Second Avenue Subway Monthly Report For Dec11

PMOC MONTHLY REPORT Second Avenue Subway Phase 1 (MTACC-SAS) Project Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York, New
York December 1 to December 31, 2011
PMOC Contract No. DTFT60-09-D-00007 Task Order No. 2, Project No. DC-27-5115, Work Order No. 02
Urban Engineers of New York, P.C., 2 Penn Plaza, Suite 1103, New York, New York 10121 PMOC Lead, Charles A. Halboth, PE, 212-736-9100; cahalboth@urbanengineers.com Length of time on project: 1 year
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. SECOND AVENUE SUBWAY (SAS) THIRD PARTY DISCLAIMER .................................................................................................. 1 REPORT FORMAT AND FOCUS ............................................................................................. 1 MONITORING REPORT ........................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 1 ELPEP SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 7 1.0 GRANTEES CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH ...................................................... 8 1.1 TECHNICAL CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY ..............................................................................8 1.2 PROJECT CONTROLS ............................................................................................................11 1.3 FTA COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS .........................................................................................16 2.0 PROJECT SCOPE.......................................................................................................... 17 2.1 STATUS & QUALITY: DESIGN/PROCUREMENT/CONSTRUCTION ..........................................17 2.2 THIRD-PARTY AGREEMENT ................................................................................................22 2.3 CONTRACT PACKAGES AND DELIVERY METHODS ..............................................................22 2.4 VEHICLES ............................................................................................................................23 2.5 PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND REAL ESTATE .......................................................................24 2.6 COMMUNITY RELATIONS ....................................................................................................24 3.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUB-PLANS ............................................ 25 3.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN ............................................................................................25 3.2 PMP SUB PLAN...................................................................................................................25 3.3 PROJECT PROCEDURES ........................................................................................................25 4.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE STATUS ................................................................................ 26 4.1 INTEGRATED PROJECT SCHEDULE .......................................................................................26 4.2 90-DAY LOOK-AHEAD ........................................................................................................29 4.3 CRITICAL PATH ACTIVITIES ................................................................................................30 4.4 COMPLIANCE WITH SCHEDULE MANAGEMENT PLAN..........................................................32 5.0 PROJECT COST STATUS ........................................................................................... 33 5.1 BUDGET/COST ....................................................................................................................33 5.2 PROJECT FUNDING ..............................................................................................................37 5.3 COST VARIANCE ANALYSIS ................................................................................................38
December 2011 Monthly Report
MTACC-SAS
5.4 PROJECT CONTINGENCY .....................................................................................................40 6.0 PROJECT RISK ............................................................................................................. 42 6.1 INITIAL RISK ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................42 6.2 RISK UPDATES ....................................................................................................................42 6.3 RISK MANAGEMENT STATUS ..............................................................................................43 6.4 RISK MITIGATION ACTIONS ................................................................................................45 6.5 COST AND SCHEDULE CONTINGENCY .................................................................................45 7.0 8.0 LIST OF ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 47 GRANTEE ACTIONS FROM QUARTERLY AND MONTHLY MEETINGS ..... 52
TABLES
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF CRITICAL DATES ...................................................................... 4 TABLE 2: PROJECT BUDGET/COST TABLE .................................................................... 5 TABLE 1-1: STANDARD COST CATEGORIES................................................................... 13 TABLE 1-2: APPROPRIATED AND OBLIGATED FUNDS ............................................... 13 TABLE 2-1: CONSTRUCTION PROCUREMENT ............................................................... 18 TABLE 2-2 CONSTRUCTION PROCUREMENT METHOD AND STATUS ................... 23 TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF SCHEDULE DATES ............................................................... 26 TABLE 4-2: SUMMARY SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE BY CONSTRUCTION PACKAGE................................................................................................................................... 27 TABLE 4-3: QUARTERLY SCHEDULE TARGET COMPARISON ................................. 28 TABLE 4-4: 90-DAY LOOK-AHEAD SCHEDULE............................................................... 29 TABLE 5-1: ALLOCATION OF CURRENT WORKING BUDGET TO STANDARD COST CATEGORIES ................................................................................................................ 33 TABLE 5-2: AWO SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 36 TABLE 5-3: APPROPRIATED AND OBLIGATED FUNDS (FEDERAL)......................... 37 TABLE 5-4: ESTIMATE @ COMPLETION .......................................................................... 39 TABLE 6-1: SCHEDULE CONTINGENCY ........................................................................... 46
ii
MTACC-SAS
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A LIST OF ACRONYMS APPENDIX B PROJECT OVERVIEW AND MAP APPENDIX C LESSONS LEARNED APPENDIX D PMOC STATUS REPORT APPENDIX E SAFETY AND SECURITY CHECKLIST APPENDIX F ON-SITE PICTURES
iii
MTACC-SAS
THIRD PARTY DISCLAIMER This report and all subsidiary reports are prepared solely for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). This report should not be relied upon by any party, except FTA or the project sponsor, in accordance with the purposes as described below. For projects funded through FTA Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGAs) program, FTA and its Project Management Oversight Contractor (PMOC) use a risk-based assessment process to review and validate a project sponsors budget and schedule. This risk-based assessment process is a tool for analyzing project development and management. Moreover, the assessment process is iterative in nature; any results of an FTA or PMOC risk-based assessment represent a snapshot in time for a particular project under the conditions known at that same point in time. The status of any assessment may be altered at any time by new information, changes in circumstances, or further developments in the project, including any specific measures a sponsor may take to mitigate the risks to project costs, budget, and schedule, or the strategy a sponsor may develop for project execution. Therefore, the information in the monthly reports may change from month to month, based on relevant factors for the month and/or previous months. REPORT FORMAT AND FOCUS This monthly report is submitted in compliance with the terms of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Contract No. DTFT60-09-D-00007, Task Order No. 003. Its purpose is to provide information and data to assist the FTA as it continually monitors the grantees technical capability and capacity to execute a project efficiently and effectively, and hence, whether the grantee continues to be ready to receive federal funds for further project development. This report covers the project management activities on the MTACC (Capital Construction) Second Avenue Subway (SAS) Mega-Project managed by MTACC and MTA as the grantee and financed by the FTA FFGA. MONITORING REPORT The contents of this report are cumulative in nature, and may reference or build upon topics discussed in previous reports. All comments received pertaining to previous reports have been incorporated in this report. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Second Avenue Subway project will include a two-track line along Second Avenue from 125th Street to the Financial District in lower Manhattan. It will also include a connection from Second Avenue through the 63rd Street tunnel to existing tracks for service to West Midtown and Brooklyn. Sixteen new ADA accessible stations will be constructed. The Second Avenue Subway will reduce overcrowding and delays on the Lexington Avenue line, improving travel for both city and suburban commuters, and provide better access to mass transit for residents of the far East Side of Manhattan. Stations will have a combination of escalators, stairs, and, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, elevator connections from street-level to station mezzanine and from mezzanine to platforms.
