dates for work program updates Meeting On time schedule submittal dates for phase review updates Complete trns*port estimate with minor errors On time update ROW estimate for projects involving ROW

2 Below Expectations Scope of work and LRE not consistent Incomplete engineer’s estimate at bidability and production Incomplete lump sum items break down costs Missed one phase review update Missed one work program schedule update Incomplete trns*port estimate Failed to update ROW estimate for projects involving ROW

1 Poor Scope of work and LRE not consistent Missing engineer’s estimate at bidability and production Missing lump sum items break down costs Missed schedule submittal dates for work program updates Missed schedule submittal dates for phase review updates Incomplete trns*port estimate with major errors Failed to update ROW estimate for projects involving ROW Missed all phase review scheduled updates, missed all work program scheduled updates

Minor – MOT factor, mobilization factor used in LRE Major – Wrong LRE template, missed contingency factors for pavement, wrong pay item selection

20. Specifications Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 Excellent Submitted developmental spec with no errors Submitted modified spec with no errors Specification package is complete with no errors and no re-submittals All TSP’s included Delivered early or on time Submitted all applicable items in production complete checklist

4 Exceed Expectations Submitted developmental spec with no errors Submitted modified spec with no errors Specification package is complete with no errors and no re-submittals All TSP’s included Specification package is complete with one error Delivered early or on time Submitted all applicable items in production complete checklist

3 Meet Expectations Completed and submitted highlighted workbook Submitted complete TSP Specification package complete with no more than two errors. Submitted on time Submitted all applicable items in production complete checklist

2 Below Expectations Incomplete workbook, incomplete specification package Submitted wrong developmental spec and modified spec Submitted wrong or incomplete TSP’s Resubmit more than 2 times to correct errors in spec. package.

1 Poor

Missing modified specifications at bidability phase review Major syntax errors on specifications package Missed schedule submittal dates Missing developmental specifications at bidability review Missing TSP’s Missed production schedule, resubmit more than 3 times to correct errors in spec. package,

Incomplete means the package has more than two errors.

21. Electronic Delivery Quality Grade Score

Criteria

5 NCI (Non compliant indicator) score of 0 with first submittal No CD re-submittals Setmaker processed successfully

4 NCI (Non compliant Indicator) score of 1

One CD Re-Submittal Submitted with one iteration of project CD for an NCI score of 0, successively improved NCI

score for each phase submittal) Setmaker processed successfully

3 NCI (Non compliant Indicator) score between 2-3 Submitted 2 iterations to comply with production CD for NCI score of 0 successively improved

NCI score for each phase submittal) Setmaker processed successfully

2 NCI (Non compliant Indicator) score between 4-5 and Setmaker does not process successfully and/or Submitted 3 iterations to comply with production CD for NCI score of 0 no successive

improvement in NCI score for each phase submittal

1 NCI (Non compliant Indicator) score greater than 6 and Setmaker does not process successfully and/or No successive improvement in NCI score for each phase submittal

EXHIBIT 4

ACEC-FL CEI Sub-Committee July Report

Based FDOT CEI Managers/ACEC-FL CEI Liaison Meeting June 6, 2018 and

ACEC-FL CEI Sub-committee meeting on June 19, 2018

1. Summary of meeting with FDOT CEI Managers and ACEC-FL CEI Liaison a. MOT concerns of FDOT

i. CEIs inspection and documentation of correction for the installation and maintenance of barrier wall and crash cushions. CEI sub-committee sent out links to FDOT training to members – all CEI should review the training.

ii. Links sent to CEI sub-committee members:

Temporary Barrier Inspection Training: http://www.fdot.gov/construction/Engineers/MOT/Presents/Barrier%20Wall.pdf

Temporary Crash Cushion Inspection Training: http://www.fdot.gov/construction/Engineers/MOT/Presents/Crash%20Cushion.pdf

b. MOT Inspection form

i. It is the contractor’s responsibility to maintain the MOT, the changes to the form were done so that there is a record that the MOT was inspected.

ii. FDOT stressed the importance of following up with CPPR if the contractor has not installed the MOT properly.

iii. FDOT will review the form for minor changes: adding back the deficiency list (page 3), add senior inspector as a signatory of the form, revise the form instruction, add a space for the inspector to put the time of the inspection on the form.

c. MOT Training i. There will be new MOT Inspection training for CEI based on inspection of the

contractor’s work. The current MOT certification puts an emphasis on the design of the MOT.

2. CPAM review a. FDOT/ACEC will set up a procedure for consultants to have an opportunity to review draft

CPAM revisions 3. Drilled shaft certification requirement for 10 shafts to be inspected before certification

a. FDOT will review internally

4. CEI evaluations a. The goal of FDOT and CEI is for consistency throughout the districts

5. Hybrid Contracts:

a. FDOT will consider advertising project specific hybrid contracts for larger projects

EXHIBIT 4

b. ACEC to propose language to add an administrative position to manage the TWO paperwork

6. CEI cost vs. Construction cost discussion a. No longer an issue, FDOT will continue to monitoring the percentages as they currently are

within the performance measure range

7. Update from FDOT on 3-D design implementation in construction a. CO construction will be working on this in the coming months

8. Summary of ACEC-FL CEI sub-committee meeting on June 19, 2018

a. Briefed the committee on the above items

b. Asphalt Task team with FTBA i. CEI sub-committee will be working with FTBA creating a task team to review

inspection requirements on resurfacing projects. Awaiting on FTBA’s proposed members

c. Hybrid contracts i. Inspection staff approval- is FDOT expecting 2 years of experience and every

certification d. 75th%Q

i. A report that Districts are saying that people are over qualified and requesting that that staff be taken off the contract

ii. Compiling data from the district where it was reported to see if there is a trend

1 of 1 Specs – Handout 1

FES/ACEC-FL Transportation Committee Meeting July 10, 2018

Specifications Subcommittee Report 1. FDOT Specifications for review

During the past three months, Forty (40) specifications and other related revisions were offered by the FDOT Specifications office for comment. At this time, there are seven (7) proposed Specifications that are out for Industry Review. In addition, there are 6 updates (also for review) to the FDOT Materials manual (simply updating web references). The materials were being distributed to the ACEC-Fl Transportation Committee membership soon after being posted. See attached spreadsheet for a complete list since the last meeting. 2. FDOT Office of Design News –Transportation Syposium was held June 18th, 19th & 20th in

Orlando. Conference presentations may be posted soon on several topics. Some topics may be of interest to Engineers.

3. Subcommittee Membership currently includes Allen Schrumpf, Sean O’Keefe, Gus Quesada, and Wayne Petrone.

End of Report. Allen Schrumpf

EXHIBIT 5

ACEC-FL Transportation Committee Meeting - July 10, 2018 Specs - Handout 2

Review No.

File No. Title Description & AssessmentComments

Due

1SP6390100-

CIAC

Electrical Power Service Assemblies - Description (Contribution-In-Aid-Of

Construction)

Modify the language to minimize the need of supplemental agreements to address certain utility connection.

5/24/2018

2 9920700Highway Lighting

MaterialsProvides Luminaire retrofit kits as an option. 6/7/2018

3 7000102-2 Highway SigningModify requirement, since not all cases require a panel to be

installed with all retroreflective strips.6/7/2018

4 SP4550000DBStructures Foundations

Desing BuildMultiple changes in language (Note entire section is 70 pages) 6/7/2018

5 4550701 Strcutures Foundations Multiple changes in language (Note entire section is 20 pages) 6/7/20186 9160000 Bitumious Materials Multiple changes in language 6/14/2018

7 3370701Asphalt Concrete Friction

CourseChanges in language 6/14/2018

8 3340302Superpave Asphalt

ConcreteChanges in language 6/14/2018

9 3200602Hot Mix Asphalt - Plant Methods and Equipment

Changes in language 6/14/2018

10 2340500 Superpave Asphalt Base Changes in language 6/14/201811 0090504 Measurement and Payment Changes in language 6/14/2018

12 9900201Temporary Traffic Control

Device Materials

Clarify that the section refers to vehicular longitudinal channelizing devices. The new article was created to add info

and equirements for manufacturers seeking to submit their TMA devices to the APL.

6/21/2018

13 9850202 Geosynthetic Materials Changes in language/standards referenced. 6/21/2018

14 6710000 Traffic ControllersUpdate controllers that meet the current CALTRANS, NEMA, or

ACT specs.6/21/2018

15 6200401Grounding and Lightning

ProtectionDon't require this testing for roadway lighting installations.

Grounding for these installations is specified in Standard Plans.6/21/2018

16 5440000 Crash Cushions Changes in language/standards referenced. 6/21/2018

17 1100301 Clearing and GrubbingExpand stockpiling & parking within the selective clearing &

grubbing areas as well as plant preservation areas. 6/21/2018

18 1021102 Maintenance of Traffic Adds provisions for Temporary Lighting 6/21/2018

19 9900301Temporary Traffic Control

Device MaterialsChanges in language (Adds references to NEMA TS-5-2017) 6/28/2018

Allen Schrumpf, PE (DRMP) - Interim Subcommittee Chair

FES/ACEC-FL Specifications SubcommitteeFDOT Spec Revisions Proposed (April 4, 2018 Thru June 25, 2018)

A. Schrumpf specs 2 1 of 3


20 7110500Thermoplastic Pavement

MarkingsSpecify packaging labels will be accepted in lieu of a certification. 6/28/2018

Review No.

File No. Title Description & AssessmentComments

Due

21 7090500Two Reactive Componets

Pavement MarkingsSpecify packaging labels will be accepted in lieu of a certification. 6/28/2018

22 7010500Profiled Thermoplastic

Pavement MarkingsSpecify packaging labels will be accepted in lieu of a certification. 6/28/2018

23 7000302 Highway Signing For internally illuminated signs, add provisions for Door latches and

update NEMA spec year6/28/2018

24 6780200Traffic Controller

AccessoriesAdd Power switch std, modify certain standard reference years. 6/28/2018

25 6760206 Traffic Cabinets Shifts Auto Transfer switch provision from 676-2.6 to 676-2.6.1 6/28/2018

26 6540000Midblock Crosswalk

Enhancement AssembliesAdd requirements or modifies provisions for these units 6/28/2018

27 6530202Pedestrian Signal

AssembliesModify language to add egg crate louver option in lieu of visor and

amend wire terminal provisions6/28/2018

28 SP5800204FA Landscaping Modify Language to be consistent with other Landscaping specs. 6/28/2018

29 SP5800201 Landscaping Modify Language to be consistent with other Landscaping specs. 6/28/2018

30 1050410Contractor Quality Control

General RequirementsClarify language related to Contractor QC & Inspections 6/28/2018

31 1020917 Maintenance of TrafficClarify language on operating and maintaining Truck/Trailer

Mounted Attenuators6/28/2018

32 SP0080302A

Prosecution and Progress - Prosecution of Work

(Submission of Working Schedule)

Modify the Language to "Contract" Schedule, and add'l provisions 6/28/2018

33 0080302 Prosecution and Progress Modify the Language to "Contract" Schedule 6/28/2018

34 1020303 Maintenance of TrafficUpdate because Lane Closures, Mobile Operations and Traffic Pacing Operations no longer required to be submitted in Lane

Closure Information System7/5/2018

35 5460000 Rumble StripsSeparates provisions for Permanent and for Short Term Raised

Rumble Strips7/5/2018

36 7110401Thermoplastic Pavement

MarkingsAmends spec to exclude Short Term Raised Rumble Strips to wait to

place Thermo markings7/5/2018

37 9600000Post-Tensioning

Components

Provide additional criteria for flexible filler/unbonded systems. Modify approved criteria for accredited labs was expanded to include

ISO 17025 certified and AASHTO R18 certified facilities7/5/2018

38 4500000Precast Prestressed Concrete

ConstructionModifies language related to requirements for Quality Control

procedures, etc. (Note entire section is 35 pages)7/12/2018

39 3460000 Portland Cement ConcreteModifies language related to requirements for Quality Control procedures, terminology, etc. (Note entire section is 24 pages)

7/12/2018

ACEC-FL Specifications SubcommitteeFDOT Spec Revisions Proposed (April 4, 2018 Thru June 25, 2018)

Allen Schrumpf, PE (DRMP) - Interim Subcommittee Chair



40 4300100 Pipe Culverts Modifies language to address drilling plastic pipe. 7/19/2018

ACEC-FL Specifications Subcommittee


ACEC-FL XWY Sub-committee Report

June 28, 2018

1. Second Quarter 2018 Reports

a. CFX i. Meeting held on June 1, 2018.

ii. Minutes attached. b. JTA

i. Meeting held on June 12, 2018 ii. Met with Carter Rohan and Andy Rodgers, JTA.

iii. Discussed various topics including Automated Vehicle (AV) Initiative including conversion of Skyway Monorail to AV system. JTA attended AV National Summit in DC.

iv. New Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center (JRTC) underway. Scheduled for substantial completion in Jan 2020 and move in for Feb. or March 2020.

v. Major projects include D/B Kerwin with a groundbreaking on June 20, 2018.

c. MDX i. Meeting held on June 14, 2018 with MDX working group internally.

ii. Reviewed topics that need to be addressed with MDX. iii. Team members will reach out to Executive Director to garner continued

interest by MDX to work with ACEC-FL to assist in streamlining procurement process.

iv. Will provide examples from other XWY Authorities. d. THEA

i. Meeting scheduled for July 26, 2018. ii. List of future projects attached.

2. Upcoming Meeting Schedule

Transportation Committee Meeting Date

Location Proposed XWY Sub-Committee

Teleconference Date July 10, 2018 Tampa Wednesday, June 27, 2018 – 8:30 AM

October 9, 2018 Orlando Monday, September 24, 2018 – 4PM

EXHIBIT 6

CFX FICE Expressway Sub-Committee Summary

June 1, 2018

Attendees: Laura Kelley, Glenn Pressimone, Chaitali Prajapati, Jay Nagle, Eddy Gonzalez

• Glenn Pressimone discussed creating their own Plans Preparation Manual. o Goal to have a PPM within 12 months which will include general notes, filing system

structure, record management, standardized scope of services, negotiations, etc • CFX Work Plan look ahead

o Annual work plan Work plan approval in June 29 Board Meeting Draft plan is available $1.9 B next 5-year work plan

• $500 M proposed heavy expansion potential projects o Osceola Parkway o Poinciana o South Port o Lake Orange Connector o 408 Extension

• $750M existing improvements Six month look ahead

• 2 more 417 projects • 2 more 429 projects • CFX targeting a 6 month look ahead in July/August,

• CFX would like to move forward with electronic signing & sealing however have not finalized an approach.

• CFX looking for “Greener Technology” and the industry may be requested to provide input. • CFX will be requesting color .pdf plans for information purposes only. • Future meetings dates were discussed and the 3rd or 4th weeks are better for meeting (1st

week they are busy preparing for board meeting and 2nd week busy with board meeting). Future meeting to be scheduled.

of 2

List of Future Proposed Projects 2018

Project Name

Description

Estimated Release

Estimated Board

Approval

Investment Advisory Services

Investment Advisory Services for operating and capital funds.

January

March

19th Street Trailhead @ Selmon Greenway Connector Design

Prepare construction documents in accordance with FDOT Local Agency Program (LAP) for the 19th Street Trailhead @ Selmon Greenway Connector.

March

June

Selmon East Resurfacing

Project involves pavement restoration, rehabilitation, and resurfacing of the Selmon Expressway from 78th Street to I-75.

April

June

Selmon South Safety Project

Safety improvement project involving filling and piping (where necessary) the existing median ditch and adding median pavement to provide wider inside shoulders and refuge lanes as well as a median barrier wall. Project limits are from Himes Avenue to Hyde Park Avenue.

May

September

PD&E Study for the Selmon South Improvement Projects

PD&E effort involves the preparation of a State Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for capacity improvements for the Selmon Expressway from Himes Avenue to Morgan Street. Study will determine number of additional lanes that will be needed and what lane configuration works best for the roadway as far as constructability and maintenance of traffic.

June

October

Meridian Ultimate Phase 1 (Twiggs Street Widening)

Meridian Ultimate improvements are a series of improvements designed to facilitate ingress/egress for traffic traveling from/to the Selmon Expressway/Reversible Elevated Lanes (REL). The Phase 1 project includes REL ramp improvements and the widening of Twiggs Street to a five-lane section between Meridian and Nebraska Avenues to better accommodate exiting REL traffic heading westbound on Twiggs.

July

September

of 2

Meridian Ultimate Phase 2 (PD&E - Nebraska Ave)

Meridian Ultimate improvements are a series of improvements designed to facilitate ingress/egress for traffic traveling from/to the Selmon Expressway/Reversible Elevated Lanes (REL). The Phase 2 PD&E study will look at capacity improvements on Nebraska Avenue between Twiggs Street and the intersection of Nebraska Avenue with Cass Street/Nuccio Parkway and will determine number of lanes, amount of right-of-way required, as well as potential social and environmental impacts of the proprosed work.

August

Nov/Dec

Selmon East Improvement Projects

RS&H is currently evaluating potential capacity improvement options on the Selmon Expressway from downtown Tampa to I-75. It is anticipated that at the conclusion of the study, THEA will be provided with recommendations for several capacity improvement projects. These projects may require a PD&E Study that encompasses the entire corridor, or multiple PD&E studies for particular project segments. Ultimately, there will be a series of projects proposed for design and construction. The project delivery methods are to be determined.

September

December

For information concerning this list, contact Man Le, Contracts & Procurement Manager, at [email protected]

March 28, 2018

mailto:[email protected]

EDC-5 Innovations (2019-2020)ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION METHODSConventional subsurface exploration methods provide limited data for project design, which can result in constructability issues and increased cost. Advanced geotechnical exploration methods offer solutions for generating more accurate geotechnical characterizations that improve design and construction, leading to shorter project delivery times and reducing the risks associated with limited data on subsurface site conditions.

COLLABORATIVE HYDRAULICS: ADVANCING TO THE NEXT GENERATION OF ENGINEERING (CHANGE)

Advances in hydraulic modeling tools are providing a more comprehensive understanding of complex flow patterns at river crossings versus traditional modeling techniques. These 2D hydraulic modeling and 3D computer visualization technologies also facilitate more effective communication and collaboration, improving agencies’ ability to design safer and more cost-effective and resilient structures on waterways.

PROJECT BUNDLINGMany States continue to see an increase in the number of highways and bridges needing attention, and those that are posted for reduced loads adversely affect travel, freight movement, and emergency response times. Project bundling helps address this national issue. By awarding a single contract for several similar preservation, rehabilitation, or replacement projects, agencies can streamline design and construction, reduce costs, and effectively decrease transportation project backlogs.

REDUCING RURAL ROADWAY DEPARTURESReducing fatalities on rural roads remains a major challenge in the United States. Roadway departures on the rural road network account for one-third of traffic fatalities. Systemic application of proven roadway departure countermeasures, such as rumble strips, friction treatments, and clear zones, helps keep vehicles in their travel lanes, reduce the potential for crashes, and reduce the severity of those crashes that do occur.

SAFE TRANSPORTATION FOR EVERY PEDESTRIAN (STEP)Pedestrians accounted for 16 percent of all roadway fatalities, and crashes are predominantly at midblock and intersection crossing locations. As pedestrian safety continues to be a concern for transportation agencies across the country, cost-effective countermeasures are available to assist practitioners in providing safer crossings for all pedestrians.

(over)

Mobility ∙ Safety ∙ Quality ∙ Environment ∙ Shortening Project Delivery

EXHIBIT 7

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/geotech_methods.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/change2.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/change2.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/project_bundling.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/roadway_departures.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/step2.cfm

Every Day Counts (EDC), a State-based initiative of FHWA’s Center for Accelerating Innovation, works with State, local and private sector partners to encourage the adoption of proven technologies and innovations aimed at shortening and enhancing project delivery.

For additional information, please visit:

www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts

www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/contacts.cfm

UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS (UAS)UAS can benefit nearly all aspects of highway transportation, from inspection to construction and operations, by collecting high-quality data automatically or remotely. These relatively low-cost devices allow agencies to speed the data collection needed for better-informed decisions while reducing the adverse impacts of temporary work zones on work crews and the traveling public.

USE OF CROWDSOURCING TO ADVANCE OPERATIONSState DOTs and local agencies traditionally rely on data from fixed sensors and cameras that monitor single locations to operate and manage their transportation systems. Using new sources of crowdsourced traffic data, agencies have access to large amounts of reliable, real-time data with more geographic coverage of the transportation system than with traditional sources. Combining crowdsourced data with traditional data sources enables better management and operation of the transportation system through faster detection of and response to problems, faster and more accurate traveler information to the public, and more proactive and effective operations strategies.

VALUE CAPTURE: CAPITALIZING ON THE VALUE CREATED BY TRANSPORTATIONWhen public agencies invest in transportation assets that improve access and increase opportunity in the community, adjacent property owners benefit through greater land value and other economic impacts. Many techniques are available to the public sector to share in a portion of this increased land value to build, maintain, or reinvest in the transportation system.

VIRTUAL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENTRobust public engagement during transportation planning and project development can accelerate project delivery by identifying issues and concerns early in the process. Virtual public involvement techniques, such as telephone town halls and online meetings, offer convenient, efficient, and low-cost methods for informing the public, encouraging their participation, and receiving their input.

WEATHER-RESPONSIVE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESMore than 20 percent of crashes are weather-related, and weather-associated delays can result in significant losses in productivity and efficiency. Weather-responsive traffic and maintenance management strategies support State and local transportation agencies in deploying improved traffic control and traveler information systems that will significantly reduce highway crashes and delays resulting from adverse weather. It also promotes anti-icing strategies for reducing chloride use.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts/

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/contacts.cfm#edc5

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/uas.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/crowdsourcing.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/value_capture.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/virtual_public_involvement.cfm

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_5/weather_strategies.cfm

�� !�� "�#�$�% ��&��

��$$$'(�$�'��'#��%��%��)��*��#��*&��'�(& ��

+,-,./012345064.78.9326:173424;76.