MTACC-SAS
Phase One of the project will include tunnels from 105th Street and Second Avenue to 63rd Street and Third Avenue, with new stations along Second Avenue at 96th, 86th and 72nd Streets and new entrances to the existing Lexington Ave./63rd Street Station at 63rd Street and Third Avenue. 2. CHANGES DURING 4th QUARTER 2011 a. Engineering/Design Progress The Design Consultant (AECOM/Arup) completed the update of the 96th Street Station Concrete, MEP/Finishes, Utilities, and Restoration (C2B) contract documentation, making it available for the procurement process. b. New Contract Procurements Construction Contract C2B was advertised for bids on December 5, 2011. The Track, Power, Signals and Communication Systems Contract (C6) was approved by the MTA Board on December 21, 2011.
c. Construction Progress All construction is approximately 26.3 % complete. Summary progress for each contract is as follows: The Tunnel Boring Contractor (Contract C1) completed the TBM mining of the tunnels from 92nd Street to 63rd Street. Surface preparation, waterproofing and lining of the tunnels is ongoing. The 86th Street Station Excavation and Utility Relocation Contractor (Contract C5A) achieved substantial completion and has demobilized. The 86th Street Station Civil/Structural Work Contractor (Contract C5B) started preconstruction condition surveys of building adjacent to the work areas. The 96th Street Station Heavy Civil/Structural Work Contractor (Contract C2A) completed installation of all 51 slurry wall panels on the Westside of 2nd Avenue. The 72nd Street Station Heavy Civil/Structural Work Contractor (Contract C4B) has excavated 89,765 Bank Cubic Yards (BCY) of the total 170,507 BCY for the main cavern. The 63rd Street/Lexington Avenue Station Reconstruction Contractor (Contract C3) started the installation of the temporary and permanent structural steel. Resolution of change order associated with the deletion of tunnel lining between 72nd and 86th Streets. Local funding of the 2010 2014 MTA Capital Plan. Development of the C5B baseline schedule and its incorporation into the IPS.
d. Continuing and Unresolved Issues
e. New Cost and Schedule Issues
MTACC-SAS
PROJECT STATUS SUMMARY AND PMOC ASSESSMENT
a. Grantee Technical Capacity and Capability During the 4th Quarter 2011 MTACC maintained its technical capacity and capability to support the SAS Phase 1 Project. Additional staff personnel from New York City Transit (NYCT) and PB Americas (Consultant Construction Manager-CCM) are being assigned to support the upcoming award of Track, Power, Signals and Communications Systems Contract C-26009 (C6). The SAS Project Management Team continues to be an effective integrated project organization utilizing personnel from MTACC, NYCT, PB Americas and AECOM/Arup (Design Consultant). b. Real Estate Acquisition All real estate for the SAS Phase 1 Project has been acquired. Real estate acquisition and tenant relocation was performed in accordance with the approved SAS Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan, and Relocation Plan. These plans address Title 49 CFR Part 24, which implements the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended and FTA real estate requirements 5010.1C. c. Engineering/Design The final design phase of the project was completed in late November 2010. During the 4th Quarter 2011, engineering support continued with the updating of the station finish packages with as-built information from predecessor packages, and updates or modifications involving utilities, MPT, etc. The drawings/specifications for the 96th Street Station Concrete, MEP/Finishes, Utilities, and Restoration Contract C-26010 (C2B) was subsequently updated and made available for the procurement process. d. Procurement Procurement activity during the 4th Quarter 2011 included the MTA Board approval of the Track, Power, Signals and Communication Systems Contract C-26009 (C6). The contract is scheduled to be awarded in mid-January, 2012, pending resolution of a procurement protest from one of the proposers. Also Contract C2B was advertised for bid on December 5, 2011. A notice of award is scheduled for April 30, 2012. Six (C1, C2A, C3, C4B, C5A, C5B) of the 10 construction packages for SAS Phase 1 Project have been awarded. e. Railroad Force Account (Support and Construction) As of December 31, 2011 force account expenditure has increased to $1,715,021. The increase in expenditure reflects NYCTs track outages for upper platform (T1) and lower platform (T2) work at the 63rd Street/Lexington Avenue Station. While MTACC is heavily involved in construction activities, it does not have its own employees to support these activities. It relies on NYCT in-house labor for this purpose. The SAS Construction Support Services Force Account Plan details the services that will be provided by NYCT, including general orders, flagging, work trains, access and protection, inspections, and crowd control. f. Vehicles No additional vehicles will be procured for the SAS Phase 1 Project. MTACC/NYCTs assertion that recent services reductions will provide ample spare vehicles for the SAS Phase 1 Project has been reflected in the Rail Fleet Management Plan which was accepted by FTA Region II. A