<=>=?@ABCDEFG@HBI>[email protected]:0U.VW06X0Y.-Z.[2:\;6]476Y./ .PQ_Q.PQPabccadQQQ

e=KM=?BfN?BIgg=A=?@MDKEBhKKNi@MDNK

Vj.k750ZW03U./2U.7X64:-9j.R04S73lVj/./0576:4324;76m0:7X3n0:

I>i@Kg=>Bo=NM=gFKDg@ABpqrAN?@MDNKBs=MFN>L

hJr?Ni=>BLNAtMDNKLB@K>BKNK>=LM?tgMDi=BJ=MFN>LBfN?BE=K=?@MDKEBMF=BE=NM=gFKDg@ABr?NfDA=LBtL=>BfN?Br?Nu=gMB>=LDEKv

+6w03:426w;6].\7S.:Xx:X382n0.:;40.n76w;4;76:.2880n4.137y0n4.w0:;]6.26w.n76:43Xn4;76.;:.n3;4;n2z.47.06:X3;6].:280.26w.n7:4a0880n4;W0.137y0n4:,j51z05064;6].2wW26n0w.]0740n\6;n2z.0{1z7324;76.504\7w:.S;zz.;5137W0.137y0n4.w0n;:;76:Y.z02w;6].47.:\734060w.137y0n4.w0z;W03U.4;50:.26w.n7:4:2W;6]:.4\24.:;]6;8;n264zU.x0608;4.4\0.432W0z;6].1Xxz;n,

hJr?Ni=>B|t}Lt?f@g=BhKi=LMDE@MDNKB~@M@

/;8803;6].:;40.n76w;4;76:.30130:064.2.:;]6;8;n264.6X5x03.78.n7:4.0:n2z24;76:.26w.w0z2U:.76.\;]\S2U.26w.x3;w]0.n76:43Xn4;76.137y0n4:,.9\0:0.137xz05:23;:0.S\06.4\0.:;40.n76w;4;76:.06n7X64030w.w;8803.8375.4\7:0.w7nX50640w.;6.4\0.]0740n\6;n2z.301734:.26w.n76432n4.w7nX5064:.w0W0z710w.8375130:n3;14;W0.26w.5;6;52z.:Xx:X382n0.0{1z7324;76.137]325:,.X33064zUY.w0:;]6.06];6003:.30zU.76.z;5;40w.;6W0:4;]24;76.w242.873.:Xx:X382n0n\232n403;�24;76.26w.;680306n0.47.]0603240.4\0.]0740n\6;n2z.1378;z0.X:0w.873.4\0.w0:;]6,.+68734X6240zUY.:;6n0.]37X6w.n76w;4;76:.;68zX06n;6].w0:;]626w.n76:43Xn4;76.n26.W23U.S;w0zU.S;4\;6.4\0.137y0n4.:;40Y.52l;6].w0n;:;76:.S;4\.;6n751z040.73.z;5;40w.;6873524;76.n26.30:Xz4.;6.n7:4zUn76:43Xn42x;z;4U.;::X0:.26w.nz2;5:,

j::X0:.30:Xz4;6].8375.;62w0�X240.:Xx:X382n0.;6W0:4;]24;76:.z0w.4\0.;6wX:43U.47.w0W0z71.676w0:43Xn4;W0.]071\U:;n2z.504\7w:.n212xz0.78.088;n;064zU502:X3;6].1371034;0:.4\24.n26.x0.n7330z240w.47.4\0.06];6003;6].1371034;0:.30�X;30w.873.w0:;]6.26w.n76:43Xn4;76,.9\0:0.504\7w:Y.;6.n75x;624;76.S;4\w3;zz;6]Y.:251z;6]Y.26w.40:4;6].40n\6;�X0:Y.;5137W0.4\0.n768;w06n0.;6.26w.30wXn0.4\0.X6n0342;64U.78.4\0.]0740n\6;n2z.n\232n403;�24;76,

R76w0:43Xn4;W0.]071\U:;n2z.504\7w:.137W;w0.4S7aw;506:;762z.�P/�.26w.4\300aw;506:;762z.�b/�.:Xx:X382n0.;52]0:Y.w;:4;6]X;:\;6].52403;2z.26w]37X6wS2403.n\26]0:.x74\.z24032zzU.26w.S;4\.w014\.2n37::.2.137y0n4.:;40,.�;:n\232n403;�0w.]37X6wS2403.26w.74\03.X6264;n;1240w.�n\26]0wn76w;4;76:�.4\24.w0z2U.137y0n4:.26w.0:n2z240.n7:4:.n26.x0.30wXn0w.73.2z47]04\03.2W7;w0w,.[\06.n7X1z0w.S;4\.321;w.26w.30z;2xz0.;6a:;4X.8;0zw.40:4;6]Y137y0n4.w0:;]6:.x0n750.5730.088;n;064.26w.z0::.n76:03W24;W0,

�=K=fDML

�=>tg=>B�DL�v.m0wXn;6].X6n0342;64;0:.;6.:Xx:X382n0.n76w;4;76:.5;4;]240:.w0:;]6.26w.n76:43Xn4;76.3;:l:,hJr?Ni=>B�t@ADMHvBj5137W;6].n768;w06n0.;6.4\0.]0740n\6;n2z.n\232n403;�24;76.30wXn0:.X660n0::23U.n76:03W24;:5.;6.w0:;]6.26w.0:42xz;:\0:.25730.30z;2xz0.x2:;:.873.w0:;]6.26w.n76:43Xn4;76.78.87X6w24;76:.26w.74\03.]0740n\6;n2z.8024X30:.;512n4;6].4\0.\;]\S2U.:U:405,Igg=A=?@M=>B�?Nu=gMB~=ADi=?Hv.-;6n0.2.:;]6;8;n264.6X5x03.78.n76:43Xn4;76.w0z2U:.n26.x0.2443;xX40w.47.;62w0�X240.l67Sz0w]0.78.:Xx:X382n0.:;40n76w;4;76:Y.676w0:43Xn4;W0.]071\U:;n2z.504\7w:.;5137W0.w0n;:;76.52l;6].26w.n76:43Xn42x;z;4UY.137W;w;6].4;50.26w.n7:4.:2W;6]:.8734326:173424;76.2]06n;0:,

�� !�� "�#�$�% ��&��

��$$$'(�$�'��'#��%��%��)��*��#��*&��'�(& ��

+,-,./01/,2./34-5,65.

789:;<=>=;?@AB;A<C>DE?=FADFC<=@@B;GHA8:?:A:<IEB@B?BC;HA8:?:A>:;:G=>=;?HA:;8AJ:F8K:F=AJ:9=AB>DFC9=8A?J=ALE;<?BC;:MB?NA:;8A?B>=AF=IEBF=>=;?@;==8=8A?CADFCGF=@@AG=C?=<J;B<:MA=ODMCF:?BC;A>=?JC8@PAQ?:?=A8=D:F?>=;?@ACLA?F:;@DCF?:?BC;A<EFF=;?MNAB;<CFDCF:?B;GA?J=@=A:89:;<=8A>=?JC8@AKB?JB;DFCR=<?AG=C?=<J;B<:MA@B?=A<J:F:<?=FBS:?BC;@AB;<ME8=AT:MBLCF;B:HAUMCFB8:HAVB;;=@C?:HAVB@@CEFBHA:;8A?J=AWLLB<=ACLAU=8=F:MAX:;8@AYBGJK:NP

Z0[,-5,\

].[/6_.4\AUY 7Aa=@CEF<=AT=;?=FAbcdceAfghijkhgAl=;R:>B;PaB9=F@m8C?PGC9

+6n-\/o6520n\AUY 7AWLLB<=ACLAp;LF:@?FE<?EF=AbhdheAjjgiqffcAQBM:@PrB<JCM@m8C?PGC9

s:G=AM:@?A>C8BLB=8AC;AtE;=AqjHAhdqu

�� ! "�� #$%�� &�'��'

$��(��%%% )$%� �� #��''��'��'��*��$�'#�� )& ��

+,-,./012345064.78.9326:173424;76.

<=>=?@ABCDEFG@HBI>[email protected]:0U.VW06X0Y.-Z.[2:\;6]476Y./ .PQ_Q.PQPabccadQQQ

e=KM=?BfN?BIgg=A=?@MDKEBhKKNi@MDNK

Vj.k750ZW03U./2U.7X64:-9j.R04S73lVj/./0576:4324;76m0:7X3n0:

eNAA@oN?@MDi=BCH>?@pADgLqBI>i@KgDKEBMNBMF=Br=sMBt=K=?@MDNKBNfBuKEDK==?DKEBveCIrtuw

r=sMxE=K=?@MDNKBFH>?@pADgBMNNALBDJy?Ni=BMF=BpK>=?LM@K>DKEBNfBgNJyA=sBDKM=?@gMDNKLBo=MG==KB?Di=?BN?BgN@LM@AB=KiD?NKJ=KMLB@K>M?@KLyN?M@MDNKB@LL=MLzB=K@oADKEBo=MM=?B>=LDEKzB=KF@Kg=>BgNJJpKDg@MDNKzB@K>BJN?=B=ffDgD=KMBy?N{=gMB>=ADi=?H|

j6.30n064.U023:Y.30:7X3n0.2]06n;0:.\2W0.;6n302:0}.4\0;3.87nX:.76.4\0.2::0::5064.78.06W;37650642~.;512n4:.2::7n;240}.S;4\.3;W03.n37::;6]:,.V:.230:X~4Y.\U}32X~;n.06];6003:.230.30:176:;�~0.873.}0576:4324;6].4\24.;512n4:.\2W0.�006.2W7;}0}.73.5;6;5;�0},.932};4;762~.\U}32X~;n.477~:.}7.674:X11734.4\0:0.~0W0~:.78.;6�X;3U.26}.262~U:;:,.X33064.57}0~;6].40n\6;�X0:.n75576~U.X:0}.873.\U}32X~;n.}0:;]6.211~U.:0W032~.:;51~;8U;6]2::X514;76:.4\24.n26.~02}.47.7W03~U.n76:03W24;W0.73.;62nnX3240.30:X~4:,

/0W0~715064:.;6.4S7a};506:;762~.�P/�.\U}32X~;n.57}0~;6].26}.4\300a};506:;762~.�b/�.n751X403.W;:X2~;�24;76.40n\67~7]U.\2W0.52}0.17S038X~477~:.2W2;~2�~0.4\24.]3024~U.06\26n0.4\0.X6}03:426};6].78.n751~0�.3;W03.26}.n72:42~.\U}32X~;n:,.j6.2}};4;76Y.4\0.06\26n0}.W;:X2~;�24;76:.2::;:406];6003:.;6.n755X6;n24;6].\U}32X~;n.n76};4;76:.47.74\03:.S;4\;6.4\0.137�0n4.}0~;W03U.137n0::.�1~266;6]Y.06W;37650642~Y.}0:;]6Y.26}.n76:43Xn4;76�Y30:7X3n0.2]06n;0:Y.4\0.1X�~;nY.26}.74\03.:42l0\7~}03:,

r=sMxt=K=?@MDNKBCH>?@pADgB�N>=ADKEB�NNAL

V}W26n0}.\U}32X~;n.57}0~;6].40n\67~7];0:.78803.1~26603:Y.:n;064;:4:Y.26}.06];6003:.4\0.477~:.47.}01;n4.:10n;8;n.1\U:;n2~Y.06W;37650642~Y.26}.\2�;424n\232n403;:4;n:.4\37X]\.b/.W;:X2~;�24;76.78.8~7SY.W0~7n;4UY.26}.}014\.2~76].26.064;30.n\2660~.302n\,.9\0:0.477~:.S;~~.;6n302:0.4\0.l67S~0}]0.782]06n;0:.26}.4\0;3.2�;~;4U.47.52l0.5730.n7:4a0880n4;W0.\U}32X~;n.}0n;:;76:.S;4\;6.4\0;3.137�0n4.}0~;W03U,.V}};4;762~.211~;n24;76:.;6n~X}0.n751~0��3;}]0.n37::;6]:Y.262~U:;:.78.�3;}]0.714;76:Y.n751~0�.8~77}1~2;6.]075043UY.8~77}.3;:l.2::0::5064Y.8~77}.5211;6]Y.n\2660~.30:47324;76Y.8;:\.\2�;424262~U:;:Y.:0};5064.4326:1734.26}.:n7X3.262~U:;:Y.n\2660~.:42�;~;4U.26}.n7X6403502:X30.262~U:;:Y.26}.74\03:,

[\;~0.P/.57}0~;6].40n\67~7];0:.\2W0.2}W26n0}.:;]6;8;n264~U.;6.30n064.U023:Y.6742�~0.2}W26n05064:.\2W0.2~:7.�006.52}0.;6.�3;}]0.:n7X3.30:023n\26}.0W2~X24;76.477~:Y.062�~;6].06];6003:.47.52l0.5730.;687350}.26}.2nnX3240.2::0::5064:.78.674.76~U.4\0.:n7X3.}014\.174064;2~Y.�X4.2~:7.4\0.~7n24;7626}.0�4064.78.:n7X3,

�=K=fDML

hJy?Ni=>B�p@ADMHB@K>B�=LDAD=KgH|.�04403.30130:06424;76:.137W;}0.1~266;6].26}.}0:;]6.4025:.S;4\.�04403.}242Y.~02};6].47.;5137W0}.137�0n4�X2~;4U,uKF@Kg=>BeNAA@oN?@MDNK|.b/.]321\;n2~.W;:X2~;�24;76:.}03;W0}.8375.P/.57}0~;6].78803.�04403.477~:.873.n755X6;n24;6].4\0.78406.n751~0�;64032n4;76.�04S006.S2403S2U:Y.4\0.4326:173424;76.;6832:43Xn4X30Y.26}.4\0.:X337X6};6].06W;3765064,�M?=@JADK=>B�=ADi=?H|.j5137W0}.n7~~2�7324;76.4\37X]\.P/.26}.b/.W;:X2~;�24;76:.78803:.302~.174064;2~.873.30}Xn;6].06W;37650642~Y.30]X~2473UY06];6003;6]Y.26}.74\03.;510};5064:.47.137�0n4.}0~;W03U,

�� ! "�� #$%�� &�'��'

$��(��%%% )$%� �� #��''��'��'��*��$�'#�� )& ��

+,-,./01/,2./34-5,65.

789:;<=<>?@A8B8=<CD8;EF@G;@H898;E@?8IHF@:IB8@8JCI;A8A@E:8@DIHK8E@<L@:?AHIM=G9@D<A8=G;>@CH<>HIDF@I;A@E<<=FN@7:8F8@E<<=F@FG>;GLG9I;E=?@IABI;98E:8@FEIE8@<L@CHI9EG98@I;A@<LL8H@H8I=@C<E8;EGI=@E<@FEH8ID=G;8@CH<O89E@A8B8=<CD8;EP@G;9=MAG;>@8;BGH<;D8;EI=P@H8>M=IE<H?P@I;A@8;>G;88HG;>@I9EGBGEG8FN

Q<FE@REIE8F@:IB8@I;@ISIH8;8FF@<L@E:8F8@;8S@:?AHIM=G9@D<A8=G;>@E<<=F@I;A@E:8GH@T8;8LGEFN@UAAGEG<;I==?P@VWXU@:IF@MCAIE8A@ES<@YIEG<;I=@WG>:SI?Z;FEGEME8@9<MHF8F@E<@FMCC<HE@IABI;98A@D<A8=G;>@E89:;<=<>G8F[@\]_abcdeadfghi jcgadkhlhmancoehfphqakr]fshtduofurbcdpe@I;A@qsjofvgauceakdhlhwflchxoajkceN

y0z,-5,{

+50,,/|0}-z@VWXU@~8F<MH98@�8;E8H@��@��@R9<EENW<>I;�A<EN><B

�465/�40�z@VWXU@~8F<MH98@�8;E8H@��@��@�HG9NHN�H<S;�A<EN><B

�.{0�45.{

VWXU@W?AHIM=G9@�;>G;88HG;>

@

�.�6z-4{��6�.0{

Z;;<BIEG<;@RC<E=G>:E[@�<==IT<HIEGB8@W?AHIM=G9F[@UABI;9G;>@E:8@Y8JE@�8;8HIEG<;@<L@�;>G;88HG;>@��WUY��@��[��@��

�;��8DI;A@X8TG;IHF

��@RMDDGE@�H8IK<ME@R8FFG<;

@�I>8@=IFE@D<AGLG8A@<;@�M;8@��P@��

�� !�" #�$��%��

��&%��!!!'( !�'��'��)��)��)��"��"��%��*��&��*+��'�($ ��

,-.-/0123456175/89/:437;284535<87/

=>?>@ABCDEFGHAICJ?KELEMN@ANEOL/PQRR/S1T/U14;1V/WX17Y1Z/.[/\3;]<7587Z/0_/QRaR/QRQbcddbeRRR

f>LN>@CgO@CJhh>B>@ANELFCiLLOjANEOL

_Wk/l861[X14V/03V/_8Y75;.:k_/S15T84mWk0/01687;5435<87n1;8Y4o1;

p@Oq>hNCrsL?BELF

p@Oq>hNCtsL?BELFuAHA@?ELFCACMELFB>ChOLN@AhNCgO@CM>j>@ABCv@>M>@jANEOLwC@>GAtEBENANEOLwCO@C@>vBAh>K>LNCv@Oq>hNMuhALCMN@>AKBEL>C?>MEFLCAL?hOLMN@shNEOLwC@>?sh>ChOMNMwCAL?C>AM>Cv@Oq>hNCtAhxBOFMy

z37V/.5351;/o875<7Y1/58/;11/37/<7o413;1/<7/]<]T3V;/37{/|4<{1;/5]35/711{/355175<87Z/89517/87/5]1<4/}8o3}/;V;516;-/W;/3/41;Y}5Z/637V/89/5]1;1]<]T3V;/37{/|4<{1;/341/|1<7/28;51{/984/41{Yo1{/}83{;Z/T]<o]/3{X14;1}V/3991o5;/543X1}/5<61Z/941<]5/68X16175;Z/37{/161417oV/41;287;1/5<61;-

~48�1o5/|Y7{}<7/89914;/5]1/285175<3}/984/o8;5/37{/5<61/;3X<7;/{<41o5}V/|1719<o<3}/58/41{Yo<7/5]1/5437;284535<87/248�1o5/|3om}8-/k5/3}}8T;/5]1822845Y7<5V/58/3{{41;;/637V/248�1o5;/93o<7/;<6<}34/711{;/Y;<7/o86687/84/<778X35<X1/41]3|<}<535<87/37{/412}3o16175/;54351<1;/37{/53o5<o;/<7/3o8;5b1991o5<X1/637714-

rsL?BELFCp@Oq>hNMCfALC�Aj>C�EK>CAL?CfOMN

~48�1o5/|Y7{}<7/<;/3/248o1;;/|V/T]<o]/3/;<7}1/o87543o5/3T34{/<;/Y;1{/58/o87543o5/984/5]1/241;14X35<87Z/41]3|<}<535<87Z/84/412}3o16175/89/;1X143}248�1o5;-/:]1/o87543o5/63V/|1/248oY41{/<7/;1X143}/{<9914175/T3V;/37{/63V/<7o}Y{1/|85]/{1;<7/37{/o87;54Yo5<87/<7/5]1/8X143}}/;o821Z/{1217{<7/875]1/248oY416175/615]8{-/:]1/o87543o5/o8Y}{/o8X14/3/;<7}1/o8Y75VZ/{<;54<o5Z/84/.5351Z/37{/<5/63V/|1/5<141{/58/3}}8T/3/o86|<735<87/89/T84m/5V21;�{1;<7Z/241;14X35<87Z/41]3|<}<535<87Z/84/o862}151/412}3o16175�-/k7/;861/o3;1;Z/5]1/o87543o5/63V/<7o}Y{1/825<87/V134;-/�Y7{}<7/{1;<7/37{o87;54Yo5<87/o87543o5;/;3X1;/248oY416175/5<61Z/}1X1431;/{1;<7/1�2145<;1Z/3o]<1X1;/1o8786<1;/89/;o3}1Z/37{/|Y<}{;/686175Y6/58/63<753<7/o4<5<o3}3;;15;/5]35/341/588/89517/<7/3/{19<o<175/o87{<5<87-

r>L>gENM

��v>?EN>?Cp@Oq>hNC�>BEj>@Iy/~48�1o5/|Y7{}<7/o37/]1}2/3{{41;;/5]1/735<873}/<;;Y1/89/|3om}8 1{/5437;284535<87/248�1o5;-�>?sh>?CfOMNy/�Y7{}<7/248�1o5;/T<5]/;]341{/9135Y41;/}1X1431;/{1;<7/1�2145<;1/37{/3o]<1X1;/1o8786<1;/89/;o3}1-�ggEhE>LhIyC,;<7/3/;<7}1/o87543o5/3T34{/984/;1X143}/;<6<}34/248�1o5;/;54136}<71;/{1;<7/37{/o87;54Yo5<87/37{/;3X1;/248oY416175/5<61-

�NAN>COgCNG>Cp@AhNEh>

~48�1o5/|Y7{}<7/199845;/|V/.5351/{123456175;/89/5437;284535<87/�0�:;�/<7/z<;;8Y4<Z/�]<8Z/~177;V}X37<3Z/�184<3Z/01}3T341Z/37{/�4187/]3X141{Yo1{/o8;5;/37{/;54136}<71{/{1;<7/37{/o87;54Yo5<87-/�Y7{}<7/3}}8T1{/5]16/58/53m1/3{X37531/89/9Y7{<7/822845Y7<5<1;/37{/�Y<om}V/<6248X1}341/7Y6|14;/89/|4<{1;-

�84/1�362}1Z/5]1/~177;V}X37<3/0�:/�~1770�:�/o87{Yo51{/3/5]411bo8Y75V/2<}85/248�1o5/5]35/41|Y<}5Z/412}3o1{Z/84/4168X1{/eP/o8Y75Vb8T71{;54Yo5Y41;/984/�Q/6<}}<87Z/41;Y}5<7/<7/3/Q�R/214o175/;3X<7;/87/{1;<7/37{/3/�P/214o175/;3X<7;/87/o87;54Yo5<87-/~1770�:/98}}8T1{/Y2/87/5]<;