MTACC-SAS
zero dollar budget for the procurement of vehicles is reflected in the projects Current Working Budget (CWB) and also in the latest cost estimate (Rev. 9). g. Systems Testing and Start-Up Systems testing and start-up is allocated to the Track, Power, Signals and Communications Systems Contract C-26009 (C6). The staff recommendation to award this contract to the joint venture of Comstock/Skanska was approved on December 21, 2011. It is valued at $261,900,000. Comprehensive testing of the SAS will be based on a Facilities Systems Test Program (FSTP), which is documented in a four volume submittal; Volume 1 Management Plan, Volume 2 Interface Control Plan, Volume 3 - Test Procedures Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), Field Installation Acceptance Test (FIAT), Simulated Integrated Systems Test (SIST), AND Volume 4 - Test Procedures Final Systems Integrated Testing (FSIT). FSTP testing and startup functions will be performed at various stages of Contract 6. For example, there will be standalone tests performed by the Stations and (C6) Systems Contractors, independent of each other, at the equipment level. There will be installation work to be performed by the Systems Contractor in both the stations and tunnels that is concurrent with work being performed by the Stations Contractor at both the equipment and the station level. There will be integrated tests in stations that will need to be coordinated between the Stations and Systems Contractors as part of the Station Construction Substantial Completion milestones at the Station Level. There will be integrated systems testing in stations that will be conducted post Station Construction Substantial Completion at the NYCT System wide level, both prior to and with Test Train Operations, during which time the stations may have on-going Contractor maintenance activities which may impede test scheduling or contract testing progress. All these Pre-Revenue Operations periods of testing require formal, advance scheduling and diligent, close coordination among the Contractor, the C-26009 Systems Contractor, and the Authority. h. Project Schedule Table 1: Summary of Critical Dates
FFGA Begin Construction Construction Complete Revenue Service January 1, 2007 December 31, 2013 June 30, 2014 Forecast Completion Grantee PMOC March 20, 2007A October 25, 2016 December 30, 2016 March 20, 2007A October 2017 February 2018
MTACC-SAS
i. Project Budget/Cost
Table 2: Project Budget/Cost Table
FFGA FFGA Amend Obligated ($ Million) 4,137.911 MTA Current Working Budget (CWB) $ Millions 5,489.614 816.614 4,137.911 *866.760 838.667 838.667 28.093 25.633 2.460 **3,509.000 100.000 1,145.782 4,673.000 1,350.693 1,300.000 1,300.000 50.693 48.233 2.460 **3,509.000 450.000 3,059.000 0 % of Total 100 14.88 85.12 24.60 23.68 23.68 0.92 0.88 0.04 63.92 8.20 55.72 0 1,538.609 502.552 491.440 491.440 11.112 8.652 2.460 1,036.057 28.02 9.15 8.95 8.95 0.20 0.16 0.04 18.87 Expenditures as of December 31, 2011 % of Total 28.02
($ Millions) Grand Total Cost: Financing Cost Total Project Cost: Total Federal: Total FTA share:
5309 New Starts share
% of Total 100 16.78 83.22 27.75 96.25 100 3.75 95.15 4.85 55.47 16.67 83.33 0
TBD
$ Millions 1,538.609
4,866.614 816.614 4,050.000 1,350.693 1,300.000 1,300.000 50.693 48.233 2.460 2,699.307 450.000 2,249.307 0
Total FHWA share:

CMAQ Special Highway Appropriation
Total Local share: State share Agency share City share
* Obligated amounts obtained from the Transportation Electronic Award Management (TEAM) system and MTACCs Grant Management Department. ** Current MTA Board approved budget.
j. Project Risk The overall risk of project schedule and cost increases has been reduced during the 4th Quarter 2011 as a result of: Completion of all real estate acquisition Substantial completion of Contract C5A NYCDEP approval of the 60 water main redesign Delays resulting from coordination of work between multiple prime contracts and adverse public reaction to the air quality and noise consequences of blasting and excavation will be major risks that could have adverse cost and schedule impacts for the foreseeable future.
MTACC-SAS
MONTHLY UPDATE The information contained in the body of this report is limited, in accordance with Oversight Procedure 25, to inform the FTA of the most critical project occurrences, issues, and next steps, as well as professional opinions and recommendations. Where a section is included with no text, there are no new critical project occurrences [or] issues to report this month.