�� !�" #�$��%��

��&%��!!!'( !�'��'��)��)��)��"��"��%��*��&��*+��'�($ ��

,-../,,01203-4,-567080,989/:5;/<0==>?145;7/01-6;@5670.A6948.9B

CD8E3@/,0AF034AG/.901-6;@567034A748E,H

I/@8:84/0IJK0-,/,080,/45/,0AF0145;7/01-6;@5670.A6948.9,09A08;;4/,,034/,/4L895A605,,-/,0A60145;7/,05607AA;086;0F8540.A6;595A6B0KM/0N45;7/O8687/E/690P/.95A60345A4595Q/,09M/0:A4R086;09M/0O8569/686./0I5,945.9,08;E565,9/409M/0.A6948.9,B0S4AG/.90,.A3/,056.@-;/0;/.R0,/8@567<0145;7/38569567<0;/.R0389.M567<086;0GA56904/3854BJM5A0IJKT,0N45;7/0S8496/4,M530S4A748E05,04/[email protected]/[email protected];7/,0AL/40W02/84,0F-6;/;09M4A-7M0XYUV0E5@@5A60560Z4869[695.53895A60\/L/6-/0]/M5.@/,0Z[\]CC01A6;,_BZ/A47580IJKT,0I/,576?N-5@;0N45;7/0\/3@8./E/690S4A748E<0:M5.M01/7860560UVY<0:5@@04/3@8./[email protected]@0145;7/,0AL/40Y<Va=0.8@/6;840;82,9M4A-7M06/:04/L/6-/08L85@81@/0-6;/409M/0K486,3A49895A60b-6;5670[.90AF0UVY=BO5,,A-450IJKT,0X>=0E5@@5A60P8F/0c0PA-6;0N45;7/0dE34AL/E/690S4A748E04/3@8./;0A404/M815@5989/;0>VU0P989/0145;7/,0AL/40WB=02/84,<56.@-;5670==e0145;7/,04/3@8./;09M4A-7M080,567@/0;/,576?1-5@;0.A6948.9BJ4/7A60IJKT,0XYBW015@@5A60J4/7A60K486,3A49895A60d6L/,9E/690[.90ddd0P989/0N45;7/0I/@5L/420S4A748E04/3@8./;0A404/3854/;0UfY0145;7/,0-,567>f034AG/.901-6;@/,B

ghijkljm

nhophqrksltk0buv[0JFF5./0AF0d6F48,94-.9-4/0UVU_0W ?YWeU0\AE/ABZ84.58w;A9B7AL

xkytzq{i|p}ps0buv[0\/,A-4./0~/69/40eVe_0ffY?YafY0I8L5;B�6R/F/4w;A9B7AL

S87/0@8,90EA;5F5/;0A60�-6/0YW<0UVY>

�� !��"�� #�$��

"��%&"��%��%��'��'��'��(��(��%�&$ ��

)*+*,-./0123.42,56,71048/51202954,

:;<;=>?@ABCDE>F@G<HBIBJK=>KBLI,MNOO,P.Q,R.18.S,TU.4V.W,+X,Y08Z94[254W,-\,NO]O,NON_aa_bOOO

c;IK;=@dL=@Gee;?;=>KBIC@fIILg>KBLI

\Th,i53.XU.1S,-0S,\5V428+7h\,P.2Q51jTh-,-.35482102954k.85V1l.8

m;<neBIC@mn=>?@mL><E>F@o;p>=Kn=;J

qFJK;HBe@>pp?Be>KBLI@Ld@p=Lg;I@=L><E>F@<;p>=Kn=;@eLnIK;=H;>Jn=;J@rF@qK>K;@>I<@?Le>?@>C;IeB;J@LI@=n=>?@=L><J@e>I@D>g;@>@pLJBKBg;@BHp>eKLI@J>d;KF@>I<@=;<ne;@K=>ddBe@<;>KDJs

k.tVl94[,6020u929.8,54,1V10u,150t8,1.30948,0,30v51,lZ0uu.4[.,94,2Z.,)492.t,+202.8*,h4,NOMaW,MwW]O,u9U.8,Q.1.,u582,54,1V10u,150t8x351.,2Z04,Z0u6,560uu,210669l,t.02Z8x.U.4,2Z5V[Z,54uS,M,/.1l.42,56,2Z.,)*+*,/5/Vu02954,u9U.8,94,1V10u,01.08*,+Vy8204290u,806.2S,93/15U.3.428,l04,y.,t9669lVu2,25,30j.y.l0V8.,1V10u,150t8,0ll5V42,651,0//15z9302.uS,{O,/.1l.42,56,/Vyu9l,150t,39u.0[.,04t,01.,562.4,5/.102.t,yS,u5l0u,0[.4l9.8,Q92Z,u9392.t,1.85V1l.8,04t2.lZ49l0u,.z/.1298.,94,806.2S,040uS898,51,/u04494[*

7Z.1.,01.,5//512V4929.8,651,+202.,t./0123.428,56,21048/51202954,|-}78~W,u5l0u,0[.4l9.8W,04t,�5l0u,7.lZ49l0u,T8898204l.,�15[103,|�7T�~,\.42.18,2594l1.08.,V80[.,56,/15U.4,806.2S,l5V42.13.08V1.8W,255u8W,04t,52Z.1,1.85V1l.8,25,351.,.66.l29U.uS,j../,U.Z9lu.8,94,2Z.91,210U.u,u04.8W,1.tVl.,2Z./52.4290u,651,l108Z.8,QZ.4,U.Z9lu.8,t5,u.0U.,2Z.91,u04.8W,04t,1.tVl.,2Z.,8.U.192S,56,2Z58.,l108Z.8,2Z02,t5,5llV1*

q>d;=@mn=>?@mL><J

71048/51202954,0[.4l9.8,l04,V8.,U0195V8,040uS898W,t90[45829lW,04t,l5V42.13.08V1.,8.u.l2954,255u8,25,8S82.39l0uuS,0//uS,806.2S,21.023.428,2Z02,01.,948S4l,Q92Z,2Z.91,+202.�8,+2102.[9l,i9[ZQ0S,+06.2S,�u04,|+i+�~*,YZ.1.,t020,98,u9392.tW,0[.4l9.8,l04,8.2,Z9[Z_/195192S,/0103.2.18,|.*[*,U5uV3.,l192.190~651,8S82.39l,0//u9l02954,56,150tQ0S,t./012V1.,l5V42.13.08V1.8,y08.t,54,1.8.01lZ,51,t020,6153,8939u01,0[.4l9.8*,Xz03/u.8,94luVt.�

+9[40[.,04t,301j94[8,t.u94.02.,u04.,.t[.8W,0u9[43.42,lZ04[.8W,04t,Z.u/,t19U.18,40U9[02.*kV3yu.,8219/8,0u.12,t15Q8S,04t,t98210l2.t,t19U.18,t196294[,6153,2Z.91,u04.*�19l2954,21.023.428,02,lV1U.8,51,52Z.1,93/512042,u5l029548,1.tVl.,u588,56,l54215u*

+Z5Vut.18W,+06.2SXt[.+�W,04t,lu.01,�54.8,/15U9t.,5//512V4929.8,651,0,806.,1.l5U.1S,QZ.4,t19U.18,u.0U.,2Z.,150tQ0S*k50t89t.,Z01tQ01.,l04,1.tVl.,2Z.,8.U.192S,56,150tQ0S,t./012V1.,l108Z.8*

�;I;dBKJ

q>d;=@mL><Js,7Z.,/15/58.t,l5V42.13.08V1.8,01.,/15U.4,25,1.tVl.,8.U.1.,l108Z.8*�nBe�@o;p?LFH;IKs@\108Z,35t969l02954,60l2518,01.,0U09u0yu.,04t,8204t01t8,01.,94,/u0l.,02,+202.,-}78,651,3582,l5V42.13.08V1.8*,-020W040uS898,255u8W,04t,/15l.88.8,01.,0U09u0yu.,25,9t.4296S,04t,93/u.3.42,.66.l29U.,21.023.428,02,/1951929�.t,u5l029548*:?;�BrB?BKFs,�0195V8,040uS898W,t90[45829lW,04t,l5V42.13.08V1.,8.u.l2954,255u8,01.,0U09u0yu.,651,V8.,y08.t,54,2Z.,t020,0U09u0y9u92S,04t,2Z.,+202.�8+i+�,[50u8*

qK>K;@Ld@KD;@�=>eKBe;

�� !��"�� #�$��

"��%&"��%��%��'��'��'��(��(��%�&$ ��

)*+,-+./,01+23420/5*4630270+84208/+20/2094:+2:./480,/*6/2*+,8/-;3</<;9<02/=4653;*6+:/5:+88;=;5+3;*68/+6,/+20/12*>06/703<*,8/=*2/20,45;69/52+8<08+6,/;712*>;69/3<0/8+=03./*=/3<0/32+681*23+3;*6/8.8307?/@2+8</7*,;=;5+3;*6/=+53*28/<+>0/A006/,0>0:*10,/+6,/12*7*30,/=*2/80>02+:/*=/3<0805*4630270+84208/+6,/+20/7+;68320+7/+3/3<0/B3+30/:0>0:C/-<;5</<+8/1201+20,/=*2/;71:07063+3;*6/+3/3<0/:*5+:/:0>0:?/D<0/,+3+C/+6+:.8;8/3**:8C/+6,12*508808/3*/;,063;=./+6,/;71:07063/0==053;>0/320+370638/+3/12;*2;3;E0,/:*5+3;*68/+20/+>+;:+A:0/;6/7+6./B3+308/+6,C/3*/+/:08802/0F3063C/5*22081*6,;69:*5+:/+9065;08?

G;6608*3+/<+8/,0>0:*10,/>;+A:0/8+=03./;71:07063+3;*6/1:+68/=*2/0+5</*=/;38/5*463;08C/7+,0/=46,;69/20+,;:./+>+;:+A:0C/+6,/12*7*30,/1+236028<;18/=*20==;5;063/5*6832453;*6/7+6+907063?/H*23</I+J*3+/<+8/+:8*/,0>0:*10,/1:+68/=*2/+::/;38/5*463;08C/-<;:0/K*-+C/H0A2+8J+C/+6,/L+68+8/+20/-*2J;69/*6/+8;7;:+2/0==*23?/H0+2:./+::/*=/M+8<;693*6N8/5*463;08/<+>0/+:8*/,0>0:*10,/1:+68?/OPMQ/;8/-*2J;69/-;3</7*20/3<+6/+/,*E06/B3+30/IRD8/+6,/SDQT@063028/3*/1;:*3/3<0/,0>0:*17063/*=/S*5+:/B+=03./K71:07063+3;*6/T:+68?/K6/+,,;3;*6C/+112*F;7+30:./UVW/D2;A+:/B+=03./T:+68/<+>0/A006/,0>0:*10,/*2+20/;6/12*92088?

XYZ[\][

X\[_ab\[[cdefcgh/OPMQ/R==;50/*=/B+=03./ijWjk/UWlmWnoV/@+3<.?B+3302=;0:,p,*3?9*>

qf]rasgtfZ/OPMQ/)08*4250/@06302/iUWUk/VVWmuuWn/I;5J?Q:A;6p,*3?9*>

T+90/:+83/7*,;=;0,/*6/v460/wlC/jWwu

�� ! "��# $�%&'�� (�)��

&��''' �&'� �� %��*�+��*,�� *�) ��

-./.0123456728609:0;548<395646=980

>?@?ABCDEFGHIBJDK@LFMFNOABOFPM0QRSS0T2U0V25<2W0XY28Z2[0/\0]4<=8_698[01 0RSabS0RSRcdeecfSSS

g?MO?ADhPADKii?C?ABOFMGDjMMPkBOFPM

Xl0m972\Y25W014W09Z86</;l0T26U95nXl1012798<6546=98o2<9Z5p2<

qBh?DrABMNsPAOBOFPMDhPADtk?AJDu?@?NOAFBMDvqrtuw

qJNO?LFiDBssCFiBOFPMDPhDiPNOx?hh?iOFk?DiPyMO?AL?BNyA?NDIFOHDzMPIMDNBh?OJD{?M?hFONDiBMDH?CsDA?@yi?Ds?@?NOAFBMDhBOBCFOF?NDBOD{POHDyMiPMOAPCC?@BM@DNFGMBCF|?@DiAPNNFMGDCPiBOFPMN}

Xpp95~=8_0690620T46=984�0m=_U4W0;54::=p0/4:26W0X~7=8=<6546=98[0RSQe0U=682<<2~062079<6032~2<65=480:464�=6=2<0<=8p20QbbS.0�2~2<65=48<04pp9Z862~:95043359�=7462�W0Qe0325p28609:04��0594~U4W0:464�=6=2<0�a[b��[048~0620Y4<6074�95=6W09:062<209ppZ552~0U=�20p59<<=8_0620594~U4W0460�9607=~��9pn48~0=8625<2p6=980p59<<=8_0�9p46=98<0��R0325p28609ppZ552~04U4W0:5970=8625<2p6=98<048~0Q�0325p2860460=8625<2p6=98<�.0;25204520p9<6c2::2p6=Y2p9Z8625724<Z52<06460p480�20<W<62746=p4��W0Z<2~069052~Zp20p54<2<048~0�5=8_0724<Z52~0<4:26W0�282:=6<0460Z8p98659��2~048~0<=_84�=�2~032~2<65=48p59<<=8_0�9p46=98<.

u?@?NOAFBMDqBh?OJDgPyMO?AL?BNyA?N

-8p98659��2~0p59<<=8_0�9p46=98<074W04Y20=84~2�Z462032~2<65=480p59<<=8_0:4p=�=6=2<[0p5246=8_0�455=25<0690<4:2[0p98Y28=286[048~0p973�262032~2<65=48826U95n<.0X60<=_84�=�2~0=8625<2p6=98<02�Z=332~0U=6032~2<65=480<=_84�<[0p98:�=p6<0U=606Z58=8_0Y2=p�2<074W09ppZ50U28032~2<65=48<0<22040U4�n0<=_84�48~0Y2=p�2<0<22040�2:606Z580<=_84�.0�W0:9pZ<=8_09804��032~2<65=480p59<<=8_0�9p46=98<[0Z5�48048~05Z54�[04_28p=2<0p480p9735228<=Y2�W04~~52<<04<=_8=:=p4860846=984�0<4:26W0359��27048~0=7359Y20�Z4�=6W09:0�=:20:95032~2<65=48<09:04��04_2<048~04�=�=6=2<.0;20:9��9U=8_0p9Z8625724<Z52<03597962~0�W/;\�0R.S0p480=7359Y2032~2<65=480<4:26W0U280Z<2~0=806204335935=4620594~U4W0p9862�6.

�?B@FMGDs?@?NOAFBMDFMO?AkBCN0��l<�0460<=_84�=�2~0=8625<2p6=98<04��9U032~2<65=48<0690U4�n[0Z<Z4��W0d0690f0<2p98~<[0�2:9520Y2=p�2<0_26040_52280<=_84�6906Z580�2:609505=_6.0;20��l0=8p524<2<0Y=<=�=�=6W[052~Zp2<0p98:�=p6<[048~0=7359Y2<0W=2�~=8_.

�PB@D�F?ON0p48052~Zp20Y2=p�20<322~<048~06208Z7�2509:0�482<032~2<65=48<0p59<<[048~062W0p480p524620<34p206904~~082U032~2<65=480:4p=�=6=2<0<Zp04<32~2<65=480p59<<=8_�52:Z_20=<�48~<.

�?iOBMGyCBADABsF@DhCBNHD{?BiPMN0�oo��<�045204p6=Y20�Z<25c4p6Z462~�095034<<=Y20�4Z697462~0~262p6=98�047�250�\1<06460Z<20480=552_Z�450:�4<346625804607=~c��9pn0950Z8p98659��2~0p59<<=8_0�9p46=98<.0;2W0<=_8=:=p486�W0=8p524<20~5=Y250W=2�~=8_0�24Y=95.

u?@?NOAFBMDHJ{AF@D{?BiPMN0��m�<�0359Y=~2039<=6=Y20<6930p98659�0=804524<0U=60=_032~2<65=480654::=p0Y9�Z72<.0;20�m�0=<0480=862572~=4620936=98�26U228040:�4<=8_0�24p98048~040:Z��032~2<65=480<=_84�.

u?@?NOAFBMDiAPNNFMG�A?hyG?DFNCBM@N04��9U032~2<65=48<040<4:2503�4p20690<69304606207=~39=8609:0620594~U4W0�2:9520p59<<=8_06205274=8=8_0~=<648p2.;=<0=<03456=pZ�45�W02�3:Z�0:9509�~25032~2<65=48<09509625032~2<65=48<0U=60�=7=62~079�=�=6W.0;2052:Z_20=<�48~0�148=<09::<260~2<=_8�0p97�46<32~2<65=480~=<654p6=9804<0=60_Z=~2<06270690Y=2U098p97=8_0654::=p0�2:952062W0p59<<.

�BFN?@DiAPNNIBCzN0p480<25Y204<040654::=p0p4�7=8_0724<Z52048~052~Zp20Y2=p�20<322~<.

�� ! "��# $�%&'�� (�)��

&��''' �&'� �� %��*�+��*,�� *�) ��

-./0012345670787379:5;<=2<>;?;<90@ABCDEAFBADGHBBIFJKAJLMENLOMAFOPAQOEFODQPABLMOFMQAFOPARFGKLOMB@AEQJSAPGLTQGBAPQNQDNASQPQBNGLFOBUSFGNLDCJFGJVAFNOLMENW

X;<;Y790

Z?[./6;\5]2Y;9:5_HCONQGRQFBCGQBAFGQAFTFLJFJQANEFNAHaaQGASGHTQOABHJCNLHOBAaHGAGQPCDLOMASQPQBNGLFOAaFNFJLNLQBAFNACODHONGHJJQPAFOPABLMOFJLbQPDGHBBLOMAJHDFNLHOBWc2.d;9;\5Z<6;09?;<9AeVAaHDCBLOMAHOASQPQBNGLFOBADGHBBLOMAJHDFNLHOB@AFMQODLQBADFOAFPPGQBBAFABLMOLaLDFONAOFNLHOFJASQPQBNGLFOABFaQNVASGHJQRWf<=2<>;\5gh2379:5/Y5i7Y;AjRSGHTLOMADGHBBLOMAHSSHGNCOLNLQBAHHBNBAkCFJLNVAHaAJLaQAaHGASQPQBNGLFOBAHaAFJJAFMQBAFOPAFLJLNLQBW

eCLJPLOMAHOANEQAlAmnoAFSSGHFDEApQOMLOQQGLOM@AQOaHGDQRQON@AQPCDFNLHO@AFOPAQRQGMQODVARQPLDFJABQGTLDQBqAILNELOAQFDEArNFNQ@ADHRRCOLNLQBADFOAPQSJHVSGHTQO@ADHBNsQaaQDNLTQADHCONQGRQFBCGQBANHALRSGHTQASQPQBNGLFOABFaQNVW

]929;5/Y59=;5t.2>97>;

_HRRCOLNLQBAFDGHBBANEQAuFNLHOAFGQAQOQaLNNLOMAVACBLOMAvwjWAjOAuQIAxHGKA_LNV@ANEQAQaaQDNBAHaANELBANGQFNRQONAIQGQAPGFRFNLDWAyEQGQAvwjBAIQGQLOBNFJJQP@ANEQAHTQGFJJAOCR QGAHaASQPQBNGLFOBAFOPALDVDJLBNBAKLJJQPAHGABQTQGQJVALOzCGQPAPGHSSQPA{|ASQGDQONWAvwjACBQALOA}JHGLPFAFJBHAVLQJPQPASHBLNLTQGQBCJNB@ALODJCPLOMAGQPCDLOMANEQASQGDQONFMQAHaATQELDJQsSQPQBNGLFOADHOaJLDNBAQNIQQOA~�AFOPA��ASQGDQONAFNAPLaaQGQONALONQGBQDNLHOBWA�EQA��}eAEFBMGQFNJVALODGQFBQPAPGLTQGAVLQJPLOMAGFNQBALOABQTQGFJADHRRCOLNLQB@AFOPAFAGQDQONABNCPVAPQRHOBNGFNQPANEFNALNADFOAGQPCDQASQPQBNGLFOADGFBEQBWA��}eBADFOAQQ�NGQRQJVAQaaQDNLTQAFNANGFLJADGHBBLOMBAHGAOQFGABDEHHJBWA

-/<92>90

X;>4:5-./1;A}�y�A�aaLDQAHaArFaQNVAp��lqA||�s{{��A�QQDDFW_GHIQ�PHNWMHT

t;9;.5fh<A}�y�A�QBHCGDQA_QONQGAp{��qA|�{s��AwQNQGWnCO�PHNWMHT

�;0/h.>;0

}�y�AwGHTQOArFaQNVA_HCONQGRQFBCGQB

wQPQBNGLFOAFOPAeLDVDJQAjOaHGRFNLHOA_QONQG

AwFMQAJFBNARHPLaLQPAHOA�COQA��@A~��

�� !"#�� $�

"��%��###&'"#�&�$�&!$(��$(��$��(��)$*��)+��*��&)'� ��

,-.-/0123456175/89/:437;284535<87/




pLKALL>?CJ>@EABCqIMN>KMCrpJqs

pJqCOgg>@CM>j>@ABCN@ALMgO@KANEj>CAMt>hNMCgO@CGEFGHAICN@ALMtO@NANEOLuCELhBv?ELFCEKt@Oj>K>LNMCELCMAg>NIuCt@O?vhNEjENIuCAL?ChOMNw

:]1/x1719<5;/89/Y763771y/314<3z/;V;516;/{,W.|/341/T<y1/437<7/37y/<623o5/7134zV/3zz/3;21o5;/89/]<]T3V/5437;284535<87-/,W./248X<y1/]<]b}Y3z<5V/;Y4X1V/37y/y353/6322<7/5]35/o37/x1/o8zz1o51y/3Y58635<o3zzV/84/416851zV-/~341/3413;/o37/x1/63221y/41z35<X1zV/}Y<omzV/<7/o86234<;87/58543y<5<873z/;Y4X1V/37y/6322<7/243o5<o1;-/,W./341/3z;8/Y;1y/984/;Y4X1V/37y/<6314V/3;/2345/89/161417oV/41;287;1/1X175;/T]141/543y<5<873z;Y4X1V<7/37y/6322<7/243o5<o1;/341/<73y1}Y351/84/<628;;<xz1-

�I>M�EL�NG>�q�I

,W./<6248X1/821435<87;Z/o87;54Yo5<87Z/<7;21o5<87Z/37y/;3915V/xV/o8zz1o5<7/y353/711y1y/58/y1;<7Z/xY<zyZ/37y/8214351/5]1/]<]T3V/;V;516-/�4<y1<7;21o5<87/17]37o1y/xV/,W./3z;8/<6248X1;/;3915V/984/5]1/<7;21o5<87/5136/37y/5]1/543X1z<7/2Yxz<o/xV/41yYo<7/5]1/711y/984/51628434V/T84m/�871;-_87;54Yo5<87/<7;21o5<87/T<5]/,W./3zz8T;/984/3/x<4y�;/1V1/X<1T/89/o87;54Yo5<87/24841;;/37y/984/5]1/y1X1z826175/89/5]411by<617;<873z/{c0|/51443<768y1z;/5]35/y8oY6175/5]1/o87;54Yo5<87/248o1;;-/,W./51o]78z8V/<X1;/.5351/y123456175;/89/5437;284535<87/{0�:;|/1V1;b<7b5]1b;mV/yY4<7/<7o<y17541;287;1/984/483yT3V/y<;5Y4x37o1;/;Yo]/3;/48om;z<y1;Z/3X3z37o]1;Z/37y/9z88y;-/k5/3zz8T;/.5351;/58/8x53<7/6841/y353/58/63m1/6841/<798461y/y1o<;<87;Z3zz/o8zz1o51y/9486/3/41z35<X1zV/z8Tbo8;5/2z359846-

.5351;/37y/z8o3z/317o<1;/71T/58/,W./51o]78z8V/o37/<6248X1/5]1<4/Y7y14;537y<7/89/,W./o323x<z<5<1;Z/37y/oY44175/Y;14;/o37/x483y17/5]1/4371/89285175<3z/322z<o35<87;/98oY;1y/87/<7;21o5<87Z/o87;54Yo5<87Z/37y/821435<87;-/n1Yz3584V/41}Y<416175;/984/o86614o<3z/,W./821435<87;/37y/z13y317oV/.537y34y/�21435<7/�48o1yY41;/248X<y1/3/235]/58/3yX37o<7/3/,W./248436-