MTACC-SAS
ELPEP SUMMARY Status: ELPEP meetings were held on December 6, 2011 and December 8, 2011. The current status of each of the main ELPEP components as discussed and updated during December 2011 is summarized as follows: Technical Capacity and Capability (TCC): The TCC for SAS Phase 1 was submitted on 3/11/10 and approved by the FTA on 4/6/10. The PMOC completed its review of the Revision 8 SAS PMP and is monitoring and verifying implementation and compliance with this plan. Schedule Management Plan (SMP): On November 3, 2011, the FTA confirmed that MTACC has responded to the Candidate Revisions identified in FTAs conditional approval letter, dated October 26, 2010, and that the SMP is fully approved. The PMOC has verified SAS substantial compliance with the SMP since August 2010. The process of transferring the compliance verification process to the MTA is discussed below. The issue of secondary schedule mitigation was clarified and agreed upon. Cost Management Plan (CMP): FTA conditional approval of the Cost Management Plan, including five (5) Candidate Revisions was provided on September 1, 2011. MTACC has submitted its final revisions to the CMP, which incorporate its responses to those Candidate Revisions. FTA/PMOC final review of these revisions is in progress. Risk Mitigation Capacity Plan (RMCP): Drafts of the ESA and SAS Risk Management Plans were transmitted to FTA Region II during October 2011. MTA addressed all PMOC comments in its submittal of the RMCP on October 28, 2011. Resolution of any final comments to the RMCP will be coordinated and combined with a review of the ESA and SAS Project Risk Management Plans. PMOC review of these plans has been completed and comments forwarded to FTA-Region II. Conformance and Compliance: Review of MTACC, Cost and Schedule compliance is a relatively straightforward matter and can be accomplished through existing reporting tools. Risk Management compliance is somewhat more complicated due to the qualitative elements of the process. Potential methods for this reporting process were presented and discussed. MTA will further evaluate and present its findings in a subsequent meeting.
Observation: Although overall implementation of the ELPEP is somewhat behind schedule, the MTACC has begun implementation of schedule, cost and risk management plans. The SAS Phase 1 PMP has been updated to support these management documents and processes. The PMOC has noted numerous instances where benefits conferred by these enhanced management tools have been realized. Concerns and Recommendations: Development of formal implementation verification and reporting process for each of these ELPEP elements should be given priority. The verification process will ensure that all benefits associated with the ELPEP are realized to the greatest extent possible.
MTACC-SAS
1.0 1.1
GRANTEES CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH Technical Capacity and Capability
1.1.1 Organization, Personnel Qualifications and Experience Status: During the 4th Quarter 2011, MTACC increased its technical capacity and capability to support the SAS Phase 1 Project. Additional personnel from New York City Transit (NYCT) and PB Americas (Consultant Construction Manager-CCM) were assigned to support Contract C5B and staff personnel have been identified to support Contract C6 when awarded. The SAS Project Management Team continues to be an integrated project organization utilizing personnel from MTACC, NYCT, PB Americas and AECOM/Arup (Design Consultant). There are five primary functional groups: Design Services Management; Construction; Construction Support; Budget, Administration and Accounts; and Program Control. The project has set up a Management Control System such that it can continuously manage, monitor, and report the scope, budget, schedule, and contingency levels of the project in order to ensure that the project progresses in accordance with the Enterprise Level Project Execution Plan (ELPEP). Observation: MTACC is effectively utilizing consultant staff to fill key positions on the project team. The project team acts as an integrated organization with virtually no distinction between the employees actual employers. The Project Managers are doing a good job in coordinating the turnover of work area from one contractor to another. Concerns and Recommendations: The Construction Manager for Contract C6 has yet to be identified. Typically this individual would have been available during construction procurement to assist in resolution of bidder questions. This is a key position on the project team. The PMOC recommends this position be mobilized as soon as possible. 1.1.2 Grantees Work Approach, Understanding, and Performance Ability a) Adequacy of Project Management Plan and Project Controls Status: PMOC review of the updated SAS Project Management Plan (Revision 8) has been completed. The PMOC has continued to evaluate the specific issue that resulted in a Candidate Revision, whether the proposed PMP revision has been implemented and whether the original issue was ultimately satisfied. Observation: The PMOC will review its findings with the FTA and subsequently present findings and recommendations to the MTA. Concerns and Recommendations: Any concerns will be documented as comments and tracked for resolution prior to PMOCs recommendation for FTAs approval of the revised PMP.
MTACC-SAS
b)
Grantees Approach to FFGA and other FTA/Federal Requirements
Status: MTACC continues to utilize the ELPEP and its various sub-plans in management of the FFGA. Observation: Efforts are still underway to amend the FFGA because the baseline cost and schedule have been exceeded. No update this period. Concerns and Recommendations: See section 1.1.2 a. c) Grantees Approach to Force Account Plan Status: Force Account expenditure increased to $1,715,021 during the 4th Quarter 2011 and is expected to continue in support of the activity at the 63rd Street/Lexington Avenue Station. Observation: The Force Account requirements are documented in the SAS Force Account Plan. The plan gives a description and a cost estimate of the NYCT services required for the design of the track and signal elements of the system and to support construction activities for each individual contract. The Force Account budget has been validated as part of the review of Revision 9 of the SAS Cost Estimate. Concerns and Recommendations: None d) Grantees Approach to Safety and Security Plan Status: MTACCs approach to Safety and Security is defined in Section 4 Safety, Security and Health Programs of the SAS PMP. Observation: Section 4 of the PMP includes the required project Health and Safety Plan (HASP) that describes the responsibility and protocols to maintain a safe environment throughout the construction of the SAS Project. The requirements for the contractors security program are delineated. The section also outlines the Project Safety and Security Management Plan (SSMP) as required by 49 CFR Part 659 which includes the Safety and Security Certification Plan (SSPC) and the Systems Safety and Reliability Assurance Program Plan (SSRA). Concerns and Recommendations: None e) Grantees Approach to Asset Management Asset Management Identification and control of project assets will be coordinated between the Systems Track, Power, Signals and Communications Contractor (Contract 26009) and NYCTs
MTACC-SAS
Department of Subways. With the award of the C6 contract, efforts will begin on the development of the Asset Management Plan. Observation: SAS Asset Management Plan must be integrated with NYCTs Property Management System. Concerns and Recommendations: None f) Grantees Approach to Community Relations Status: During the 4th Quarter of 2011, MTACC continued community information and outreach efforts which included: Periodic meetings and information sharing sessions with interested or affected groups.. Staffing and maintaining a community office that responds to community concerns. Notifications and bulletins through a variety of media outlets. A quarterly public workshop, held on November 30, 2011 .
Observation: Construction complaints have increased in both number and significance over the past several months as construction activity has increased. Public concerns over health and safety impacts from excavation and blasting were effectively handled. Where possible, meaningful actions were taken to mitigate objectionable conditions. The public workshop, held on November 30, 2011, was a new initiative which allowed members of the community to interact with members of the MTACC in a collaborative, problem-solving environment. The workshop was opened to 200 members of the community, and was hosted by the President of the MTACC. After a brief introduction, participants broke into smaller groups based upon their area of interest. Each group had a facilitator to moderate the discussion. Most, if not all, of the tables were also joined by representatives of the MTA and contractors working on the project. After about 2 hours, representatives from several tables were invited to step forward to make brief presentations. MTACC stated they would fully consider and evaluate viable suggestions generated from the workshop. Conclusions and Recommendations: MTACCs community outreach has been proactive in its outreach efforts to the affected community. MTACC executive management has made the commitment to address community concerns and mitigate the effects of construction where possible. The workshop held on November 30, 2011 was a new method to engage the community and work collaboratively towards solutions. The participation of the MTACC President in these events demonstrates the MTAs resolve in this area.
10
MTACC-SAS
1.1.3 Grantees Understanding of Federal Requirements and Local Funding Process a) b) Federal Requirements Uniform Property Acquisition and Relocation Act of 1970
Real estate acquisition and tenant relocation is being performed in accordance with the approved SAS Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan and Relocation Plan. These plans address Title 49 CFR Part 24, which implements the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Polices Act of 1970, as amended, and FTA real estate requirements 5010.1C. c) Local Funding Agreements MTAs approved 2000-2004 and 2005-2009 Capital Programs provided $2,964 million for SAS Phase 1 ($1,050 million and $1,914 million respectively). The proposed 2010-2014 Capital Program budgets $1,487 million to complete the SAS Phase 1 project. Of the $1,487 million, $545 million was approved for the 2010-2011 timeframe. MTA needs to approve $942 million for the 2012-2014 timeframe. A Financial Management Oversight Contractor review has been initiated by FTA Region II. 1.2 Project Controls 1.2.1 Scope Definition and Control Status: During the 4th Quarter 2011, there has been no change in the scope of the SAS Project. The scope of the SAS Project is defined by the FEIS, ROD and the FFGA. The project scope will be delivered via ten (10) construction packages, with support from NYCT for rail systems engineering, installation and overall operating systems inspection and testing. Observation: The process of utilizing the Configuration Control Board (CCB), the change control process, the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and issuing Technical Memorandums has proven to be an effective means of controlling scope and managing the transfer of scope between construction packages. This process continues to be used to manage scope refinements and to adjust package scope to react to unanticipated field conditions. Concerns and Recommendations: Technical processes involving the modification or transfer of scope between construction packages are well-established and have been proven effective. Management processes involving the cost and schedule impacts of scope changes and transfers are less developed. No additional concerns or recommendations were realized during the 4th Quarter 2011. 1.2.2 Quality Status: The Second Avenue Subway Quality Management team held monthly Quality Meetings and Quarterly Quality Oversights of the Contractor with CCM, MTACC and PMOC participation. They participated in the job progress meetings, monitored quality matters in the field for each
11
MTACC-SAS
construction contract, reviewed and provided comments for Quality Work Plans, and participated in Preparatory Phase Sessions for numerous construction processes. Observations: The QA/QC processes are well defined and are being implemented per the various quality plans and procedures. With the reassignment of Quality Personnel and the hiring of an additional Quality Project Manager, the PMOC feels that the MTACC is adequately staffed to provide quality oversight on the current contracts. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC recommends that MTACC evaluate future quality staff requirements based on the upcoming ward of the C6 Systems contract. 