�>L>gENM

qAg>NIw/�112<7/T84m14;/8Y5/89/]346�;/T3V/<;/3/63�84/x1719<5/89/Y;<7/,W.-/:43y<5<873z/x4<y1/<7;21o5<87/41}Y<41;/;155<7/Y2/51628434V/T84m�871;Z/y158Y4<7/54399<oZ/37y/Y;<7/]13XV/1}Y<26175-/,W./51o]78z8V/o37/;211y/y353/o8zz1o5<87/T]<z1/41yYo<7/4<;m/58/T84m/o41T;/37y/5]1543X1z<7/2Yxz<o-Jhh>B>@AN>?CfOLMN@vhNEOLwC,W./51o]78z8V/o37/3oo1z14351/5]1/4351/89/y353/o8zz1o5<87/821435<87;/;Yo]/3;/;Y4X1V/84/314<3z/2]858432]V-/k5/o37x1/Y;1y/984/48Y5<71/<7;21o5<87;Z/;Yo]/3;/9zV<7/3/24843661y/235]/8X14/;<z5/917o<7/39514/3/43<7/1X175/58/o]1om/984/;1y<6175/xY<zyY2Z/37y/]<]b4<;m/<7;21o5<87;Z/;Yo]/3;/o4371/84/93z;1T84m/o87;54Yo5<87-JMM>NC�AELN>LALh>w/:]1/3x<z<5V/58/48Y5<71zV/37y/o87;<;5175zV/632/51443<7/89914;/5]1/285175<3z/984/<;8z35<7/248xz16/3413;/x19841/37/161417oV8ooY4;Z/T]<o]/o37/;3X1/z<X1;/37y/41yYo1/o8;5;/984/3;;15/63<751737o1-/k9/5]141/<;/37/161417oV/1X175Z/,W./51o]78z8V/o37/}Y<omzV/37y<71�217;<X1zV/;Y4X1V/5]1/y3631Z/3zz8T<7/984/x15514b<798461y/37y/199<o<175/41o8X14V/821435<87;-

qNAN>COgCNG>C�@AhNEh>

�� !"#�� $�

"��%��###&'"#�&�$�&!$(��$(��$��(��)$*��)+��*��&)'� ��

,-./012/31/245678379/6:;<11/=>2/.=6=2/?@A1B/678/=>2/70CD2;/<E/,-./655F3:6=3<71/31/37:;261379/1=2683FGH/-/IJKL/10;M2G/DG/=>2/-C2;3:67-11<:36=3<7/<E/.=6=2/N39>O6G/678/A;6715<;=6=3<7/@EE3:36F1/E<078/=>6=/IJ/.=6=21/6;2/6F;268G/01379/>39>P82E373=3<7/:6C2;61B/Q3?-RB/678/<=>2;1271<;1/=</27>67:2/:<71=;0:=3<7/37152:=3<7B/D;3892/37152:=3<7B/678/37:3827=/;215<712/<52;6=3<71H/-7/6883=3<76F/KS/.=6=21/6;2/6:=3M2FG/;2126;:>379,-./012/=</27>67:2/=>23;/<52;6=3<71H

T61>379=<7/>61/2M6F06=28/,-./655F3:6=3<71/37/62;36F/;<68O6G/10;M23FF67:2/678/5<=27=36FFG/E<;/13=06=3<76F/6O6;27211/E<;/6M6F67:>2/:<7=;<FHU<;=>/V6;<F376/31/01379/,-./=</1055<;=/:<71=;0:=3<7/37152:=3<71/678/52;E<;C/6::3827=/1:272/;2:<71=;0:=3<71/=</<527/=;6M2F/F6721/C<;2W03:XFGH/U2O/Y2;12G/31/:0;;27=FG/01379/,-./=</1055<;=/1=;0:=0;6F/37152:=3<71B/;26FP=3C2/:<71=;0:=3<7/5;<Z2:=/C<73=<;379B/=;6EE3:/37:3827=/C67692C27=B62;36F/[?/:<;;38<;/C655379B/2C2;927:G/;215<712/611211C27=1B/678/=;6EE3:/:<7921=3<7/611211C27=1H@>3</31/01379/,-./=2:>7<F<9G/E<;/=;6EE3:/C<73=<;379B/2C2;927:G/;215<712/<52;6=3<71B/678/:<71=;0:=3<7/37152:=3<71H

\]_a_b

cdebfghi/jNT-/@EE3:2/<E/k7E;61=;0:=0;2/lmJ[n/SJoP[pqp/Y6C21Hr;6Gs8<=H9<M

\] tefuev/jNT-/@EE3:2/<E/k7E;61=;0:=0;2/lIJIn/[qqPKJmL/V<7732Hw2Os8<=H9<M

x692/F61=/C<83E328/<7/Y072/KSB/IJKL

�� ! "��# $��%��& ��'��

%�� (�%��(��(��&��&��)��(��' ��

*+,+-./01234/53-67-82159062313:65-

;<=<>?@ABCDEF?GAH=ICJCKL>?LCMJ-NOPP-Q/R-S/29/T-UV/5W/X-,Y-Z19[:5\365X-.]-OP_P-OPOabbcPPP

d<JL<>AeM>AHff<@<>?LCJDAgJJMh?LCMJ

]Ui-j64/YV/2T-.1T-]6W539,8i]-Q/3R62kUi.-./46593213:65l/96W2m/9

nK<AMeAd>MF=KMo>fCJDALMAH=h?Jf<Apq<>?LCMJK

d>MF=KMo>fCJDALo>JKAL>?JKqM>L?LCMJAKGKL<IAoK<>KACJLMAK<JKM>KAMJAKGKL<IAq<>eM>I?Jf<rAq>MhC=CJDA><?@sLCI<rAECDEsto?@CLGA=?L?AMJAL>?eeCfMq<>?LCMJKrAfMJ=CLCMJKrA?J=A=>Ch<>Au<E?hCM>v

*9:5\-m26Rw96W2m/w-w131-7264-941230[65/-15w-m/xxWx12y19/w-w131-96W2m/9-15w-/5[15m/w-x1R-/5762m/4/53-m644W5:m13:659-3[26W\[-m640W3/21:w/w-w:9013m[-z]U.{-9T93/49X-0Wyx:m-1\/5m:/9-12/-:5m2/19:5\-3[/:2-9:3W13:651x-1R12/5/99-67-32177:m-m65w:3:659-:5mxWw:5\-m219[/9X-R/13[/2X-15w-R62k|65/9+-]26Rw96W2m/w-32177:m-w131-026V:w/9-1-5/RX-2/1x3:4/-w131-96W2m/X-6W39:w/-67-3[/-y6W5w12:/9-67-7:}/w-9/59629-15w-m14/219X-36-1m3:V/xT-4151\/32177:m+-8[:9-/51yx/9-1\/5mT-93177-36-41k/-w/m:9:659-462/-~W:mkxT-15w-m6V/2-x12\/2-\/6\210[:m-12/19X-x/1w:5\-36-:4026V/w-2/90659/9-36-32177:m:5m:w/539-15w-63[/2-m65\/93:65m1W9:5\-/V/539-1x65\-R:3[-603:4:|13:65-67-32177:m-7x6R-3[26W\[-3[/-9T93/4+

l/1x3:4/-m26Rw96W2m/w-w131-65-32177:m-46V/4/53-15w-32177:m-7x6R-3[26W\[6W3-3[/-32159062313:65-5/3R62k-m15-y/-:53/\213/w-R:3[-32159062313:659T93/49-4151\/4/53-15w-60/213:659-z8,��{-9T93/49-3[13-026V:w/-2/1x3:4/-32177:m-465:362:5\-z9:3W13:651x-1R12/5/99{�-321V/x/2-:5762413:65X-9Wm[-19NN-9T93/49-15w-321V/x-3:4/9-65-wT514:m-4/991\/-9:\59�-15w-1m3:V/-32177:m-4151\/4/53-zU8�{X-9Wm[-19-~W/W/-R125:5\9-15w-wT514:m-x15/-m65326x9T93/49+

�<?@s�CI<rABCDEs�o?@CLGA�?L?

]W22/53-w131-96W2m/9-:5-32177:m-60/213:659-673/5-m64/-7264-7:}/w-9/59629-3[13-465:362-32177:m-m65w:3:659-13-7:}/w-x6m13:659+-8[/-W9/-67-m26Rw96W2m/ww131-3W259-32159062313:65-9T93/4-W9/29-R:3[-941230[65/9-15w-63[/2-46y:x/-w131-96W2m/9-:536-32177:m-9/59629-3[13-9:\5:7:m153xT-:5m2/19/-3[/-w131-V6xW4/15w-\/6\210[:m-m6V/21\/+-U\/5m:/9-W9:5\-m26Rw96W2m/w-w131-m15-026V:w/-/12x:/2-:5m:w/53-563:7:m13:65-762-~W:mk/2-2/90659/9-15w-:53/\213:65-:536321V/x/2-:5762413:65-15w-U8�-9T93/49-36-603:4:|/-321V/x+

*9/-67-m26Rw96W2m/w-w131-m6Wxw-2/wWm/-3[/-5//w-762-261w9:w/-9/59629-15w-9T93/49-3[13-026V:w/-w131-:5-65xT-1-9:5\x/-x6m13:65-15w-2/~W:2/-:5931xx13:6515w-41:53/515m/+-i5-1ww:3:65X-m26Rw96W2m/w-w131-:9-y/:5\-m6xx/m3/w-m653:5W6W9xT-3[26W\[6W3-3[/-9T93/4-15w-R:xx-563-9W77/2-7264-3[/-x6m1x-9/5962-629T93/4-6W31\/9-1996m:13/w-R:3[-mW22/53-9T93/49+

�<J<eCLK

gJf><?K<=A�?e<LGv-]26Rw96W2m/w-w131-/51yx/9-1\/5mT-93177-36-:w/53:7T-026yx/49-462/-~W:mkxT-15w-462/-m657:w/53xTX-x/1w:5\-36-7193/2-15w462/-1mmW213/-2/90659/9-36-32177:m-:5m:w/539-15w-63[/2-m65\/93:65m1W9:5\-/V/539+gIq>Mh<=Apq<>?LCMJKv-]26Rw96W2m/w-w131-/51yx/9-1\/5mT-93177-36-026V:w/-y/33/2-321V/x/2-:5762413:65-15w-462/-0261m3:V/-15w-/77/m3:V/60/213:659-93213/\:/9-3[13-m15-x/1w-36-2/wWm/w-32177:m-m65\/93:65-15w-:4026V/w-2/x:1y:x:3T+dMKLA�?hCJDKv-]26Rw96W2m/w-w131-:9-m693/77/m3:V/-15w-m6Wxw-2/wWm/-3[/-5//w-762-1ww:3:651x-261w9:w/-9/59629-15w-9T93/49-3[13-2/~W:2/:5931xx13:65-15w-41:53/515m/+

�� ! "��# $��%��& ��'��

%�� (�%��(��(��&��&��)��(��' ��

*+,+-./0.+1-.23,4+54-

67897:;<=>97?87@AB<;8CD8EF=F<8=7G8HC:=H8=?<7:9<>8=;<8@>97?8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8978F;=DD9:8CJ<;=F9C7>K8L=M<N8=8:CAA@79FOPB=><G8F;=DD9:8=7G87=Q9?=F9C7=JJN8;<JC;F>8FC8R=Q<8R@7G;<G>8CD8EF=F<8=7G8HC:=H8=?<7:O8J=;F7<;>8J=;F9:9J=F97?8978FR<9;8SC77<:F<G8S9F9M<7>8T;C?;=AN8IR9:R8J;CQ9G<>8L=M<:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8FC8=?<7:9<>8FC897:;<=><8@7G<;>F=7G97?8CD8FR<9;8>O>F<A8J<;DC;A=7:<8=7G89AJ;CQ<8CJ<;=F9C7>K8UCI=N8VR9CN8T<77>OHQ=79=N8=7G8CFR<;WVX>8=;<8IC;Y97?8I9FR8UZ[U\]8FC8J;CQ9G<8;<=HPF9A<8F;=DD9:8=7G8;C=G8:C7G9F9C7>8FC8A<=>@;<8=7G8A=7=?<8FR<8F;=7>JC;F=F9C787<FIC;YK

6GG9F9C7=H8<=AJH<>8CD8@>97?8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8DC;8F;=DD9:8A=7=?<A<7F_

HC;9G=8WVX89>8@>97?8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8978:CAB97=F9C78I9FR8S6W8FC89AJ;CQ<8FR<8;<>JC7><8DC;8:;=>R<>8=7G8;C=G8:HC>@;<>KUCI=8WVX8;<:<9Q<>8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8D;CA8A@HF9JH<8>C@;:<>8978FR<9;8F;=DD9:8A=7=?<A<7F8:<7F<;>8DC;8G<F<:F97?897:9G<7F>8C78@;B=78=7G8;@;=H;C=G>8978;<=H8F9A<Ka9:R9?=78WVX8;<:<9Q<>8A97@F<PBOPA97@F<8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8FR=F8?C<>8G9;<:FHO897FC89F>8F;=DD9:8A=7=?<A<7F8:<7F<;>8DC;8JC>F97?8F;=Q<H8F9A<A<>>=?<>8C78GO7=A9:8A<>>=?<8>9?7>KXR<8W9>F;9:F8CD8SCH@AB9=8WVX8bL=>R97?FC7N8WSc89>8@>97?8A97@F<PBOPA97@F<8:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8FC8=>><>>8FR<8J<;DC;A=7:<8CD8=;F<;9=H>8=7G>9?7=H>8=7G8J;CG@:<8I<B8J<;DC;A=7:<8A<=>@;<>8G=>RBC=;G>8bJ<;DC;A=7:<8=F8=8?H=7:<c8>C8FR=F8>9?7=H>8=;<8;<F9A<G8AC;<8J;C=:F9Q<HOKXR<8a<F;CJCH9F=78X;=7>JC;F=F9C78SCAA9>>9C7N8FR<8A<F;CJCH9F=78JH=7797?8C;?=79M=F9C78DC;8FR<8E=78;=7:9>:C8d=O8=;<=N89>8@>97?8;<=HPF9A<:;CIG>C@;:<G8G=F=8FC8AC79FC;8H9Q<8F;=DD9:8:C7G9F9C7>8=7G897:;<=><8FR<8:CQ<;=?<8=;<=8=7G8=::@;=:O8CD89F>8eff8F;=Q<H<;897DC;A=F9C78>O>F<AK

g/h+,4+i

j,k-i.g/lm,38nL68VDD9:<8CD8VJ<;=F9C7>8opqPreoPstqu8v=A<>K:CHO=;wGCFK?CQ882,xl.j/y/5h8nL68VDD9:<8CD8VJ<;=F9C7>8bzqzc8oppPetpe8J=@HKvCGC97wGCFK?CQ

T=?<8H=>F8ACG9D9<G8C78{@7<8fsN8zqfu

�� ! "�� #��$�� %�&��

�� $$$'(�$�'��'��)��)��)��*�� *+��)��+*��'*(& ��

,-.-/0123456175/89/:437;284535<87/




pABq>CfArNq@>sCfArENABEtELFCOLCNG>CpABq>Cf@>AN>?CuICv@ALMrO@NANEOL

wN@AN>FE>MCgO@CAF>LhE>MCNOC@>hOj>@CACrO@NEOLCOgCrquBEhCN@ALMrO@NANEOLCELj>MNK>LNMCNGANC@>MqBNCELCELh@>AM>?CBAL?CjABq>Mx

yYz{<o/<7X1;56175/<7/5437;284535<87/3;;15;/5]35/<6248X1/3oo1;;/37|/<7o413;1/822845Y7<5V/z1719<5/3|}3o175/2482145V/8T714;/5]48Y]/413514/{37|/X3{Y137|/85]14/1o8786<o/<623o5;-/~37V/51o]7<�Y1;/341/3X3<{3z{1/58/5]1/2Yz{<o/;1o584/58/;]341/<7/3/2845<87/89/5]<;/<7o413;1|/{37|/X3{Y1/58/zY<{|Z/63<753<7Z84/41<7X1;5/<7/5]1/5437;284535<87/;V;516-

�3{Y1/o325Y41/z1<7;/T<5]/5]1/X3{Y1/o41351|/zV/5]1/3oo1;;/5437;284535<87/248X<|1;-/�3{Y1/<;/5]17/17]37o1|/5]48Y]/24<X351/;1o584/<7X1;56175/37|1o8786<o/|1X1{826175/173z{1|/zV/5]1/2Yz{<o/<7X1;56175-/W/2845<87/89/5]35/X3{Y1/o41351|/zV/5]1/<7943;54Yo5Y41/o37/z1/�o325Y41|�/zV/5]1/2Yz{<o/;1o58458/41<7X1;5/<7Z/8214351Z/84/63<753<7/5437;284535<87/<7943;54Yo5Y41-/�3{Y1/o325Y41/24<7o<2{1;/o37/z1/322{<1|/58/68;5/|1X1{826175/;o1734<8;Z/T]15]1471T/<7943;54Yo5Y41/984/71T/{37|/|1X1{826175/84/41zY<{5/<7943;54Yo5Y41/<7/|17;1/Y4z37/3413;-

�85]/5]1/2{377<7/37|/<62{1617535<87/984/X3{Y1/o325Y41/41{V/24<634<{V/87/{8o3{/8X1476175/<7<5<35<X1;-/�84/5]1;1/{8o3{/2Yz{<o/317o<1;Z/X3{Y1o325Y41/248X<|1;/5]1/822845Y7<5V/58/43<;1/9Y7|;/58/635o]/�1|143{/4375;Z/T]<o]/<7o413;<7{V/162]3;<�1/5]1/<6284537o1/89/24<X351/37|/2Yz{<o/787b�1|143{/2345<o<235<87-

�>L>gENM

fOLNELqOqMCiKr@Oj>K>LNx/�3{Y1/o325Y41/;54351<1;/o37/248X<|1/3/;Y;53<71|/41X17Y1/;8Y4o1/5]35/o37/;Y22845/821435<87;/37|/63<751737o1/84Z<7/;861/o3;1;Z/5]1/9<737o<7/89/5]1/84<<73{/5437;284535<87/<6248X16175-=ELALhEABC��qENIx/�3{Y1/o325Y41/2486851;/1�Y<5V/zV/41<7984o<7/5]1/�z1719<o<34V/23V;�/24<7o<2{1/89/1o8786<o;-/\]17/24<X351/{37|8T714;z1719<5/9486/3/2Yz{<o/<7X1;56175Z/X3{Y1/o325Y41/248X<|1;/3/T3V/984/3/2845<87/89/5]1/3<7/58/|<41o5{V/;Y22845/5]1/2Yz{<o/<7X1;56175/5]35/173z{1|5]1<4/z1719<5-�LjE@OLK>LNABCwqMNAELAuEBENIx/k7/o1453<7/o3;1;Z/X3{Y1/o325Y41/o37/]1{2/241X175/;243T{/zV/248X<|<7/3/|<;<7o175<X1/984/;21oY{35<X1/{37|]8{|<7-

wNAN>COgCNG>C�@AhNEh>

.5351;/;Yo]/3;/_3{<9847<3Z/_8{843|8Z/�{84<|3Z/�184<3Z/~3;;3o]Y;155;Z/~<;;8Y4<Z/�]<8Z/�4187Z/y177;V{X37<3Z/:1�3;Z/37|/�<4<7<3Z/3;/T1{{/3;/5]10<;54<o5/89/_8{Y6z<3Z/341/Y;<7/X3{Y1/o325Y41/825<87;/;Yoo1;;9Y{{V-/:]1/98{{8T<7/341/1�362{1;/89/|<9914175/X3{Y1/o325Y41/322{<o35<87;/;Y22845<7]<]T3V/<6248X16175;/3o48;;/5]1/,7<51|/.5351;�

.1X143{/;63{{/58T7;/<7/�4187/]3X1/<7;5<5Y51|/5437;284535<87/Y5<{<5V/911;/5]48Y]/6875]{V/Y5<{<5V/z<{{;/5]35/9Y7|/248436;/23V<7/984/{8o3{/483|63<751737o1/37|/;3915V/248}1o5;-

�� ! "�� #��$�� %�&��

�� $$$'(�$�'��'��)��)��)��*�� *+��)��+*��'*(& ��

,-./012/13/45675/8313675/297:.;3/7<.9/=>?@A/65/07BCDECFG/H-67G/6F/15/.I1D2B./7J/:7653/K.<.B72D.53/15K/96L-3>7J>M1N/CF./1L9..D.53F/376D297<./391JJ6;/72.913675F/15K/3915FJ79D/3-./<76K/;1CF.K/EN/=>?@A/6537/15/C9E15/F39..3F;12./M63-/9.316B/F-72F/15K/9.F31C9153FO01B6J79561PF/H915L./07C53N/,915F279313675/07996K79/QL.5;6.F/R,0QS/19./CF65L/K.<.B72D.53/6D21;3/J..F/37/L.5.913./JC5KF/3-13/-1<./297<6K.KF..K/;12631B/J79/3915F279313675/J1;6B636.F/15K/;75365C./37/E./15/653.L91B/J.13C9./7J/,0QPF/K.E3/D151L.D.53/F3913.LNO=5/,.I1FG/3-./T793/U793-/063N/07C5;6B/.F31EB6F-.K/3915F279313675/6D21;3/J..F/65/VCBN/WAAX/75/5.M/K.<.B72D.53/297:.;3F/37/-.B2/JC5K3915F279313675/6D297<.D.53FO/=5/Q296B/WAYZG/3-./;7C5;6B/12297<.K/1/3915F279313675/6D21;3/J../65;9.1F./J97D/[WGAAA/37/[ZGAAA/75/5.M/F65LB.>J1D6BN/-7D.FO,-./063N/7J/0-6;1L7/CF.K/31I/65;9.D.53/J6515;65L/K6F396;3F/37/JC5K/1/<196.3N/7J/297:.;3FG/65;BCK65L/F39..3/6D297<.D.53FG/3915F63/F313675FG/15K5.6L-E79-77K/9.K.<.B72D.53O

\]_a_b

c_de fg_hid/TjUQ/HJJ6;./7J/kB15565LG/l5<6975D.53G/m/n.1B3N/WAW>Z??>oAYA/83.J15Op13qr.sK73OL7<

tuvfwxbu]y/0.53.9/J79/=557<136<./T6515;./8C22793/zAz>o?W>Z?{o/,-1NO|6F-72sK73OL7<

}db]~�adb

0.53.9/J79/=557<136<./T6515;./8C22793/�/�1BC./0123C9.

/k1L./B1F3/D7K6J6.K/75/VC5./?G/WAYX

�� !�"#$�% & ��'��

#��('��$$$)*#$�) ��)"��% �%��'�� +��+(��+��)�*� ��

,-.-/0123456175/89/:437;284535<87/




pE@NqABCrqsBEhCiLjOBj>K>LN

pE@NqABCtqsBEhCELjOBj>K>LNCMqttO@NMCAF>LhE>MC>ggO@NMCNOC>LFAF>CNG>CtqsBEhCKO@>C>gg>hNEj>BICsICMqttB>K>LNELFCgAh>uNOugAh>CELgO@KANEOLMGA@ELFCHENGCN>hGLOBOFIv

k778X35<X1/X<45Y3w/2Yxw<o/<7X8wX16175/51o]7<yY1;/248X<z1/.5351/z123456175;/89/5437;284535<87/{0|:;}Z/5437;<5/317o<1;Z/6154828w<537/2w377<78437<~35<87;/{��|;}Z/37z/4Y43w/5437;284535<87/2w377<7/8437<~35<87;/{n:�|;}/T<5]/3/2w359846/58/<79846/5]1/2Yxw<o/37z/41o1<X1/911zx3om-/:]1;1;54351<1;/o41351/199<o<17o<1;/<7/]8T/<7984635<87/<;/z<;;16<7351z/37z/]8T/<72Y5/<;/o8ww1o51z/37z/o87;<z141zZ/T]<o]/o37/285175<3wwV/3oo1w143512w377<7/37z/248�1o5/z1X1w826175/248o1;;1;-

�LhOq@AFELFCrqsBEhC�LFAF>K>LN

�Yxw<o/<7X8wX16175/<;/3/o4<5<o3w/o86287175/<7/5]1/5437;284535<87/z1o<;<87b63m<7/248o1;;Z/3ww8T<7/984/6137<79Yw/o87;<z1435<87/37z/<72Y5/9486<75141;51z/<7z<X<zY3w;-/W;/z3<wV/Y;14;/89/5]1/5437;284535<87/;V;516Z/5]1/2Yxw<o/]3;/Y;19Yw/82<7<87;Z/<7;<]5;Z/37z/8x;14X35<87;/58/;]341/T<5]/5]1<4/.53510|:/37z/w8o3w/317o<1;/87/5]1/214984637o1/37z/711z;/89/5]1/5437;284535<87/;V;516/84/87/;21o<9<o/248�1o5;-/[34wV/37z/;5487/2Yxw<o/17316175/]3;5]1/285175<3w/58/3oo1w14351/248�1o5/z1w<X14V/xV/]1w2<7/<z175<9V/37z/3zz41;;/2Yxw<o/o87o147;/134wV/<7/5]1/2w377<7/248o1;;Z/5]141xV/41zYo<7/z1w3V;9486/241X<8Y;wV/Y7m78T7/<75141;5;/w351/<7/5]1/248�1o5/z1w<X14V/248o1;;-

S134wV/3ww/.5351/0|:;/37z/68;5/w8o3w/317o<1;/Y;1/T1x;<51;/58/28;5/<7984635<87/3x8Y5/5]1<4/3o5<X<5<1;-/\<5]/5]1/<7o413;1z/Y;1/89/;8o<3w/61z<3/588w;37z/68x<w1/322w<o35<87;Z/5]1/2Yxw<o/o37/3oo1;;/Y;14b94<17zwV/9135Y41;/;Yo]/3;/87w<71/X<z18;Z/28zo3;5;Z/o48Tz;8Y4o1z/632;Z/37z/85]14/<75143o5<X1984Y6;/58/41o1<X1/<7984635<87/37z/248X<z1/<72Y5-

:]1;1/71T/822845Y7<5<1;/984/<7984635<87/;]34<7/37z/2Yxw<o/<7X8wX16175/<7/5]1/5437;284535<87/2w377<7Z/2484366<7Z/37z/248�1o5/z1X1w826175248o1;;/<7owYz1Z/xY5/341/785/w<6<51z/58Z/51w12]871/58T7/]3ww;Z/87w<71/6115<7;Z/282bY2/8Y5413o]Z/;8o<3w/6115<7;�6115<7b<7b3/x8�/m<5;Z/;584V/632;ZyY<om/X<z18;Z/o48Tz;8Y4o<7Z/;Y4X1V/588w;Z/413wb5<61/28ww<7/588w;Z/;8o<3w/61z<3/98ww8T<7Z/X<;Y3w<~35<87Z/37z/T84m<7/T<5]/xw8 14;-

�>L>gENM

�ggEhE>LhICAL?C�OHCfOMNv/�<45Y3w/588w;/37z/2w359846;/o37/199<o<175wV/x1/63z1/3oo1;;<xw1/58/o866Y7<5<1;Z/637V/35/3/w8T14/o8;5/5]37543z<5<873w/2Yxw<o/17316175/615]8z;-Jhh>B>@AN>?Cr@O�>hNC�>BEj>@Iv/n8xY;5/2Yxw<o/17316175/]1w2;/<z175<9V/<;;Y1;/134wV/<7/5]1/248�1o5/2w377<7/248o1;;Z/T]<o]/41zYo1;/5]1/711z58/41X<;<5/z1o<;<87;-fOKKqLEhANEOLCAL?CfOBBAsO@ANEOLv/�<45Y3w/2Yxw<o/<7X8wX16175/o37/3<z/<7/1;53xw<;]<7/3/o86687/X<;<87/984/5437;284535<87/37z/17;Y41/5]182<7<87;/37z/711z;/89/5]1/2Yxw<o/341/Y7z14;588z/37z/o87;<z141z/zY4<7/5437;284535<87/2w377<7/37z/248�1o5/z1X1w826175-

�� !�"#$�% & ��'��

#��('��$$$)*#$�) ��)"��% �%��'�� +��+(��+��)�*� ��

,-./0123,04/45650789:;<=>?@9=AA@B9;CD@>EF9B=?GFHA@EF<B9IHA9EA9CA=9J?<=;D;J?=F9;C9=<?E;=;AC?@9?JJ<A?DHFB9=A9J>K@;D9;CLA@LFMFC=N9O<F?=F<FCP?PFMFC=9D?C9;MJ<ALF9J<AQFD=9R>?@;=SN

T7/753UV37W53XY/Z7[Z5

:;<=>?@9J>K@;D9;CLA@LFMFC=9J<AL;EFB9\=?=F9] _B9?CE9@AD?@9?PFCD;FB9=H<A>PHA>=9=HF9DA>C=<S9I;=H9?9J@?=A<M9A9;CCAL?=;LF9=AA@B9?CE9B=<?=FP;FB9A<M?G;CP9J>K@;D9;CLA@LFMFC=9MA<F9?DDFBB;K@Fa9=H>B9J<AL;E;CP9?9KF==F<9>CEF<B=?CE;CP9A9=HF9J>K@;DbB9DACDF<CB9<FP?<E;CP9=<?CBJA<=?=;AC9BSB=FMJF<A<M?CDF9?CE9CFFEBN9_HF9A@@AI;CP9?<F9Fc?MJ@FB9A9B>DDFBB>@9L;<=>?@9J>K@;D9;CLA@LFMFC=9=FDHC;R>FBd

eA@A<?EA9] _9HF@E9=F@FJHACF9=AIC9H?@@B9=A9DACE>D=9@?<PFfBD?@F9A>=<F?DH9IH;@F9EFLF@AJ;CP9=HF;<9@ACPf<?CPF9B=?=FI;EF9=<?CBJA<=?=;AC9J@?Ca;CD@>E;CP9ACF9=AIC9H?@@9A<9F?DH9gh 9?CE9i_h 9<FP;AC9;C9=HF9\=?=FNg;CCFBA=?9] _9=?<PF=FE9@;M;=FE9jCP@;BH9J<A;D;FCDS9kljhm9JAJ>@?=;ACB9IH;@F9>JE?=;CP9=HF;<9\=?=FI;EF9g>@=;fMAE?@9_<?CBJA<=?=;AC9h@?C>B;CP9=?K@F=fK?BFE9B><LFSB9;C9M>@=;J@F9@?CP>?PFBN9_HF9=?K@F=fK?BFE9B><LFSB9?@@AIFE9g;CCFBA=?9] _9B=?9=A9L;B;=9ljh9DAMM>C;=;FB9?CE9BA@;D;=B=?GFHA@EF<B9=A9F?B;@S9JA;C=a9D@;DGa9?CE9<FBJACENnA<=H9oF<BFS9_<?CBJA<=?=;AC9h@?CC;CP9p>=HA<;=S9;B9>B;CP9<F?@f=;MF9JA@@;CP9?B9J?<=9A9@;LF9MFF=;CPB9?CE9IFK;C?<BN_Fc?Bb9p@?MA9p<F?9gh 9;B9>B;CP9@AIfDAB=9L;EFAB9;C9JAB=B9AC9BAD;?@9MFE;?N_HF9e;=S9A9i;DHMACEa9:;<P;C;?a9>BFE9=?<PF=FE9B=?GFHA@EF<9MFF=;CPBa9?9qI;G;M?Jar9?CE9;CCAL?=;LF9E?=?9DA@@FD=;AC9L;?9?9D@A>EfK?BFE9E?=?fP?=HF<;CP9=AA@9=A9P?=HF<9;F@E9AKBF<L?=;ACB9?CE9BJFD;;D9;CA<M?=;AC9<AM9JFAJ@F9I;=H9;<B=fH?CE9FcJF<;FCDF9K;G;CP9?CE9I?@G;CP9?@ACPi;DHMACEbB9B=<FF=BN

sU07/Z72

s/6[tt53uU0W/69^ ;DF9A9h@?CC;CPa9jCL;<ACMFC=a9v9iF?@=S99kwxwm9yzzfz{|}9e?M;@@FN~ACH?M�EA=NPAL

�U1�3�Zs�ttU�4W9^ ;DF9A9h@?CC;CPa9jCL;<ACMFC=a9v9iF?@=S99kwxwm9yzzf�xx�9oAESNgDe>@@A>PH�EA=NPAL

h?PF9@?B=9MAE;;FE9AC9o>CF9�ya9wx�}

�� !��" #��$�% &!��

��$$$'(�$�'!��'��%!�%)�*��!)+��$��+��')(� ��

,-.-/0123456175/89/:437;284535<87/




p>ANG>@qr>MsOLMEj>CtALAF>K>LNCuN@AN>FE>M

p>ANG>@q@>MsOLMEj>CN@AggEhCKALAF>K>LNCvprwtxCMN@AN>FE>MCELh@>AM>CNG>C>gg>hNEj>L>MMCOgCN@AggEhCOs>@ANEOLMC?y@ELFCA?j>@M>C@OA?CH>ANG>@hOL?ENEOLMzCAL?CH>ANG>@q@>MsOLMEj>CKAELN>LALh>CKALAF>K>LNCvprttxCMN@AN>FE>MCG>BsC@>?yh>ChOMNMCAMMOhEAN>?CHENGCHELN>@CKAELN>LALh>{

|X14/5]1/}3;5/PR/V134;Z/X1]<o}1/o43;]1;/]3X1/3X1431~/Z�dPZPQR/214/V134-/:T175Vb871/214o175/89/5]8;1/o43;]1;�7134}V/PZQPRZRRR�T141/T135]14b41}351~-/|7/3X1431Z/7134}V/dZRRR/2182}1/341/m<}}1~/37~/8X14/eeZRRR/341/<7�Y41~/<7/T135]14b41}351~/o43;]1;/13o]/V134-/�<m1T<;1Z/5]1/~1}3V;3;;8o<351~/T<5]/T135]14/o37/�1/24898Y7~Z/41;Y}5<7/<7/;<7<9<o375/}8;;1;/<7/199<o<17oV-

\n:�/;54351<1;/248X<~1/3ooY4351/<7984635<87/58/317o<1;/87/5]1/711~/984/3224824<351/54399<o/<7514X175<87/;54351<1;/58/6<5<351/5]1/<623o5;/89T135]14b41}351~/483~/37~/54399<o/o87~<5<87;-/:]1/41;Y}5/<;/<6248X1~/68�<}<5VZ/41~Yo1~/~1}3V;Z/37~/;3914/543X1}/~Y4<7/3~X14;1/T135]14/o87~<5<87;-\n��/;54351<1;/341/3};8/Y;1~/�V/317o<1;/58/41~Yo1/5]1/7135<X1/17X<48761753}/<623o5;/37~/o8;5;/3;;8o<351~/T<5]/483~/;3}5/Y;1-

p>ANG>@qr>MsOLMEj>Cw@AggEhCAL?CtAELN>LALh>CtALAF>K>LN

:]1/�l\W/n83~/\135]14/�37316175/�48436/~1X1}82;/37~/~12}8V;/483~/T135]14/637316175/;54351<1;/5]35/]1}2/317o<1;/41;287~/58/3~X14;1T135]14/o87~<5<87;/�V/248X<~<7/54399<o/3~X<;84<1;/37~/T347<7;/58/543X1}14;/37~/o87548}}<7/5]1/9}8T/89/54399<o/87/5]1/]<]T3V;/~Y4<7/<7o}16175T135]14-/W/41o175/98oY;/89/5]1/248436/<;/Y;<7/68�<}1/8�;14X35<87;/37~/o8771o51~/X1]<o}1/~353/58/;Y22845/54399<o/37~/63<751737o1/637316175-:]1/248436/~1X1}821~/37~/2Y�}<;]1~/5]1/�Y<~1}<71;/984/012}8V<7/_8771o51~b�1]<o}1/[73�}1~/\135]14/n1;287;<X1/:4399<o/�37316175.54351<1;-

W~825<7/T135]14b41;287;<X1/54399<o/37~/63<751737o1/637316175/;54351<1;/5]35/Y;1/483~/T135]14/~353/9486/k751435<7/�8�<}1/|�;14X35<87;�k�|�/37~/o8771o51~/X1]<o}1/51o]78}8<1;Z/o86�<71~/T<5]/<798461~/~1o<;<87;/;5166<7/9486/�35]9<7~14Z/T<}}/173�}1/.5351/37~/}8o3}/317o<1;/58/�12483o5<X1/37~/63731/5]1/;V;516/�19841/7135<X1/<623o5;/8ooY4-/k7/3~~<5<87Z/6841/3ooY4351/37~/}8o35<87b;21o<9<o/483~/T135]14/o87~<5<87/~353/T<}}3}}8T/3224824<351/54399<o/637316175/;54351<1;/58/�1/~12}8V1~/T]141/5]1V/341/711~1~/37~/41~Yo1/o8;5;/3;;8o<351~/T<5]/T<7514/63<751737o1Z<7o}Y~<7/;3}5/37~/o]16<o3}/322}<o35<87;-

�>L>gENM

uAg>@CrOA?M{/W17o<1;/o37/Y;1/54399<o/637316175/37~/543X1}14/<7984635<87/;V;516;/58/41~Yo1/~1}3V;/37~/o43;]1;/41;Y}5<7/9486/3~X14;1T135]14-iLgO@K>?Cw@Aj>B>@M{CW17o<1;/o37/248X<~1/T135]14/<623o5/;53516175;/5]35/173�}1/~4<X14;/58/63m1/�15514/~1o<;<87;/4134~<7/T]15]14Z/T]17Z37~/T]141/58/543X1}-�LjE@OLK>LNABCuyMNAELA�EBENI{/:]1/7135<X1/17X<48761753}/<623o5;/89/483~/;3}5/Y;1/�V/637V/317o<1;/o37/�1/41~Yo1~/3;/5]1/4<]5/�Y375<5<1;89/o]}84<~1;/37~/85]14/o]16<o3};/341/87}V/322}<1~/T]141/5]1V/341/T3443751~-

�� !��" #��$�% &!��

��$$$'(�$�'!��'��%!�%)�*��!)+��$��+��')(� ��

,-.-/0120-3/045.6-76/

89:9;<=:>?=@AB:@=CDE@FB=:G;>BF;<=9H:9=H:I;=J;:?F@K=:?AC9;?=L:9HMF>?;J=:>?=NOP=:J;=@;:?F>G=9H;=?;C@AKQ;>9=AM=RSTO=:>?=RSOOU=89:9;<=9H:9=H:I;:@J;:?K=FQC@;Q;>9;?=AJ=:J;=FQC@;Q;>9F>G=RSTO=<9J:9;GF;<=D<F>G=QAEF@;=AE<;JI:9FA><=MJAQ=I;HFB@;<=F>B@D?;=RKAQF>GV=OFBHFG:>V=8AD9H=W:XA9:VR:<HF>G9A>V=:>?=W;@:Y:J;U=89:9;<=9H:9=H:I;=FQC@;Q;>9;?=YF>9;J=Q:F>9;>:>B;Z:>9F[FBF>G=<9J:9;GF;<=D<F>G=NOP=?:9:=F>B@D?;=OF>>;<A9:V=OFBHFG:>V:>?=\;I:?:U=N>=:??F9FA>V=<;I;J:@=@AB:@=:G;>BF;<V=<DBH=:<=9H;=]F9K=AM=R;<9=W;<=OAF>;<V=NAY:V=H:I;=Q:?;=;9;><FI;=F>I;<9Q;>9<=F>=I;HFB@;[E:<;?9;BH>A@AGF;<=MAJ=QAJ;=;MMFBF;>9=:>?=;MM;B9FI;=9J:MMFB=:>?=Q:F>9;>:>B;=Q:>:G;Q;>9U

_1-.6-a

b1/c/50de2/e15=fgRh=PMMFB;=AM=PC;J:9FA><=ijkjl=mnn[ojpj=SA;Q;JUh@M;@AJq?A9UGAI

4.re047a.1=fgRh=PMMFB;=AM=PC;J:9FA><=ijkjl=mnn[smks=L:D@ULF<:>Aq?A9UGAI

b/a1r56/a

fgRh=SA:?=R;:9H;J=O:>:G;Q;>9=LJAGJ:Q

tDF?;@F>;<=MAJ=W;C@AKF>G=]A>>;B9;?[u;HFB@;=v>:E@;?=R;:9H;J=S;<CA><FI;=TJ:MMFB=O:>:G;Q;>9=89J:9;GF;<

L:G;=@:<9=QA?FMF;?=A>=wD>;=nV=jksx

January 10, 2017

Page 1

Errors and Omissions – Benefit/Cost Analysis Evaluation Guidelines Overview

The department incurs unplanned costs on construction projects. When they are considered Premium Costs as defined in the Construction Project Administration Manual (CPAM), some can be attributable to Errors and Omissions (E&O) as defined in Procedure 375-020-010, Errors and Omissions and Contractual Breaches by Consultants on Department Contracts. They can be caused by the design consultant, i.e. Engineer of Record (EOR), or the Construction Engineering and Inspection consultant (CCEI), and in some cases both.

337.015(3), Florida Statutes, states “To protect the public interest, the department shall vigorously pursue claims against contractors and consultants for time overruns and substandard work products.” When EOR E&O or CCEI E&O issues are identified, the department must decide whether, when and how to pursue recovery from the EOR consultant or CEI consultant. The following general determinations shall apply:

1. Procedure 375-020-010 defines the processes for managing E&O issues on construction contracts.

2. Benefit/Cost Analysis Evaluation Guidelines will apply only to issues for which E&O responsibility is debatable, meaning the department will need substantiate a consultant’s responsibility for E&O and Premium Costs the department incurred to correct them. Responsibility for substantiating consultant responsibility rests with the Design Project Manager (DPM) for Design consultant E&O, and the Construction Project Manager (CPM) for CEI Consultant E&O.

Design Consultant E&O resolution participants will be the District E&O Liaison, DPM, District Consultant Project Management Engineer (DCPME), District Design Engineer (DDE), CPM, District Director of Transportation Development (DTD), District Legal (DL), Chief Engineer and Office of General Counsel (OGC).

CEI Consultant E&O resolution participants will be the District E&O Liaison, CPM, District Construction Engineer (DCE), District Director of Transportation Operations (DTO), DL, CE and OGC.

3. Refer to FIGURE 1 – PARTICIPANT CHECKLIST.

4. Refer to FIGURE 2 – BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS (FOR DEBATABLE ISSUES) for a flowchart.

5. Refer to FIGURE 3 – PURSUE EXAMPLE, and FIGURE 4 – DO NO PURSUE EXAMPLE, for examples of B/C analysis.

Regardless of whether E&O is certain or debatable, the department will reserve the right to pursue recovery of Premium Cost.

EXHIBIT 8

January 10, 2017

Page 2

Process – FOR EVERY DEBATABLE ISSUE:

Attempt first to resolve the issue at the project level. For Design Consultant E&O, initially limit participants to the E&O Liaison, CPM, DPM, DCPME, DDE and DL. For CEI Consultant E&O, initially limit participants to the E&O Liaison, CPM, DCE and DL. Involve DTD, DTO, CE and OGC as prescribed by procedure.

Design Consultant E&O:

1. Construction made the assessment of E&O and determined the Premium Cost. 2. The DPM shall assess the Premium Cost portion (all/part/none) for which the

consultant should be held responsible. This amount will be referred to as Benefit. The DPM shall consult with DL and obtain concurrence.

3. DPM shall proceed with Benefit/Cost (B/C) analysis to determine action on pursuit of recovery.

The DPM shall estimate hours each participant (DPM, E&O Liaison, CPM, DCPME and DDE) will spend to substantiate Consultant responsibility. The DPM shall apply hourly rates to the hours to the estimated hours and sum to arrive at a total investment. This amount will be referred to as Cost.

A B/C ratio shall be calculated. If B/C is 1.0 or greater, pursuit of E&O recovery shall proceed. If B/C is less than 1.0, E&O recovery generally shall not be pursued.

4. DPM may opt to delay action, but monthly shall reconsider performing further analysis to determine whether or not to pursue recovery. Considerations for delay include, but are not limited to the following:

Small Premium Cost Early into construction contract time Previous E&O issue resolution experience with same EOR

CEI Consultant E&O:

1. Construction made the assessment of E&O and determined the Premium Cost. 2. The CPM shall assess the Premium Cost portion (all/part/none) for which the

consultant should be held responsible. This amount will be referred to as Benefit. The CPM shall consult with DL and obtain concurrence.

3. CPM shall proceed with Benefit/Cost (B/C) analysis to determine action on pursuit of recovery.

The CPM shall estimate hours each participant (CPM, E&O Liaison, and DDE) will spend to substantiate Consultant responsibility. The CPM shall apply hourly rates to the hours to the estimated hours and sum to arrive at a total investment. This amount will be referred to as Cost.

A B/C ratio shall be calculated. If B/C is 1.0 or greater, pursuit of E&O recovery shall proceed. If B/C is less than 1.0, E&O recovery generally shall not be pursued.

5. CPM may opt to delay action, but monthly shall reconsider performing further analysis to determine whether or not to pursue recovery. Considerations for delay include, but are not limited to the following:

Small Premium Cost

January 10, 2017

Page 3

Early into construction contract time Previous E&O issue resolution experience with same CCEI

Action Delay:

1. Explanation for delay must be documented. 2. When an issue has remained IN REVIEW 120 days after Construction Passed Date

action on issue resolution using B/C analysis must proceed.

January 10, 2017

Page 4

FIGURE 1 – PARTICIPANT CHECKLIST

Design Consultant E&O CEI Consultant E&O

Premium Cost

</= $100K Premium Cost

> $100K Premium Cost

</= $100K Premium Cost

> $100K CPM X X X X DPM X X X X DCPME X X DCE X X DDE X X DTD X X DTO X X DL X X X X CE X X OGC X1 X X1 X E&O Liaison X X X X

Legend CPM: Construction Project Manager DPM: Design Project Manager DCPME: District Consultant Project Management Engineer DCE: District Construction Engineer DDE: District Design Engineer DTD: Director of Transportation Development DTO: Director of Transportation Operations DL: District Legal CE: Chief Engineer OGC: Office of General Counsel Notes 1. Not prescribed in procedure, only if essential

January 10, 2017

Page 5

$Premium Cost(initial)

Evaluate?OR

Delay?

>1?