1.2.3 Project Schedule Status: A summary of project schedule information is as follows: Forecast Completion FFGA Begin Construction Construction Complete Revenue Service Observations: The Revenue Service Date (RSD), as forecast by Update #65 of the MTACCs Integrated Project Schedule (IPS), has remained December 30, 2016. For the 4th Quarter, 2011, the calculated completion of Phase 1 construction has remained essentially constant at October 25, 2016, with 67 calendar days (CD) of schedule contingency when measured against the MTACCs target RSD of December 31, 2016. MTACC uses December 30, 2016 as its target RSD and bases its schedule and schedule contingency reporting on this target. FTA/ELPEP used February 28, 2018 as its target RSD with the condition that a minimum 240 CD of contingency be maintained against this target through September 30, 2016. To date, the MTACC criteria has been the more stringent and has been the basis of routine schedule and schedule contingency reporting. Secondary contingencies involving real estate procurement and secondary critical paths have been consistently reported. Concerns and Recommendations: The SAS Project Team continues to demonstrate its capability and capacity to actively manage the project schedule and achieve the established schedule goals. No concerns were identified this period. January 1, 2007 December 31, 2013 June 30, 2014 Grantee March 20, 2007A October 25, 2016 December 30, 2016 PMOC March 20, 2007A October 2017 February 2018
12
MTACC-SAS
1.2.4 Project Budget and Cost Status: Total project cost in the approved FFGA is $4,866,614,000 million and is allocated into the Standard Cost Categories (SCC) as shown below in Table 1-1. Table 1-1: Standard Cost Categories
Standard Cost Category (SCC) # 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Subtotal Financing Cost Total Project Description Guideway & Track Elements Stations, Stops, Terminals, Intermodal Support Facilities: Yards, Shops, Admin Bldgs. Site Work & Special Conditions Systems ROW, Land, Existing Improvements Vehicles Professional Services Unallocated Contingency Year of Expenditure $000 612,404 1,092,836 0 276,229 322,707 240,960 152,999 796,311 555,554 4,050,000 816,614 4,866,614
Table 1-2 lists the associated grants in the Transportation Electronic Award Management (TEAM) System with respective appropriated and obligated amounts as of December 31, 2011. Table 1-2: Appropriated and Obligated Funds
Grant Number NY-03-0397 NY-03-0408 NY-03-0408-01 NY-03-0408-02 NY-03-0408-03 NY-03-0408-04 NY-03-0408-05 NY-03-0408-06 NY-03-0408-07 Amount ($) $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $274,920,030 $237,849,000 Obligated ($) $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $274,920,030 $237,849,000 Disbursement ($) thru December 31, 2011 $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $157,092,845 0
NY-03-0408-08
Pending
13
Pending
0
MTACC-SAS
Grant Number NY-17-X001-00 NY-36-001-00* NY-95-X009-00 NY-95-X015-00 Total
Amount ($) $2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00
Obligated ($) $2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00
Disbursement ($) thru December 31, 2011 $2,459,821 $78,870,000 $8,652,432 $36,884,999
$502,169,014.00
* Denotes American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds
A total of $1,538,609,469 has been expended on the project through December 31, 2011, of which $420,921,506 has been spent on design and $671,084,345 on construction (MTACCs December 2011 Cost and Schedule Summary Input). Observation: Local funds totaling $1,036,440,455 ($1,538,609,469 $502,169,014) have been spent as of December 31, 2011. MTAs approved 2000-2004 and 2005-2009 Capital Programs provided $2,964 million for SAS Phase 1 ($1,050 million and $1,914 million respectively). The proposed 2010-2014 Capital Program budgets $1,487 million to complete the SAS Phase 1 project. Of the $1,487 million, $545 million was approved for the 2010-2011 timeframe. MTA needs to approve $942 million for the 2012-2014 timeframe. Concerns and Recommendations: Availability of local funding has been identified as a major concern. Current funding supports the award of construction Contract C6, but local funding of the 2011 2014 Capital Program is required to ensure award of subsequent contracts. FTA Region II has initiated a Financial Management Oversight Contractor review of the project. 1.2.5 Project Risk Monitoring and Mitigation Status: Risk monitoring and mitigation is ongoing and being performed per the SAS Risk Management Program, which is documented in Section 6.0 of the PMP. During the 4th Quarter 2011, Risk Mitigation Meeting number 11 was held on December 7, 2011. The risks addressed at the meeting were based on the set of risks identified in the risk analysis as those with the most impact to cost and schedule. The following risks were discussed: Risk CNS 4 (C6): Problems related to managing contractor during construction. Risk 89 (C5B): Different site conditions during cavern mining lead to lost productivity and contractor delay resulting in claims. Risk TRP 4 (C6): Systems Integration Testing Problems (Traction Power SCADA). Risk CNS 8 (C6): Delayed safety certification. Risk 147 (C4B): Vibration from mining operation. Risk (TBD): Shop Drawing review process.
14
MTACC-SAS
Risk (TBD): Several C4B risks involving gaining access to entrances and ancillaries due to various third-party issues.