BENEFITCOST

NO

BENEFIT($Recoverable)

Revisit(MONTHLY)

DELAY

YES

EVALUATE

Close issue

NegotiateSettlement

Receive Payment

FIGURE 2 – BENEFIT/COST DETERMINATION(DEBATABLE E&O ISSUES)

January 10, 2017

Page 6

FIGURE 3 – PURSUE EXAMPLE

Design Consultant E&O Pursuable Premium Cost (BENEFIT) $134,805 Participant Hours Hourly Rate Cost CPM 15 $125 $1,875 DPM 5 $125 $625 DCPME 10 $150 $1,500 DCE $175 DDE 10 $175 $1,750 DTD 5 $200 $1,000 DTO $200 DL 5 $175 $875 CE 5 $200 $1,000 OGC 2 $250 $500 E&O Liaison 5 $100 $500 Total COST $9,625 BENEFIT/COST 14.010

Pursue

Legend CPM: Construction Project Manager DPM: Design Project Manager DCPME: District Consultant Project Management Engineer DCE: District Construction Engineer DDE: District Design Engineer DTD: Director of Transportation Development DTO: Director of Transportation Operations DL: District Legal CE: Chief Engineer OGC: Office of General Counsel

January 10, 2017

Page 7

FIGURE 4 – DO NOT PURSUE EXAMPLE Design Consultant E&O Pursuable Premium Cost (BENEFIT) $4,125 Participant Hours Hourly Rate Cost CPM 5 $125 $625 DPM 5 $125 $625 DCPME 5 $150 $750 DCE $175 DDE 5 $175 $875 DTD 5 $200 $1,000 DL 2 $175 $350 CE $200 OGC $250 E&O Liaison 5 $100 $500 Total COST $4,725 BENEFIT/COST 0.873

Do Not Pursue

Legend CPM: Construction Project Manager DPM: Design Project Manager DCPME: District Consultant Project Management Engineer DCE: District Construction Engineer DDE: District Design Engineer DTD: Director of Transportation Development DTO: Director of Transportation Operations DL: District Legal CE: Chief Engineer OGC: Office of General Counsel

Approved: Effective: June 1, 2018 Reviewed: January 4, 2018

Office: Design/Production Support Topic No.: 375-020-010-e

RESOLUTION OF ERRORS, OMISSIONS, AND CONTRACTUAL BREACHES BY PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

ON DEPARTMENT CONTRACTS

PURPOSE:

To establish a procedure to identify, investigate, and document errors, omissions, and contractual breaches in consultant-prepared construction plans and contract documents, or in the performance of consultant construction engineering and inspection services on Department contracts; to determine and document the extent of consultant responsibility for the cost of plan revisions and certain added construction costs or claims resulting from errors, omissions, and contractual breaches; and to establish a process to pursue recovery of certain added project costs.

AUTHORITY: Sections 20.23 (3)(a), and 334.048(3), Florida Statutes (F.S.)

SCOPE: The Department’s Director of Transportation Development (DTD), Director of Transportation Operations (DTO), District Consultant Project Management Engineer (DCPME), District Design Engineer (DDE), Design Project Manager (DPM), Errors and Omissions Liaison; District Construction Engineer (DCE), Construction Project Manager (CPM), Construction Engineering and Inspection (CEI) Personnel; and the Office of Comptroller-General Accounting Office (OOC-GAO), and Office of General Counsel (OGC) Legal Counsel are the principal users of this procedure.

375-020-010-e Page 2 of 47

REFERENCES: Procedure No. 350-060-303: Accounts Receivable Procedure No. 350-080-300: Receipt Processing Procedure No. 700-000-000: Construction Project Administration Manual (CPAM) Section 95.11(4)(a), 287.055, Subsections 20.23(3)(a), 287.057, 334.048(3), 337.015(3), and 471.033(1)(g), Florida Statutes (F.S.). Rule 61G15-18.011(1), Definitions. Rule 61G15-19.001(4), Grounds for Disciplinary Proceedings. Rule 61G15-30.002 (1), Definitions Common to All Engineer’s Responsibility Rules, Florida Administrative Code. Federal Aid Policy Guide 23, Section 635.120, Code of Federal Regulations.

DEFINITIONS: Avoidability Code: Construction changes are designated as Unavoidable and Avoidable. This procedure applies only to changes designated Avoidable 1 – Production Consultant, (i.e. Design (Engineer of Record) Consultant), and Avoidable 3 – Construction Engineering and Inspection Consultant. Chief Engineer: The Department Central Office employee whose duties include overseeing Engineering operations. Construction Change Tracking System (CCTS): A function within the SiteManager Construction Management System that contains information on all contract changes such as type of change (Supplemental Agreements (SA), Work Orders (WO), Time Extensions) cost of change, responsible party and premium cost. Construction Engineering and Inspection (CEI): Personnel, whether consultant or Department employees, providing construction engineering and inspection services. Construction Plans and Contract Documents: Consultant-prepared plans and contract documents as contracted by the Department and defined in the professional services agreement. Construction Project Manager (CPM): The Department employee whose duties include managing consultant CEI contracts. Consultant: Engineering entity (Either the EOR or CCEI) under contract with the Department to provide engineering services. Consultant CEI (CCEI): A consulting engineering firm, holding a certificate of qualification, and retained by the Department to perform construction engineering and

375-020-010-e Page 3 of 47

inspection services on a project or a series of projects. For this procedure only, all references to CCEI include the appropriate coordination with the CPM. Consultant Project Administrator: The Consultant's administrator in charge of more than one aspect of the construction or administration of the project CCEI. Contractual Breach: The failure of the EOR or CCEI to perform or comply with one or more aspects of its contractual obligations. Contract Documents: The term “Contract Documents” includes: Advertisement for Proposal, Proposal, Certification as to Publication and Notice of Advertisement for Proposal, Appointment of Agent by Nonresident Contractors, Noncollusion Affidavit, Warranty Concerning Solicitation of the Contract by Others, Resolution of Award of Contract, Executed Form of Contract, Performance Bond and Payment Bond, Standard Specifications, Supplemental Specifications, Special Provisions, plans, Addenda, or other information mailed or otherwise transmitted to the prospective bidders prior to the receipt of bids, Work Orders, and Supplemental Agreements, all of which are to be treated as one instrument whether or not set forth at length in the form of contract. Contractual Obligation: The legal responsibility to satisfy the terms and conditions of the professional consultant contract. Department CEI: The Department employees who perform construction engineering and inspection services. Design Project Manager (DPM): The Department employee whose duties include managing consultant design contracts. Director of Transportation Development (DTD): The Department employee whose duties include direction of major functional responsibilities for Transportation Development within a District. Director of Transportation Operations (DTO): The Department employee whose duties include direction of major functional responsibilities for Operations within a District. Director Group: The group of people who meet to discuss resolution of Department claims against consultants. Refer to Sections 12.4 and 23.4 for more information. District Construction Engineer (DCE): The Department employee whose duties include direction of major functional responsibilities within the District Office of Construction. District Consultant Project Management Engineer (DCPME) The Department employee who is a professional engineer with direct supervisory responsibility for the DPM managing consultant-designed projects. District Design Engineer (DDE): The Department employee whose duties include direction of major functional responsibilities within the District Office of Design.

375-020-010-e Page 4 of 47

Early Notification Letter: A document which initiates the Errors and Omissions resolution process. It notifies the consultant of a design issue or CEI issue, and it advises the consultant to keep track of time for potential compensation. Engineer of Record (EOR): As defined in Rule 61G15-30.002 (1), Florida Administrative Code: “A Florida professional engineer who is in responsible charge for the preparation, signing, dating, sealing and issuing of any engineering document(s) for any engineering service or creative work.” For this procedure only, the EOR is a professional consulting engineer retained by the Department to provide said services. In the Resolution Tracking Module, the EOR is referred to as the Production Consultant. Engineer’s Estimate: The estimate of the actual cost and time impacts to the Contractor caused by a contract change without regard to whose fault the contract change is or the percentage of those cost and time impacts the Contractor may be entitled to recover. For each contract change issue, the Engineer’s Estimate will show the pay items involved along with quantities, unit prices, any time impacts, and the basis for the estimate. Entitlement Analysis: A document, signed and dated by the preparing Project Administrator or Engineer, containing statements as to each issue of a contract change, detailing the reasons (using specific contract references when appropriate) why the Contractor is, or is not, entitled to recover the time and cost impacts calculated for that contract change issue in the Engineer’s Estimate. If some of the time or cost impacts determined in the Engineer’s Estimate are the responsibility of the contractor, the Entitlement Analysis for each issue should also include a numeric percentage of those cost and time impacts for which the reasons previously detailed justify the Contractor’s entitlement. Each contract change issue should include all the pay items associated with that issue. Errors and Omissions (E&O): Acts of negligence committed by the EOR in the performance of engineering design service or creative work, and acts of negligence committed by CCEI in the performance of construction engineering inspection services. Errors and Omissions Liaison: The appointed District employee who is responsible for monitoring status of the recovery effort for all District E&O issues. Errors and Omissions Notification Letter: A document which advises the consultant of the Department’s intent to correct project issues by Supplemental Agreement/Work Order (SA/WO) with the construction contractor. The letter shall state the Department’s initial assessment of the project issues (premium costs, contract time and/or money, EOR responsibility). Negligence: As defined in Rule 61G15-19.001(4), Florida Administrative Code: “A professional engineer shall not be negligent in the practice of engineering. The term negligence set forth in Section 471.033(1) (g), F.S., is herein defined as the failure by a

375-020-010-e Page 5 of 47

professional engineer to utilize due care in performing in an engineering capacity or failing to have due regard for acceptable standards of engineering principles.” Office of the General Counsel (OGC): Department legal office. Office of the Comptroller (OOC-GAO)-General Accounting Office: The Department’s General Accounting Office within the Office of the Comptroller. Premium Costs: The additional cost of a contract change that would not have been incurred if the work had been included in the original contract. More specifically, premium costs are dollar amounts paid for non-value added work. Delays, inefficiencies, rework, or extra work as shown below, other than those caused by the contractor and/or the subcontractors or suppliers, will be considered as non-value added work. Non-value added work can occur in three distinct situations: 1 Work delays or inefficiencies. In this situation, the premium costs are the total

delay/inefficiency damages paid to the contractor. 2 Rework. The premium costs are the dollar amount of the original items of work that

have to be removed and the costs to remove these items. 3 Extra work. In this situation, the premium costs are computed as the net difference

between the final agreed prices paid to the contractor and the Engineer’s Estimate—what the cost would have been had the extra work been included in the original bid at letting.

Premium costs associated with EOR and CCEI Errors and Omissions shall be Federal-aid Non-Participating. Premium Costs Demand Letter: A letter to the EOR or CCEI demanding payment of E&O premium costs. Project Suite Enterprise Edition (PSEE): A web-based Enterprise Application developed for project management. Resolution Tracking Module (RTM): A module of PSEE which provides auditable process information about the resolution of project E&O issues. Responsible Charge: As defined in Rule 61G15-18.011(1), Florida Administrative Code: “’Responsible Charge” shall mean that degree of control an engineer is required to maintain over engineering decisions made personally or by others over which the engineer exercises supervisory direction and control authority.” Services In Kind: Services provided by a consultant, in lieu of money, as restitution for damages caused by Errors and Omissions. Value-Added Work: All work that adds value to the project.

375-020-010-e Page 6 of 47

GENERAL: The Department employs professional consulting engineers to provide design engineering and construction engineering and inspection services. While consultants are accountable for the technical accuracy and quality of their work, mistakes may occur that result in substandard work products as defined in Section 337.015(3), F.S., resulting in a claim against the consultant. Consultant-prepared construction plans and contract documents may contain errors or omissions; as a result, cost and time overruns may occur on a construction project. Cost and time overruns may also occur on a construction project because of a breach of the consultant CEI contract. When consultant errors or omissions, or contractual breaches cause added project costs the Department shall evaluate whether to prosecute recovery of these added project costs. At an appropriate time the Department may utilize the Office of the General Counsel to assist with prosecuting the recovery of these costs. For the purpose of this procedure only, “errors, omissions, and contractual breaches” shall be collectively referred to as “Errors and Omissions.” To ensure compliance with 337.015(3), F.S, the Department shall vigorously pursue recovery of incurred construction Premium Costs which are considered to be due to consultant E&O. Recovery of undisputed E&O Premium Costs shall be pursued regardless of dollar amount. The decision to pursue recovery of debatable E&O Premium Costs shall be based on a Benefit/Cost (B/C) analysis. Errors and Omissions – Benefit/Cost Analysis Evaluation Guidelines have been developed for use in these cases. The Project Manager (DPM for EOR E&O, and CPM for CCEI E&O) shall establish and maintain a project file to record all information related to the project E&O. Federal-aid participation in all changes to the Department’s construction contracts shall be determined as required by the Federal Aid Policy Guide 23, Section 635.120, Code of Federal Regulations.

https://fldot.sharepoint.com/sites/FDOT-Design/ProSup/EandO/Shared%20Documents/General/BenefitCostAnalysis/EO-BCG-011017.pdf

https://fldot.sharepoint.com/sites/FDOT-Design/ProSup/EandO/Shared%20Documents/General/BenefitCostAnalysis/EO-BCG-011017.pdf

375-020-010-e Page 7 of 47

TRAINING: The Production Support Office, with assistance from the State Construction Office and the Office of General Counsel, shall prepare and deliver training in the use of this procedure on an as-needed basis. The Department will include the consultant community in the target audience.

FORMS: This procedure requires use of the following forms:

APPENDIX C1: Early Notification Letter - Design

APPENDIX C2: Early Notification Letter - CCEI

APPENDIX D1: Errors and Omissions Notification Letter - Design

APPENDIX D2: Errors and Omissions Notification Letter - CCEI

APPENDIX E1: Premium Costs Demand Letter - Design

APPENDIX E2: Premium Costs Demand Letter - CCEI

APPENDIX F: Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and Acknowledgement of Privileged Discussion

APPENDIX G: Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Sending Funds to the Cashier’s Office)

APPENDIX H: Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Request for assistance to recover funds)

APPENDIX I: Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Request for assistance to recover/track a series of payments)

APPENDIX J: Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Services In Kind)

375-020-010-e Page 8 of 47

DESIGN CONSULTANT ERRORS AND OMISSIONS

1. DESIGN ISSUE OCCURRENCE During the construction phase of a project, issues may occur that require clarification or evaluation of the construction plans and contract documents. Such issues are generally resolved/clarified through a Request for Information (RFI). However, evaluation may indicate that such project issues require design revisions and/or contract modification as a result of the performance of the EOR. As partners in the project, the CPM, DPM, and EOR must work together to resolve these issues as quickly as possible in order to minimize construction interruptions. The DPM is responsible for documenting Design E&O issue management in RTM. This may be accomplished through the E&O Liaison. The following flowchart lays out the process for addressing Design Consultant E&O issues. Sections 2 – 12 of this procedure detail the various stages of this process.

375-020-010-e Page 9 of 47

DESIGN E&O PROCESS FLOWCHART

EOR E&O Process 1/5

DPM EOR OGC ReferenceCCEI/CPM

Discovery

Issue Participants/

Issue Identification

Notify DPM/EOR

Identify, Clarify, and Evaluate Resolution

Consult OGC

Evaluate and

Document

Responsibility for

Premium $

E&O w/

Premium ?Resolved

Early Notification

Letter

N

Collaborate on Appropriate Course of Action

CEI Prepares SA w/input from DPM, EOR, and OGC

CEI Negotiates and Implements Resolution w/Contractor

Construction Engineer

Assessment DPM Initial Assessment

Y

2

3

6

375-020-010-e Page 10 of 47

EOR E&O Process 2/5

ReferenceOGCEORDPMCCEI/CPM

Coding OK

?

Design

Assessment

Documentation

N

E&O?

Y

Resolved

N

Contract

Modifications

Y

E&O Notification

LetterResponse

Complete Assessment of EOR Responsibility w/

input from CEI/CPM

6.

7

8

9

375-020-010-e Page 11 of 47

EOR E&O Process 3/5

ReferenceOGCEORDPMCCEI/CPM

EOR

Liable?

Resolved

N

Settlement Discussions

Y

EOR Settles?Settlement

Agreement

Resolved

Y

Re-evaluate Issues

N

Pursue?

Resolved

N

Prepare Claim

Package for DTD

Y

10.

11.

375-020-010-e Page 12 of 47

EOR E&O Process 4/5

OGC DTD ReferenceChief Engr.EORDPMCCEI/

CPM

DTD Initial Evaluation & Consultation

w/OGC

DTD Group?

DTD Group Claim Meeting

Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and Acknowledgement of

Privileged Discussion

Y

Settlement?

N

>$100K?

Approval?

Y

N

Resolved

N

EOR

Setttles?

N

N

Settlement

Agreement

Y

DTD

Determination

12

Y

Y

Resolved

375-020-010-e Page 13 of 47

EOR E&O Process 5/5

ReferenceChief Engr.DTDOGCEORDPMCCEI/

CPM

DTD Premium cost

Demand Letter

25.

Premium Cost

Demand Letter

EOR

Setttles?

Resolved

LitigationN

Y

375-020-010-e Page 14 of 47

2. DESIGN ISSUE DISCOVERY, EVALUATION, AND EARLY NOTIFICATION

2.1 Discovery This stage of the business process is Discovery. Discovery by Construction starts the E&O management process. Upon discovery of the design issue, the CEI or other knowledgeable or responsible person shall promptly advise the CPM who, within one business day, shall notify the DPM of any project design issues which may require design revisions and contract modifications resulting in added project costs. Initial advisement may be by verbal communication, which must be followed promptly by e-mail or other written documentation. The DPM shall promptly notify the EOR of the issues. Early discovery and notification provides the EOR an opportunity to minimize and mitigate any added project costs. In addition, such discovery and notification may prevent or minimize contractor claims against the Department. 2.2 Notification It may initially be unclear whether a design issue is an E&O issue. If the project issues appear to have been caused by EOR E&O, the DPM has the responsibility of providing the EOR formal written notification of the nature and scope of the design issues and, if known, the resulting premium costs and contract time (Appendix C1 – Early Notification Letter – Design). This shall take place within five business days of the DPM being notified of an issue’s discovery. Notification also advises the EOR to track their time expended on the issue for potential reimbursement if the issue is later determined to not be an E&O issue. When E&O issues are not clear, i.e. debatable, the DPM shall seek the advice of OGC Legal Counsel. OGC Legal Counsel shall provide assistance with the determination of consultant negligence and with evaluating and documenting the EOR’s responsibility for premium costs. In addition, the DPM shall perform a Benefit/Cost Analysis. Benefit/Cost Analysis Guidelines are available at a link provided in the GENERAL section. If it is determined that the EOR has potential liability for any portion of premium costs incurred on the project, the DPM shall issue the Early Notification Letter to the EOR. The DPM is responsible to document this Early Notification stage of the business process in RTM. 2.3 Evaluation The CEI, CPM, DPM, and EOR shall work together to identify, clarify, and evaluate a resolution of the project design issues. The DPM shall work with the EOR to clarify the project issues by reviewing the plans and specifications, the EOR’s original scope of services, and any specific requirements the Department imposed on the EOR. Project issues may initially appear to be the result of E&O, but may subsequently be determined to be beyond the EOR’s contractual scope of services. Accordingly, the DPM shall review the consultant’s scope of services, the professional engineering standards in effect when the contract was executed, project-specific information provided to the consultant, and any

375-020-010-e Page 15 of 47

other Department instructions, to determine the consultant’s responsibility for the project issues. If the DPM is not a professional engineer, the review shall be performed by the professional engineer in responsible charge of the DPM.

3. RESOLUTION DEVELOPMENT The CEI, CPM, DPM, and EOR shall work collaboratively to determine an appropriate course of action for resolution of the design issues. 3.1 The EOR may provide revised drawings, calculations, and specification changes to resolve the design project issues. 3.2 With the approval of the CPM/DDE/DPM, the EOR may work directly with the construction contractor to resolve design project issues, provided the Department incurs no premium economic or time costs as a result. 3.3 Post-design services may be utilized to compensate the EOR for such involvement during construction (site visits and design changes) to resolve the design issue. However, the costs for site visits and additional engineering services are not billable as post-design services when the issue was caused by EOR E&O during design. The EOR shall track such costs separately for potential compensation. 3.4 The CEI shall calculate the premium cost impact for the E&O issue. 3.5 To ensure an accurate assessment of premium costs, the CCEI shall prepare the SA/WO with input from the CPM, OGC Legal Counsel, and the Construction Contractor.

4. NEGOTIATE AND IMPLEMENT RESOLUTION WITH CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR

The CEI shall negotiate any additional cost and time required to implement the proposed resolution with the construction contractor. The CCEI shall document the time and cost of a resolution with the construction contractor by a Work Order, Supplemental Agreement or Unilateral Payment document.

4.1 Resolving project design issues typically requires a change to the original construction contract through a supplemental agreement/work order (SA/WO). Topic No. 700-000-000, Construction Project Administration Manual (CPAM), Section 7.3, defines the Department’s method to initiate, document, and execute Work Orders, Supplemental Agreements, and Unilateral Payment documents. 4.2 The CEI shall perform an Entitlement Analysis on every SA/WO.

5. INITIAL ASSESSMENT

375-020-010-e Page 16 of 47

This stage of the business process is Initial Assessment. Successful recovery of damages caused by E&O is highly dependent on the initial assessment of the project issues addressed in the SA/WO document. 5.1 The CCEI shall assign initial SA/WO coding in CCTS. CPAM – Attachment for Section 7.3 defines the method for coding contract modification. The coding identifies the party responsible for causing the need for contract modification. It also indicates the Department’s intention to recover premium costs. To ensure accuracy, the CCEI shall prepare the SA/WO coding with input from the CPM, DPM, and EOR. 5.2 The CPM and DPM shall assess EOR E&O responsibility for premium cost impact with legal advice from the OGC. The reasonable administrative costs the Department incurs to process an SA/WO, and to resolve changes in contract documents, together with additional construction engineering and inspection costs, may be considered when determining premium costs. The DPM shall review the CCEI’s initial assessment and is responsible to update RTM for this stage of the business process: DPM Initial Assessment.

6. DPM DOCUMENTATION OF PREMIUM COSTS AND CODING This stage of the business process is Design Assessment Documentation. An SA/WO that is the result of E&O will also require a review of the Entitlement Analysis. Without interruption to the administration of the construction project, the CPM and DPM shall discuss the contract modification coding and premium cost calculations. Does DPM agree with coding and premium costs? Decision: NO: The DPM shall not change the Avoidable Code to a different Avoidable code

in RTM. Instead, if it should be decided EOR responsibility is partial or none, the DPM shall document this in RTM under “Comments”, then proceed with evaluation of liability for Premium Costs.

YES: Proceed with evaluation of liability for Premium Costs.

375-020-010-e Page 17 of 47

7. DPM EVALUATION OF E&O

The DPM shall evaluate the issue further to determine if the premium costs were the result of the EOR E&O. Were there Errors & Omissions resulting in premium costs? Decision: NO: The matter is resolved and no further action will be taken to prosecute recovery of

any Premium costs. The DPM shall document the basis for the decision in RTM. YES: DPM sends Errors and Omissions Notification Letter (Appendix D1).

8. E&O NOTIFICATION LETTER (APPENDIX D1)

8.1 The DPM shall notify the EOR in writing of the Department’s intent to correct project issues by SA/WO with the construction contractor (Appendix D1 – Errors and Omissions Notification Letter – Design). The notification letter shall state the Department’s initial assessment of the project issues (premium costs, contract time and/or money, EOR responsibility) and request a written response from the consultant. The DPM shall also notify the EOR—as follow-up to the Early Notification Letter (Appendix C1)—if there appears to be no consultant responsibility for the project issues. The DPM shall include copies of all such correspondence in the project E&O file. 8.2 The EOR may respond to the E&O Notification Letter and Department’s initial assessment of the project issues, providing comment and documentation. The CEI, CPM and DPM or their representatives may conduct meetings with the EOR to evaluate their response.

9. EOR LIABILITY FOR PREMIUM COSTS The CPM and DPM shall evaluate the EOR’s response to the E&O Notification Letter to complete the assessment of EOR responsibility. The initial determination of EOR responsibility shall be vested with the DPM. The CPM acts in an advisory capacity. Is the EOR liable for any portion of the Premium Costs? Decision: NO: The matter is resolved and no further action will be taken to recover Premium

Costs. YES: The Department will undertake settlement discussions with the EOR. If the Department determines that the consultant is only partially responsible for E&O, the DPM shall determine a lower amount which will be the basis for negotiation with the EOR. If the Department determines that the consultant is not responsible for E&O, the DPM shall

375-020-010-e Page 18 of 47

promptly notify the EOR of the results, and all reasonable costs incurred by the EOR during this process shall be billable as post-design services.

10. PREMIUM COSTS CLAIM SETTLEMENT

Does the Department settle claim with EOR for Premium Costs? Decision: NO: The CPM and DPM re-evaluate issues and DPM again makes decision whether to

continue prosecution of recovery of Premium Costs, with input from DDE/DCPME. YES: The matter is resolved. Legal counsel prepares settlement agreement/release and

oversees execution of agreement/release and payment of funds.

11. CONTINUE PROSECUTION OF THE CLAIM FOR PREMIUM COSTS

Shall the Department continue prosecution of the claim for Premium Costs against the EOR? Decision: NO: The DPM shall document basis for Department’s decision to not prosecute claim for

Premium Costs in RTM and include a Benefit/Cost Analysis. Case is resolved. YES: The DPM, for further analysis, shall prepare a claim package regarding the

Premium Costs and submit to the DIRECTOR GROUP for evaluation.

12. DIRECTOR GROUP CLAIM MEETING This stage of the business process is DTD Determination.

12.1 The Director of Transportation Development (DTD) shall determine if the claim for Errors and Omissions against the EOR warrants further action. 12.2 The DTD or its designee(s) shall conduct an initial evaluation of premium costs incurred by the district as a result of the EOR’s potential Errors and Omissions and advise the DTD (in the event that a designee does the evaluation). The DTD shall consult with OGC Legal Counsel on issues regarding the liability of the EOR for the premium costs. 12.3 If the district is unable to resolve its claim for premium costs with the EOR the DTD shall make a determination if the EOR is potentially liable for all or a portion of the estimated premium costs (Cost Claim). In order to make this determination the DTD may convene a group of advisors (DTD Group) to assist in the conduct of a meeting to discuss the potential liability of the EOR. 12.4 The DTD may schedule the DTD Group Claim Meeting between the DTD Group and the EOR to discuss resolution of the Errors and Omissions claim. The Department representatives in the DTD Group may include the DTD, the DPM, the CPM, OGC Legal

375-020-010-e Page 19 of 47

Counsel and other designated Department representatives as deemed necessary by the DTD. The EOR may include personnel, attorneys, consultants and experts it deems necessary to represent its interests at the Claim Meeting. The Department, EOR and their representatives at the Claim Meeting must agree that all discussions, representations, and documents made and utilized in the Claim Meeting are deemed settlement discussions and therefore subject to applicable privileges set forth by law. See Appendix F - Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and Acknowledgement of Privileged Discussions. 12.5 Notwithstanding the presence and assistance of the foregoing persons on behalf of the Department the DTD shall have sole authority for the decision on the resolution of all pending issues arising from the Errors and Omissions claim. Any proposed resolution of issues shall be in writing, reviewed by OGC Legal counsel and signed by authorized representatives (identified during the meeting) of the Department and the EOR. The proposed resolution should resolve all pending issues and provide for a full release by both parties. Each party must bear its own attorney’s fees and costs related to the pending issues. 12.6 If the EOR declines to attend or participate in the DTD Group Claim Meeting then the DTD may conduct a claim meeting without the EOR and proceed with its evaluation. 12.7 If as a result of the DTD Group Claim Meeting the Department and the EOR are able to reach a resolution of the cost claim a written agreement and release shall be drafted by OGC Legal Counsel for execution by all parties. 12.8 If the resolution of the Cost Claim is $100,000 (Premium) or less the DTD has final authority for the decision on the resolution of all pending issues with the EOR. If the resolution of the Cost Claim is greater than $100,000 the DTD has initial authority to approve the proposed resolution of the pending issues, which is subject to final approval by the Chief Engineer. The decision of the Chief Engineer is final. 12.9 If the DTD determines as a result of information provided that it is in the best interest of the Department not to prosecute the Cost Claim the Department will notify the EOR of its decision. 12.10 If the DTD determines as a result of information provided to him that it is in the best interest of the Department to prosecute the Cost Claim and the EOR does not participate in the Director’s Claim Meeting or does not reach a settlement with the Department as a result of the meeting, the DTD will notify the EOR of the Department’s decision to pursue recovery, Appendix E1 – Premium Costs Demand Letter. The letter shall summarize the project issues, the Premium Costs and any additional terms for settlement, and advise the EOR of the Department’s intent to pursue recovery through litigation. The EOR may resolve the Claim by written acceptance of the terms of the Premium Costs Demand Letter within 15 calendar days of the date of the letter. After the 15 days the offer expires. The decision of the DTD is final. Final settlement authority may vest with the Chief Engineer in accordance with the foregoing.

375-020-010-e Page 20 of 47

CONSULTANT CEI (CCEI) ERRORS AND OMISSIONS

13. CCEI ISSUE OCCURRENCE

Project issues may also arise as a result of CCEI contract administration. Discovery typically occurs during periodic reviews of the CCEI’s work product, Supplemental Agreements, time extensions, staffing, equipment, and project records. The Department’s CPM is responsible to identify Errors and Omissions that are the result of CCEI contract administration. The CPM is responsible for documenting CCEI E&O issue management in RTM. This may be accomplished through the E&O Liaison. The following flowchart lays out the process for addressing CCEI E&O issues. Sections 14 – 23 of this procedure detail the various stages of this process.

375-020-010-e Page 21 of 47

CCEI E&O PROCESS FLOWCHART

CCEI E&O Process 1/4

ReferenceDTOOGCCCEICPM

Discovery

Assessment/

Corrective Action

Early Notification

Letter to CCEI

14.

15.

Prepare SA w/input from CCEI, and OGC

Negotiate & Implement Resolution w/Construction Contractor

Premium $

Caused by

E&O?

Resolved

N

E&O Notification

Letter

18.

Y

19.Response

CPM & OGC

Complete

Assessment of

CCEI

Responsibility

CCEI Liable? 20.

Resolved

N

Y

375-020-010-e Page 22 of 47


ReferenceDTOOGCCCEICPM

Settlement Discussions

CCEI Settles?Settlement

Agreement

Resolved

Y

21.

CPM & DCE Re-

evaluate Issues

N

Pursue?

Resolved

N

Prepare Claim

Package for DTO

Y

DTO Initial Evaluation & Consultation

w/OGC

22.

375-020-010-e Page 23 of 47


ReferenceChief EngineerDTOOGCCCEICPM

DTO Group?

DTO Group Claim Meeting

Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and

Acknowledgement of Privileged Discussion

Y

Settlement?

N

>$100K?

Approval?

Resolved

Y

N

Resolved

Y

N

CCEI

Settles?

Settlement

Agreement

Resolved

Y

N

N

Y

375-020-010-e Page 24 of 47


ReferenceChief EngineerDTOOGCCCEICPM

DTO Premium

Cost Demand

Letter

CCEI

Settles?

Resolved

Y

Litigation

N

25.

375-020-010-e Page 25 of 47

14. CCEI ISSUE DISCOVERY, EVALUATION, AND EARLY NOTIFICATION

The CPM shall prepare a written assessment of the project issues, determine the appropriate corrective action, and establish a reasonable time frame to implement the solution. The CPM shall promptly notify the CCEI in writing of project issues that may result in premium costs and contract time (Appendix C2– Early Notification Letter – CCEI). If the Department determines that the CCEI is not responsible for Errors and Omissions, the DCE’s delegate shall promptly notify the CCEI of the results, and all reasonable costs incurred by the CCEI during this process shall be billable. The CCEI shall track such costs separately for potential compensation. When E&O issues are not clear, i.e. debatable, the CPM shall seek OGC advice. OGC shall provide assistance with the determination of consultant negligence, and evaluating and documenting the CCEI’s responsibility for premium costs. In addition, the CPM shall perform a Benefit/Cost Analysis. Benefit/Cost Analysis Guidelines are available at a link provided in the GENERAL section.

15. RESOLUTION DEVELOPMENT Before and after the issuance of the Early Notification Letter the CPM shall determine an appropriate course of action for resolution of the project issues. 15.1 With the approval of the DCE/CPM the CCEI may work directly with the construction contractor to resolve project issues, provided the Department incurs no premium economic or time costs as a result. 15.2 CPM shall calculate the premium cost impact for Errors and Omissions. 15.3 To ensure an accurate assessment of premium costs, the CPM shall prepare the SA/WO with input from the CCEI, OGC, and the Construction Contractor.

16. NEGOTIATE AND IMPLEMENT RESOLUTION WITH CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR 16.1 The CEI will negotiate any additional cost and time required to implement the proposed resolution with the construction contractor. The CEI shall document the time and cost of a resolution with the construction contractor by a Work Order, Supplemental Agreement, or Unilateral Payment document.

16.2 Resolving project issues typically requires a change to the original construction contract through a SA/WO. Procedure No. 700-000-000, Construction Project

375-020-010-e Page 26 of 47

Administration Manual (CPAM), Section 7.3, defines the Department’s method to initiate, document, and execute SA, WO or Unilateral Payment documents.

17. ASSESSMENT OF PREMIUM COSTS AND CODING Successful recovery of damages caused by Errors and Omissions is highly dependent on the initial assessment of the project issues addressed in the SA, WO, or Unilateral Payment document. 17.1 The CPM shall prepare the proposed SA coding. The CPM shall assess CCEI responsibility for premium cost impact for E&O with legal advice from the OGC. The reasonable administrative costs the Department incurs to process a SA/WO, and to resolve changes in contract documents, together with additional construction engineering and inspection costs may be considered when determining premium costs.

18. CPM EVALUATION OF E&O Were there Errors & Omissions resulting in premium costs? Decision: NO: The matter is resolved and no further action will be taken to prosecute recovery of

any Premium costs. The CPM shall document the basis for the decision. YES: CPM shall send Errors and Omissions Notification Letter (Appendix D2) to

CCEI

19. E&O NOTIFICATION LETTER (APPENDIX D2)

19.1 The CPM shall notify the CCEI in writing of the Department’s intent to correct project issues by SA/WO with the construction contractor (Appendix D2 – Errors and Omissions Notification Letter – CCEI). The notification letter shall state the Department’s initial assessment of the project issues (premium costs, contract time and/or money, CCEI responsibility) and request a written response from the consultant. The CPM shall also notify the CCEI—as follow-up to Early Notification (Appendix C2)—if there appears to be no consultant responsibility for the project issues. The CPM shall include copies of all such correspondence in the project E&O file.

19.2 The CCEI may respond to the E&O Notification Letter and Department’s initial assessment of the project issues, providing comment and documentation. The CPM and DCE or their representatives may conduct meetings with the CCEI to evaluate the response. The CPM and DCE shall evaluate the CCEI’s response to the CCEI Notification Letter to complete the assessment of CCEI responsibility. The initial

375-020-010-e Page 27 of 47

determination of CCEI responsibility shall be vested with the DCE. The CPM acts in an advisory capacity.

20. CCEI LIABLE FOR PREMIUM COSTS Is the CCEI liable for any portion of the Premium Costs? Decision: NO: The matter is resolved and no further action will be taken to recover Premium

Costs. YES: The Department will undertake settlement discussions with the CCEI. If the Department determines that the consultant is only partially responsible for E&O, the CPM shall determine a lower amount which will be the basis for negotiation with the CCEI. If the Department determines that the consultant is not responsible for E&O, the CPM shall promptly notify the CCEI of the results, and all reasonable costs incurred by the CCEI during this process shall be billable as consultant services.

21. DEPARTMENT SETTLES CLAIM WITH CCEI FOR PREMIUM COSTS

Does the Department settle claim with CCEI for Premium Costs? Decision: NO: CPM and DCE re-evaluate issues and DCE again makes decision whether to

continue prosecution of recovery of Premium Costs. YES: The matter is resolved. OGC Legal Counsel prepares settlement

agreement/release and oversees execution of agreement/release and payment of funds.

22. PROSECUTION OF THE CLAIM FOR PREMIUM COSTS Shall the Department continue prosecution of the claim for Premium Costs against the CCEI?

Decision: NO: The CPM shall document basis for Department’s decision to not prosecute claim for

Premium Costs, and include a Benefit/Cost Analysis. Case is resolved. YES: The CPM, for further analysis, shall prepare a claim package regarding the

Premium Costs and submit to the Director’s Group for evaluation.

375-020-010-e Page 28 of 47

23. DIRECTOR GROUP CLAIM MEETING 23.1 The Director of Transportation Operations (DTO) shall determine if the claim for Errors and Omissions against the CCEI warrants further action. 23.2 The DTO or designee(s) shall conduct an initial evaluation of premium costs incurred by the district as a result of the CCEI’s potential Errors and Omissions. The DTO shall consult with OGC Legal Counsel on issues regarding the liability of the CCEI for the premium costs. 23.3 If the district is unable to resolve its claim for premium costs with the CCEI the DTO shall make a determination if the CCEI is potentially liable for all or a portion of the estimated premium costs (Cost Claim). In order to make this determination the DTO shall convene a group of advisors (DTO Group) to assist in the conduct of a meeting to discuss the potential liability of the CCEI. 23.4 The DTO may schedule the DTO Group Claim Meeting between the DTO Group and the CCEI to discuss resolution of the Errors and Omissions claim. The Department representatives in the DTO Group may include the DTO, the DCE, the CPM, the OGC Legal Counsel and other designated Department representatives as deemed necessary by the DTO. The CCEI may include personnel, attorneys, consultants and experts it deems necessary to represent its interests at the Claim Meeting. The Department, CCEI and their representatives at the Claim Meeting must agree that all discussions, representations, and documents made and utilized in the Claim Meeting are deemed settlement discussions and therefore subject to applicable privileges set forth by law. See Appendix F-Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and Acknowledgement of Privileged Discussions. 23.5 Notwithstanding the presence and assistance of the foregoing persons on behalf of the Department the DTO shall have sole authority for the decision on the resolution of all pending issues arising from the Errors and Omissions claim. Any proposed resolution of issues shall be in writing, reviewed by OGC Legal counsel and signed by authorized representatives of the Department and the CCEI. The proposed resolution should resolve all pending issues and provide for a full release by both parties. Each party must bear their own attorney’s fees and costs related to the pending issues. 23.6 If the CCEI declines to attend or participate in the DTO Group Claim Meeting then the DTO may conduct a claim meeting without the CCEI and proceed with its evaluation of the Cost Claim. 23.7 If as a result of the DTO Group Claim Meeting the Department and the CCEI are able to reach a resolution of the cost claim a written agreement and release shall be drafted by Department legal counsel for execution by all parties. 23.8 If the resolution of the Cost Claim is $100,000 (Premium) or less the DTO has final authority for the decision on the resolution of all pending issues with the CCEI. If the

375-020-010-e Page 29 of 47

resolution of the Cost Claim is greater than $100,000 the DTO has initial authority to approve the proposed resolution of the pending issues, which is subject to final approval by the Chief Engineer. The decision of the Chief Engineer is final. 23.9 If the DTO determines as a result of information provided to him that it is in the best interest of the Department not to prosecute the Cost Claim the Department will notify the CCEI of its decision. 23.10 If the DTO determines as a result of information provided to him that it is in the best interest of the Department to prosecute the Cost Claim and the CCEI does not participate in the Director’s Claim Meeting or does not reach a settlement with the Department as a result of the Meeting, the DTO will notify the CCEI of the Department’s decision to pursue recovery, Appendix E2 –Premium Costs Demand Letter. The letter shall summarize the project issues, the Premium Costs and any additional terms for settlement, and advise the CCEI of the Department’s intent to pursue recovery through litigation. The CCEI may resolve the Claim by written acceptance of the terms of the Premium Costs Demand Letter within 15 calendar days of the date of the letter. After the 15 days the offer expires. The decision of the DTO is final. Final settlement authority may vest with the Chief Engineer in accordance with the foregoing.

375-020-010-e Page 30 of 47

RECOVERY, LITIGATION AND TRACKING

24. RECOVERY Note: This section applies to the EOR and CCEI. The Department should pursue the recovery of any premium costs that are the result of consultant Errors and Omissions. However, the extent of the Department’s recovery effort should be guided by the anticipated recovery amount and the likelihood of a successful recovery effort. Administrative costs, the expense of litigation, and the consultant’s performance history may all affect the Department’s decision to pursue recovery. If at any point in the process, the Department decides not to pursue recovery, the appropriate project manager shall justify and document the decision in the project file and notify the EOR or CCEI. The consultant may, as a result of early notification, accept responsibility for Errors and Omissions and offer to settle with the Department. In these instances, the OGC Legal Counsel, in consultation with the DDE (for EOR issues) or DCE (for CCEI issues), shall prepare and execute the settlement agreement. With the approval of the DDE/DPM and DCE/CPM, the consultant may work directly with the construction contractor to resolve the issue provided the Department incurs no premium economic or time costs from the issue. Such resolution shall be documented through a Supplemental Agreement with the construction contractor. The consultant may also have valid reasons to dispute the Department’s assessment of Errors and Omissions issues. When such disputes cannot be resolved at the project level, the Director of Transportation Development (EOR) or Director of Transportation Operations (CCEI) shall make the final determination regarding further recovery efforts as set forth herein.

25. LITIGATION Note: This section applies to the EOR and CCEI. Although legal action may be required to effect recovery if the consultant does not settle with the Department, legal assistance should be sought at the early stages of the Errors and Omissions proceedings. OGC will provide legal counsel as necessary and appropriate throughout the proceedings. During the course of proceedings in accordance with this procedure the appropriate Department DPM (for EOR E&O) or CPM (for CCEI E&O) shall seek assistance from the OGC to assist in these proceedings and the prosecution of recovery of documented premium costs, if not otherwise resolved. When legal assistance is sought with regard to the E&O procedures, the OGC shall be consulted and assist with the continuing determination of recoverability of the Premium Costs throughout the proceedings. Legal assistance should be sought at an early stage of

375-020-010-e Page 31 of 47

the procedure to insure that all conditions for recovery of the Premium Costs are being complied with. Once litigation is initiated all settlement discussions should be handled through the OGC. The district will designate its representative with authority to settle all pending matters.

26. DOCUMENTATION OF THE ERRORS AND OMISSIONS PROCEDURE

In view of the anticipation of litigation resulting from the E&O procedure the DPM (for EOR issues) or CPM (for CCEI issues) shall prepare and maintain a file containing all documentation regarding the Errors and Omissions procedure pertaining to each claim for periodic OGC review. The file labels shall include the Consulting Firm Name, the Financial Project Identification Number, the Construction Contract Number, and the title “Errors and Omissions Recovery.”

27. RECOVERED AMOUNTS OGC shall advise the DPM (for EOR issues) / (CPM for CCEI issues) of the amounts recovered through litigation. The DPM (for EOR issues) / (CPM for CCEI issues) shall provide this information to the Office of Comptroller-General Accounting Office (OOC-GAO), Accounts Receivable Section and Cashier’s Office using the format described in Section 28 of this procedure. For EOR issues, the DPM is responsible to update RTM. For CCEI issues the CPM shall work with the E&O Liaison to update RTM.

28. REPORTING, COLLECTION, AND FUNDS RECEIVED Note: This section applies to the EOR and CCEI. Note: The project manager shall include the District E&O Liaison in all correspondence with the OOC-GAO. The Department shall collect moneys from consultants in accordance with the following procedures:

Procedure No. 350-060-303, Accounts Receivable

Procedure No. 350-080-300, Receipt Processing

Federal Aid Policy Guide 23, C.F.R.

375-020-010-e Page 32 of 47

28.1 Reporting and Collection

The DPM (CPM for CCEI issues) shall provide documentation to the OOC-GAO, Accounts Receivable Section for all funds to be recovered. The OOC-GAO, Accounts Receivable Section shall maintain a system to document and track recovery of all funds received from consultants for Errors and Omissions. Reimbursement may be received in a lump sum or through a series of payments, when approved by the Comptroller (or delegate). For lump-sum payments, initial recovery efforts shall be handled at the District level. If payment is not timely, the DPM (CPM for CCEI issues) shall notify the OOC-GAO, Accounts Receivable Section who shall then continue the collection effort. If further collection efforts are not successful, the account may be turned over to the State’s contracted collection agency. OOC-GAO, Accounts Receivable Section shall coordinate and collect any approved series of payments for reimbursement. Please refer to Procedure No. 350-060-303, Accounts Receivable for detailed information. 28.2 Cash Received The DPM (CPM for CCEI issues) shall submit all funds recovered by application of this procedure to the OOC-GAO, Cashier’s Office in accordance with Procedure No. 350-080-300, Receipt Processing. Correspondence shall include the following information: Financial Project No. Federal Aid Project No. Project Description Name of Consultant Firm Department Project Manager (DPM/CPM) Amount of Recovery Date of Recovery Funds Transmittal No. Object Code In July of each year, the OOC-GAO, Cashier’s Office shall report the amount collected for Errors and Omissions in the previous fiscal year, by District, to the Program and Resource Allocation Office. In mid-September, the Program and Resource Allocation Office shall allocate in Schedule A the collected amount back to each respective District and statewide program, as appropriate.

28.3 Services In Kind

The Department may accept services in kind from a consultant, in lieu of money, as restitution for damages caused by Errors and Omissions. Such services shall be equivalent to the value of the damages incurred by the Department and stipulated in a settlement agreement prepared by the OGC. The DDE (for EOR issues) and DCE (for CCEI issues) shall determine the scope of equivalent services that will satisfy the consultant’s obligation to reimburse the Department

375-020-010-e Page 33 of 47

in accordance with settlement authority set forth herein. Additionally, the DDE and DCE shall determine the appropriate consultant personnel (number, level, compensation rate) to accomplish the scope of equivalent services. Services in kind may not be used to circumvent the Consultants’ Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) (Section 287.055, F.S.) or to provide an advantage to the consultant in CCNA selection for services on future projects. The DPM (for EOR issues) and CPM (for CCEI issues) shall monitor and document the receipt of services in kind and provide quarterly updates to the OOC-GAO, Accounts Receivable Section. When the consultant’s obligation to provide services has been satisfied, the DPM and CPM shall notify the EOR and the OOC-GAO.