From the discussions, action items have been assigned and the responsible individual identified to complete the action. Observation: SAS Project Management is proactive in its efforts to monitor and mitigate the risk of cost and schedule increases. Risks are routinely re-evaluated and updated. Mitigation strategies are developed and vetted through senior project managers. The processes currently utilized have been effective in elevating the awareness of risk issues among project staff. Concerns and Recommendations: The SAS Project Team is currently refining and implementing several initiatives directed toward managing and mitigating several of the major risks. The PMOC considers these initiatives to be extremely important elements in the overall achievement of project cost and schedule goals. 1.2.6 Project Safety and Security Status: Safety The Lost Time Accident Rate and OSHA Recordable Accident Rate from the start of construction until November 31, 2011 are 1.92 and 4.60, respectively. The Lost Time Accident rate is below the national average of 2.2 and the OSHA Recordable Accident rate is above the national average of 4.2. The cumulative construction time worked since the project inception is 2,914,378 hours. Cumulative lost time injuries since project inception is 28 and the cumulative recordable injuries are 39. Security During the 4th Quarter 2011 the construction contractors continued implementing their site security plans. Personnel rosters were updated and security gates with electronic access to selected areas were installed. Observation: The Tunnel Boring Contractor (C1) Contract 26002 still has the highest number of lost time injuries and recordable injuries on the project, 13 and 28, respectively. The contractor also has the highest amount of construction hours (1,772,879) worked on the project. The nature of the tunnel boring operation (mining, surface preparation, waterproofing and concrete lining) lends itself to greater risk of injury. The contractor has provided additional training and equipment to address the unacceptable rates. MTACC has expanded its safety program to include a monthly walk-thru of the various work zones by the SAS Project Management Team. In addition, the SAS Project Safety Manager holds a monthly meeting with all Contractor Safety Managers, OCIP Representative, and the insurance carrier representative in order to make all aware of the safety concerns on the project and to exchange lessons learned. Overall, the SAS Project Team is being proactive in implementing its safety program. Concerns and Recommendations: None
15
MTACC-SAS
1.3
FTA Compliance Documents
Status: No change this period. 1.3.1 Readiness to Enter PE Status: Preliminary Engineering (PE) began in December 2001. 1.3.2 Readiness to Enter Final Design Status: Final Design began in April 2006. 1.3.3 Record of Decision Status: The Record of Decision (ROD) was dated July 8, 2004. 1.3.4 Readiness to Execute FFGA Status: The Full Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) was dated November 19, 2007. 1.3.5 Readiness to Bid Construction Work Status: Readiness to Bid Reviews have been on hold in accordance with direction received from FTA Region II. Observations: None this period. Concerns and Recommendations: None this period. 1.3.6 Readiness for Revenue Operations Status: No change this period. Observation: None Concerns: None
16
MTACC-SAS
2.0 2.1
PROJECT SCOPE Status & Quality: Design/Procurement/Construction
2.1.1 Engineering and Design Status: The design phase of SAS Phase 1 was completed in late November 2010. Observation: The primary role of the design team currently includes: Construction Administration, generally including shop drawing review, responding to RFIs, providing design clarifications where needed and technical support during construction package bidding. Geotechnical mapping and support. Due to the nature of the work, geotechnical engineers from the design team are on site to provide an evaluation of actual subsurface conditions encountered and any consequential design modifications. Updating of station finish packages (C4C, C5C) with as-built information from predecessor packages and updates or modifications involving utilities, MPT, etc. Detailing and documentation of design changes as may be required.
Concerns and Recommendations: Engineering support of the project has remained adequate to support the ongoing construction effort and execute isolated design enhancements or modifications. 2.1.2 Procurement Status: Updated procurement status includes: C-26009 (C6): Transit & Rail Systems The final steps of the two-stage RFP process were completed this period. Best and Final Offers were received from the four (4) technically preferred teams. The MTA Board approved the staff recommendation to award this contract to Comstock/SKANSKA, JV on December 21, 2011. C-26010 (C2B): 96th Street Station Concrete, MEP & Finishes Construction documents were made available to prospective bidders for this contract on December 5, 2011. The mandatory pre-bid meeting and site tour were held on December 20, 2011. Bids are currently scheduled to be received on February 6, 2012.
No other construction packages will be advertised for bid until mid-2012.
17
MTACC-SAS
Table 2-1: Construction Procurement Activity # Description Date* Comment
Contract C-26009 (C6): Systems SYPR40 25a 25d PR40 Award Contract Advertise for Bids Bid Opening Award Contract 01/13/12 12/05/11A 02/29/12 04/30/12 Award of contract. Contract C-26010 (C2B): 96th Street Station Concrete, MEP & Finishes
* Note: All dates reference IPS Update #65 (Data Date as of 12/01/11) U.N.O.
Observations and Analysis: Contract C-26009 (C6): On December 20, 2011, the MTA Board approved the staff recommendation for the award of this contract to Comstock/SKANSKA, JV. The final, negotiated contract price of $261,900,000 was less than the Engineers Estimate of $276,480,064 and within the project budget of $269,512,153. Contract C-26010 (C2B): MTACC has committed to bidding this project in accordance with the current IPS. The project will be awarded subject to available funding.
Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is concerned that potential lack of available funding will delay the award of contract C2B. As discussed elsewhere in this report, construction of 96th Street Station is forecast to be a critical or near-critical path when delays to the C5B schedule are mitigated. Significant delays in award of C2B have a high probability of delaying the entire project and resulting in additional cost. [Ref: SAS-21-Dec10] 2.1.3 Construction Status: Six (6) of the 10 construction contracts for the SAS Phase 1 Project have been awarded. Construction progress on the active contracts through December 31, 2011 includes: Contract C-26002 (C1) TBM tunnels from 92nd Street to 63rd Street Conveyor system disassembly and removal. Dismantling of the surface vertical conveyor structure. Waterproofing and concrete lining work in the West tunnel. Excavation of the 78th Street pump room. Surface preparation, waterproofing, and concrete lining work in the East tunnel. DBS repair work ongoing.