29. TRACKING To ensure communication among disciplines and provide prompt response to management inquiries, each DDE shall establish a central point of contact – the District E&O Liaison – to be responsible for the resolution status of E&O issues. Each District E&O Liaison shall ensure that such issues are entered, updated, and resolved in RTM.

375-020-010-e Page 34 of 47

Appendix A – Statutes of Limitation

There is a 2 (two) year time period to bring a lawsuit for errors and omissions by Professional Engineers on Department Contracts. Section 95.11(4)(a), F.S, provides that the two (2) year statute of limitation period for professional negligence begins to run “from the time the cause of action is discovered or should have been discovered.” Given this short time period, it is imperative that the Chief of Litigation, Office of the General Counsel (OGC), be consulted as soon as possible to provide an opinion of the applicable limitation period and when a lawsuit must be filed. The Chief of Litigation can be reached at the OGC (850-414-5265).

375-020-010-e Page 35 of 47

Appendix B - Guidelines for Accepting Services In Kind In Lieu of Payment for

Claims against Consultants When the Department decides to pursue a claim for damages against a consultant in accordance with Procedure No. 375-020-010, “Identifying and Assigning Responsibility for Errors, Omissions, and Contractual Breaches by Professional Engineers,” the Department may accept services from the consultant equivalent to the value of the damages as stipulated in a settlement agreement. This method of restitution should only be considered when requested by the consultant. Acceptance of in-kind services is completely at the discretion of the Department, and several factors must be considered before agreeing to accept services in lieu of payment.

1. If the amount of damages exceeds the threshold for advertisement and competitive selection required by statute, currently $25,000, the competitive selection processes required by Chapter 287.055, F.S., or 287.057, F. S., as applicable, may not be circumvented. The option to accept in-kind-services in lieu of payment should only be considered if the consultant has an existing contract in place in the district that still has sufficient work to be performed to accommodate the amount of the claim. The contract selected for in-kind services can be for any work type, e.g. PD&E, Design, CE&I, but the selected contract must be with the same legal entity as the design contract on which the error or omission occurred.

2. The Department shall not agree to accept services in kind on a future contract

based on the assumption that the consultant will be selected. Not only does this delay the final resolution of the claim unnecessarily, it can give the appearance of an unfair advantage for the consultant in future selections.

3. If an appropriate contract is in place with the consultant and in-kind services are

accepted in lieu of payment, provision must be made for a detailed accounting of the cost of the services provided. The contract will have to be amended to either reduce the dollar amount of the contract without reducing the services to be performed or add work to be performed within the intent and purpose of the original scope of services.

a. If the contract is a lump sum contract, an amendment must be executed

reducing the dollar amount of the contract by the amount stipulated in the settlement agreement, with no reduction in the services to be performed or in the deliverables to be provided.

b. If a lump sum supplemental amendment expanding the services to be

provided or a new Task Work Order (TWO) is to be issued for a lump sum amount, negotiations for the compensation for the additional services will be

375-020-010-e Page 36 of 47

conducted in the normal manner and should include reasonable operating margin. Detailed documentation of the negotiations demonstrating how the lump sum amount was determined must be maintained in the project files. The additional services to be provided must be within the intent of the original scope of services.

c. If the contract is a limiting amount, an amendment must be executed

reducing the original limiting amount by the amount due with no reduction in the scope of services to be provided. Invoices must be identified for non-payment and they must be submitted manually, outside CITS. Complete documentation of the invoiced amounts - including time sheets, certified wage rates and expense receipts - must be provided by the consultant and reviewed and approved by the Department’s Project Manager and be retained for audit purposes in the project files.

d. If a limiting amount supplemental amendment or TWO is issued, negotiations

for the compensation for the additional services will be conducted in the normal manner and should include a reasonable operating margin. Invoices must be identified for non-payment and they must be submitted manually, outside the Consultants’ Invoice Transmittal System (CITS). Complete documentation of the invoiced amounts - including time sheets, certified wage rates and expense receipts - must be provided by the consultant and reviewed and approved by the Department’s Project Manager and be retained for audit purposes in the project files.

In all cases, the executed amendment or TWO must be forwarded to the Office of the Comptroller’s General Accounting Office (OOC-GAO) to establish the receivable account. Quarterly updates of the equivalent dollar value of the services received must be forwarded to OOC-GAO for adjustment of the accounts receivable. Upon completion of the work, final notification that the obligation is satisfied must be forwarded to OOC-GAO to close the account. In summary, services in kind should only be considered in lieu of payment when the district has an appropriate contract already in place with the consultant. A complete accounting of the costs of the services must be maintained, including negotiated and invoiced amounts. Because of the effort involved in identifying an appropriate contract, negotiating the work effort required to satisfy the claim, compiling and maintaining the documentation necessary to support manual invoices and verify the process, it is usually preferable to insist on monetary reimbursement.

375-020-010-e Page 37 of 47

Appendix C1 – Early Notification Letter – Design (insert date) Note: Notification Letters shall be Certified Mail and addressed to an Officer in the company.

Design Consultants, Inc. 1234 Long Street Rural City, FL 33333 Re: Project Description...

Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Dear Design Consultants: Project Issues have been identified in the referenced contract that require immediate attention. (Make reference to verbal/written communication as per Section 1). The Department respectfully requests your assistance to fully evaluate the following issue(s) and determine the appropriate course of action:

(brief description of project issues) Issues of this nature may impact project costs and contract time; please give them your immediate and full consideration. Compensation for on-site participation—and any additional engineering services—may be billed as post-design services, unless the project issues are caused by your Errors and Omissions. Please track all additional services separately for potential compensation. Thank you for your attention to these matters and response by (insert date). Sincerely, FDOT Design Project Manager

375-020-010-e Page 38 of 47

Appendix C2 – Early Notification Letter – CCEI (insert date) Note: Notification Letters shall be Certified Mail and addressed to an Officer in the company.

CCEI Consultants, Inc. 1234 Long Street Rural City, FL 33333 Re: Project Description...

Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Dear CCEI Consultants: Project Issues have been identified in the referenced contract that require immediate attention. (make reference to verbal/written communication as per Section 1). The Department respectfully requests your assistance to fully evaluate the following issue(s) and determine the appropriate course of action:

(brief description of project issues) Issues of this nature may impact project costs and contract time; please give them your immediate and full consideration. All reasonable costs you may incur during this process shall be billable, unless the project issues are the result of your Errors and Omissions. Please track these costs separately for potential compensation. Thank you for your attention to these matters and response by (insert date). Sincerely, FDOT Construction Project Manager

375-020-010-e Page 39 of 47

Appendix D1 – Errors and Omissions Notification Letter – Design

(insert date) Note: Notification Letters shall be Certified Mail and addressed to an Officer in the company.


Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Dear Design Consultants:

(If the EOR did not respond to the Early Notification Letter, so note here.) In preparing the referenced Supplemental Agreement, the Department determined that premium costs, as a result of your Errors and Omissions in the construction plans and contract documents, exist in the amount of $_______. These premium costs do not add value to the project and should have been avoided. Further, the Department intends to pursue recovery of these costs. Please respond to this letter within 15 calendar days and state your position on the Department’s assessment of costs and responsibility for the following:

(Description of errors and omissions...attachments as necessary)

Sincerely, FDOT Design Project Manager

375-020-010-e Page 40 of 47

Appendix D2 – Errors and Omissions Notification Letter – CCEI (insert date) Note: Notification Letters shall be Certified Mail and addressed to an Officer in the company.


Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Dear CCEI Consultants:

(If the CCEI did not respond to the Early Notification Letter, so note here.) In preparing the referenced Supplemental Agreement, the Department determined that premium costs, as a result of your Errors and Omissions in the administration of the project, exist in the amount of $_______. These premium costs do not add value to the project and should have been avoided. Further, the Department intends to pursue recovery of these costs. Please respond to this letter within 15 calendar days and state your position on the Department’s assessment of costs and responsibility for the following:

(Description of errors and omissions...attachments as necessary)

Sincerely, DOT Construction Project Manager

375-020-010-e Page 41 of 47

Appendix E1 – Premium Costs Demand Letter – Design



Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Dear Design Consultants: Previously, the Department advised you of damages incurred on the referenced contract in the amount of $_____. These additional project costs are the result of your Errors and Omissions and should have been avoided. The Department’s Director’s Group recently convened and determined that the assessment of premium costs against your company was appropriate and recommended that the Department pursue recovery. You may accept this determination and settle this claim for the amount set forth above by having an authorized representative of your company accept this offer by executing this letter at the bottom and returning it to the Department within 15 calendar days of the receipt of this letter. Upon payment of the premium costs the Department will provide an appropriate release. If you elect not to accept this offer within the designated time period, the Department will initiate legal action to recover these damages. Sincerely, Director of Transportation Development ACCEPTANCE OFFER: ___________________accepts the offer of the Department to settle all claims for premium costs in the amount of $______as a result of its alleged conduct in the above referenced project/contract and agrees to make payment of such sum to the Department within 30 days of the date of this Acceptance.

_________________________________

Designated Representative of Consultant Dated: ____________________________

375-020-010-e Page 42 of 47

Appendix E2 – Premium Costs Demand Letter – CCEI



Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01 Contract No. 12345 (FY) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Dear CCEI Consultants: Previously, the Department advised you of damages incurred on the referenced contract in the amount of $_______. These additional project costs are the result of your Errors and Omissions and should have been avoided. The Department’s Director’s Group recently convened and determined that the assessment of premium costs against your company was appropriate and recommended that the Department pursue recovery. You may accept this determination and settle this claim for the amount set forth above by having an authorized representative of your company accept this offer by executing this letter at the bottom and returning it to the Department within 15 calendar days of the receipt of this letter. Upon payment of the premium costs the Department will provide an appropriate release. If you elect not to accept this offer within the designated time period the Department will initiate legal action to recover these damages. Sincerely, Director of Transportation Operations

ACCEPTANCE OFFER: _____________________accepts the offer of the Department to settle all claims for premium costs in the amount of $_______as a result of its alleged conduct in the above referenced project/contract and agrees to make payment of such sum to the Department within 30 business days of this Acceptance.

_________________________________ Designated Representative of Consultant Dated: ____________________________

375-020-010-e Page 43 of 47

Appendix F – Notice of Attendance at Claim Meeting and Acknowledgement of Privileged Discussion

Re: Project Description... Financial Project ID 123456-1-52-01

Contract No. 12345 (FY) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Date and Location of Director’s Meeting: ___________________________________ The undersigned persons and entities acknowledge and agree, in their individual and representative capacities, that the discussions held in the above referenced Director’s Meeting regarding the referenced matter (and any subsequent related settlement discussions) are for the purpose of settlement of certain claims and disputes between the Department and Consultant and are subject to certain settlement privileges in accordance with Florida law. They further acknowledge that they are represented by legal counsel or have had the opportunity to obtain legal counsel and advice for this Director’s Meeting. Name (Print) Company Title Signature

375-020-010-e Page 44 of 47

Appendix G – Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Sending Funds to the Cashier’s Office)

(insert date) Office of Comptroller, General Accounting Office, Cashier’s Office Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 42 B Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Project Description...

Financial Management No. 123456-1-52-01 Federal Aid Project No. Contract No. 12345 (FY)

Dear Cashier: The District has received funds as restitution for Errors and Omissions on the referenced project, as stipulated in the attached settlement agreement. Please report the following information to the Program Development Office, so that the funds may be re-allocated to the District: Name of Consultant Firm: Amount of Recovery: Date of Recovery: Funds Transmittal No.: Object Code: 018051

Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, DPM/CPM cc: Accounts Receivable Section

375-020-010-e Page 45 of 47

Appendix H - Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Request for assistance to recover funds)

(insert date) Accounts Receivable Administrator OOC - General Accounting Office, Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 42 B Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Project Description...

Financial Management No. 123456-1-52-01 Federal Aid Project No. Contract No. 12345 (FY) Dear Accounts Receivable Administrator: The District has not yet received funds as restitution for Errors and Omissions on the referenced project, as stipulated in the attached settlement agreement. Please invoice the firm and then send to a collection agency if you are unable to recover the funds. We also request that you work with the Cashier’s Office, so they may annually report the recovered amount to the Program Development Office, and thus ensure that the funds will be reallocated to the District. Name of Consultant Firm: Amount to be recovered: Scheduled Date for recovery: Funds Transmittal No.: Object Code: 018051 Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, DPM/CPM Attachment: (settlement agreement)

375-020-010-e Page 46 of 47

Appendix I - Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Request for assistance to recover/track a series of payments)

(insert date) Deputy Comptroller OOC - General Accounting Office, Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 42 B Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Project Description...

Financial Management No. 123456-1-52-01 Federal Aid Project No. Contract No. 12345 (FY) Dear Deputy Comptroller, GAO: The District requests your approval of the recovery schedule attached as restitution for Errors and Omissions on the referenced project. If you do not approve this schedule, please suggest another one. We also ask that you track the payment of these funds and annually report the successful recovery to the Office of Financial Development, Program and Resource Allocation Office, so that the funds may be reallocated to the District. Name of Consultant Firm: Amount of Recovery Payment: Dates of Recovery Payments: Funds Transmittal No.: Object Code: 018051 Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, DPM/CPM cc: Accounts Receivable Section

375-020-010-e Page 47 of 47

Appendix J - Reporting, Collection, and Cash Received (Services In Kind)

(insert date) Deputy Comptroller OOC - General Accounting Office, Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street, MS 42 B Tallahassee, FL 32399 Re: Project Description...

Financial Management No.123456-1-52-01 Federal Aid Project No. Contract No. 12345 (FY)

Dear Deputy Comptroller: The District has agreed to accept services in kind as restitution for Errors and Omissions on the referenced project. The attached settlement agreement describes the services to be provided, including the proposed consultant personnel and their compensation rates. The District provides the following information in fulfillment of the settlement agreement: Name of Consultant Firm: Date(s) Services Provided: Original Balance: Previously Received Services: Current Services Provided: Balance:

Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, DPM/CPM

Attachment: (settlement agreement)

CHAPTER 2018-52

House Bill No. 545

An act relating to the prohibition against contracting with scrutinizedcompanies; amending s. 287.135, F.S.; prohibiting a company that is onthe Scrutinized Companies that Boycott Israel List or that is engaged in aboycott of Israel from bidding on, submitting a proposal for, or enteringinto or renewing a contract with an agency or local governmental entity forgoods or services of any amount; providing exceptions; requiring suchcontracts entered into or renewed on or after July 1, 2018, to include aprovision authorizing termination in specified circumstances; requiring acompany to provide a specified certification before submitting a bid orproposal for or entering into or renewing such contracts; providing forpreemption of agency or local governmental entity ordinances and rulesinvolving such contracts; conforming provisions to changes made by theact; providing an effective date.

Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:

Section 1. Section 287.135, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

287.135 Prohibition against contracting with scrutinized companies.—

(1) In addition to the terms defined in ss. 287.012 and 215.473, as used inthis section, the term:

(a) “Awarding body” means, for purposes of state contracts, an agency orthe department, and for purposes of local contracts, the governing body ofthe local governmental entity.

(b) “Boycott of Israel” has the same meaning as defined in s. 215.4725.

(c) “Business operations” means, for purposes specifically related toCuba or Syria, engaging in commerce in any form in Cuba or Syria,including, but not limited to, acquiring, developing, maintaining, owning,selling, possessing, leasing, or operating equipment, facilities, personnel,products, services, personal property, real property, military equipment, orany other apparatus of business or commerce.

(d) “Local governmental entity” means a county, municipality, specialdistrict, or other political subdivision of the state.

(2) A company is ineligible to, and may not, bid on, submit a proposal for,or enter into or renew a contract with an agency or local governmental entityfor goods or services of $1 million or more if at the time of bidding orsubmitting a proposal for a new contract or renewal of an existing contract,the company:

1CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.

EXHIBIT 9

(a) Any amount if, at the time of bidding on, submitting a proposal for, orentering into or renewing such contract, the company is on the ScrutinizedCompanies that Boycott Israel List, created pursuant to s. 215.4725, or isengaged in a boycott of Israel; or

(b) One million dollars or more if, at the time of bidding on, submitting aproposal for, or entering into or renewing such contract, the company:

1. Is on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or theScrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy SectorList, created pursuant to s. 215.473; or

2.(c) Is engaged in business operations in Cuba or Syria.

(3)(a) Any contract with an agency or local governmental entity for goodsor services of $1 million or more entered into or renewed on or after:

1.(a) July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012, must contain a provision thatallows for the termination of such contract at the option of the awarding bodyif the company is found to have submitted a false certification as providedunder subsection (5) or been placed on the Scrutinized Companies withActivities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in theIran Petroleum Energy Sector List.

2.(b) July 1, 2012, through September 30, 2016, must contain a provisionthat allows for the termination of such contract at the option of the awardingbody if the company is found to have submitted a false certification asprovided under subsection (5), been placed on the Scrutinized Companieswith Activities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities inthe Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List, or been engaged in businessoperations in Cuba or Syria.

3.(c) October 1, 2016, through June 30, 2018, must contain a provisionthat allows for the termination of such contract at the option of the awardingbody if the company:

a.1. Is found to have submitted a false certification as provided undersubsection (5);

b.2. Has been placed on the Scrutinized Companies that Boycott IsraelList, or is engaged in a boycott of Israel;

c.3. Has been placed on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities inSudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in the IranPetroleum Energy Sector List; or

d.4. Has been engaged in business operations in Cuba or Syria.

4. July 1, 2018, must contain a provision that allows for the terminationof such contract at the option of the awarding body if the company is found tohave submitted a false certification as provided under subsection (5), been

Ch. 2018-52 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 2018-52


placed on the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or theScrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy SectorList, or been engaged in business operations in Cuba or Syria.

(b) Any contract with an agency or local governmental entity for goods orservices of any amount entered into or renewed on or after July 1, 2018, mustcontain a provision that allows for the termination of such contract at theoption of the awarding body if the company is found to have been placed onthe Scrutinized Companies that Boycott Israel List or is engaged in a boycottof Israel.

(4) Notwithstanding subsection (2) or subsection (3), an agency or localgovernmental entity, on a case-by-case basis, may permit a company on theScrutinized Companies that Boycott Israel List, the Scrutinized Companieswith Activities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities inthe Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List, or a company engaged in withbusiness operations in Cuba or Syria, to be eligible for, bid on, submit aproposal for, or enter into or renew a contract for goods or services of $1million or more, or may permit a company on the Scrutinized Companiesthat Boycott Israel List to be eligible for, bid on, submit a proposal for, orenter into or renew a contract for goods or services of any amount, under theconditions set forth in paragraph (a) or the conditions set forth in paragraph(b):

(a)1. With respect to a company on the Scrutinized Companies withActivities in Sudan List or the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in theIran Petroleum Energy Sector List, all of the following occur:

a. The scrutinized business operations were made before July 1, 2011.

b. The scrutinized business operations have not been expanded orrenewed after July 1, 2011.

c. The agency or local governmental entity determines that it is in thebest interest of the state or local community to contract with the company.

d. The company has adopted, has publicized, and is implementing aformal plan to cease scrutinized business operations and to refrain fromengaging in any new scrutinized business operations.

2. With respect to a company engaged in business operations in Cuba orSyria, all of the following occur:

a. The business operations were made before July 1, 2012.

b. The business operations have not been expanded or renewed afterJuly 1, 2012.




d. The company has adopted, has publicized, and is implementing aformal plan to cease business operations and to refrain from engaging in anynew business operations.

3. With respect to a company on the Scrutinized Companies that BoycottIsrael List, all of the following occur:

a. The boycott of Israel was initiated before October 1, 2016.

b. The company certifies in writing that it has ceased its boycott of Israel.


d. The company has adopted, has publicized, and is implementing aformal plan to cease scrutinized business operations and to refrain fromengaging in any new scrutinized business operations.

(b) One of the following occurs:

1. The local governmental entity makes a public finding that, absentsuch an exemption, the local governmental entity would be unable to obtainthe goods or services for which the contract is offered.

2. For a contract with an executive agency, the Governor makes a publicfinding that, absent such an exemption, the agency would be unable toobtain the goods or services for which the contract is offered.

3. For a contract with an office of a state constitutional officer other thanthe Governor, the state constitutional officer makes a public finding that,absent such an exemption, the office would be unable to obtain the goods orservices for which the contract is offered.

(5) At the time a company submits a bid or proposal for a contract orbefore the company enters into or renews a contract with an agency or localgovernmental entity for goods or services of $1 million or more, the companymust certify that the company is not participating in a boycott of Israel, onthe Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or the ScrutinizedCompanies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy Sector List and, orthat it does not have business operations in Cuba or Syria. At the time acompany submits a bid or proposal for a contract or before the companyenters into or renews a contract with an agency or local governmental entityfor goods or services of any amount, the company must certify that thecompany is not participating in a boycott of Israel.

(a) If, after the agency or the local governmental entity determines,using credible information available to the public, that the company hassubmitted a false certification, the agency or local governmental entity shallprovide the company with written notice of its determination. The companyshall have 90 days following receipt of the notice to respond in writing and todemonstrate that the determination of false certification was made in error.



If the company does not make such demonstration within 90 days afterreceipt of the notice, the agency or the local governmental entity shall bringa civil action against the company. If a civil action is brought and the courtdetermines that the company submitted a false certification, the companyshall pay the penalty described in subparagraph 1. and all reasonableattorney fees and costs, including any costs for investigations that led to thefinding of false certification.

1. A civil penalty equal to the greater of $2 million or twice the amount ofthe contract for which the false certification was submitted shall be imposed.

2. The company is ineligible to bid on any contract with an agency orlocal governmental entity for 3 years after the date the agency or localgovernmental entity determined that the company submitted a falsecertification.

(b) A civil action to collect the penalties described in paragraph (a) mustcommence within 3 years after the date the false certification is submitted.

(6) Only the agency or local governmental entity that is a party to thecontract may cause a civil action to be brought under this section. Thissection does not create or authorize a private right of action or enforcementof the penalties provided in this section. An unsuccessful bidder, or any otherperson other than the agency or local governmental entity, may not protestthe award of a contract or contract renewal on the basis of a falsecertification.

(7) This section preempts any ordinance or rule of any agency or localgovernmental entity involving public contracts for goods or services of:

(a) One million dollars Of $1 million or more with a company engaged inscrutinized business operations.

(b) Any amount with a company that has been placed on the ScrutinizedCompanies that Boycott Israel List or is engaged in a boycott of Israel.

(8) The contracting prohibitions in this section applicable to companieson the Scrutinized Companies with Activities in Sudan List or theScrutinized Companies with Activities in the Iran Petroleum Energy SectorList or to companies engaged in business operations in Cuba or Syria becomeinoperative on the date that federal law ceases to authorize the states toadopt and enforce such contracting prohibitions.

Section 2. This act shall take effect July 1, 2018.

Approved by the Governor March 21, 2018.

Filed in Office Secretary of State March 21, 2018.



TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA · TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA July 10, 2018...

Documents

Transcript of TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA · TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA July 10, 2018...