18
MTACC-SAS
Contract C-26005 (C2A) 96th Street Station Heavy Civil, Structural and Utility Relocation Installation of all 51 slurry wall panels on the Westside of 2nd Avenue between 95th and 99th streets. Guidewall construction for secant piles at Ancillary 1. Installation of 33 secant piles completed on the Westside of 2nd Ave as part of the north tie-in support of excavation at existing 99th Street tunnel. Installation of deck beams along 2nd Avenue between 95th and 99th streets. Installation of twelve inch high pressure gas tie-in on the Westside of 2nd Avenue between 96th and 97th streets. Phase II building stabilization work at 1802 2nd Avenue (structural slab/grade beam construction; transformer installation by Con Ed; gas main relocation). Installation of a new 36 inch diameter sewer line was started at Entrance 1. The focus continued to be in the plaza at 63rd St. and 3rd Ave., which is the primary access to Area 5 on the project. The MPT continues to be maintained successfully at the plaza area. The CM office continues to work on getting approval from NYDOT for 2 weekend shutdowns of 63rd St. traffic. Completed the runway beams and the Gantry Crane has been installed at the 6th Mezzanine. Testing, training and startup has been completed. Continued surveying the DMPs. Continued to install temporary shielding and decking and concrete demolition in Area 5. Continued with concrete demolition in multiple Area 5 mezzanines. Continued with installation of permanent walers to transfer loads for new openings. Continued temporary and permanent structural steel fabrication & installation. Lead abatement continued and primer application continued in Area 5. Continued with crack repair at tracks G3/G4. Continued with relocation of existing conduit and services for future demolition. Current Rock Excavation Locations: o Main Station Cavern between 69th and 72nd St. Center Drift; 100% complete (21,863 CY removed) West Slash; 100% complete (17,932 CY removed) East Slash: 40.4% complete 17,932 CY removed) Bench: 3.0% complete (860 CY of 28,871 CY 100% removed)
Contract C-26006 (C3) 63rd Street Station Upgrade
Contract C-26007 (C4B) 72nd Street Station Mining and Lining
19
MTACC-SAS
o G3/S1 Cavern I (between 65th and 66th St): 100% complete (3,368 CY removed) o C3/S1 Cavern II (between 65th and 66th St): 100% complete (3,733 CY removed) o G4/S2 Cavern I (between 67th and 68th St): o G4/S2 Cavern II (between 67th and 69th St): 32.9% complete (1,286 CY of 3,753 CY removed) o Horseshoe Tunnel: Approximately 40 feet remains projected completion 1/9/2012 Ancillary 2 (72nd St Southwest Corner) demolition has progress to the third floor level projected completion 1/27/2012 Ancillary 1 (69th St Southwest Corner) demolition completed, preparation for installation of soldier piles Entrance 3 (72nd St Southeast Corner) asbestos abatement at 300 E 72nd St. ongoing in preparation for building demolition Building remediation ongoing (1343 2nd Ave, 259 E 71st St, 1390 2nd Ave, 220 E 65th St, 239 E 73rd St, 1405 2nd Ave, and 307E 70th St) This contract was declared Substantially Complete on November 16, 2011. Contractor mobilization is continuing. Seismic level instrumentation has been installed in a majority of buildings and testing is ongoing. The contractor and the CCM continue to work with remaining building owners to get access for installation of remaining instrumentation. Completed takeover of the block north of 86th St. and continued with light pole removal, installation of temporary street lighting, relocation of fire hydrants, removal of pavement and sidewalk. Completed mobilization for asbestos abatement at the Gotham Building. Began foundation work for the muck stations. Began receiving steel for the south Gantry Crane. Completed site takeover at set up barriers at Ancillary 1. Began placement of Muck Station foundations.
Contract C-26013 (C5A) 86th Street Station Excavation, Utility Relocation and Road Decking Contract C-26008 (C5B): 86th Street Station Cavern & Heavy Civil
Observations: Key elements of work or issues requiring resolution in the near future to avoid delays to the work are described below. For Contract C1: Timely completion of the CIP lining in the West tunnel to support East tunnel concrete work.
20
MTACC-SAS
Resolution of time impacts for AWO #103 (Ground Freezing), AWO #92 (TBM Extension), AWO #114 (Mining through freeze zone), and AWO #112 (CIP Lining Deletion). Potential impact of work at Ancillary #1 and entrances #1 and #2 due to: o Gas relocation outside secant piles (AWO-091) at all locations o East and West side sewer relocation at Entrance #1 and #2 o ECS duct bank relocation at entrance #1
For Contract C2A:
For Contract C3: Maintaining the steel fabrication schedule for timely steel erection is critical to maintaining the overall project schedule. Owner completion of repair work at 22 East 70th Street Negotiation and execution of the additional work order for MEP utility relocation work at 301 East 69th Street Resolution of all additional work orders to facilitate contract close out Review and approval of as built drawings required before Final Acceptance This contract continued in mobilization phase through September 2011. The initial project meetings are transition coordination meetings between the 5A & 5B contractors. The PMOC has observed that these meetings are proving to be an effective vehicle for smooth transition of site permits and overlapping activities of the 5A contractors step down operations and the 5B contractors ramping up operations.
For Contract C4B:
For Contract C5A:
For Contract C5B:
Concerns and Recommendations: The SAS Project Team continues to identify, prioritize and address construction problems which have the potential to delay the project. No concerns this period. 2.1.4 Force Account (FA) Contracts Status: During the 4th Quarter 2011 the total force account expenditures increased to $1,715,021. The increase of $908,258 is primarily associated with work at the 63rd Street Station (Contract C3), which requires general orders and work train support from NYCT. Observation: Force account expenditures have increased as additional general orders, work trains, and flagging support have been required to support the 63rd Street Station Upgrade. This will remain the principal source of force account expenditures for the foreseeable future.
21
MTACC-SAS
Concerns and Recommendation: None 2.1.5 Operational Readiness Status: NYCT has developed a Concept of Operations Plan for the SAS Project. NYCT will validate SAS Phase 1 readiness during Pre-Revenue Service Operations Training and Testing scheduled from June 15, 2016 to October 25, 2016 (Reference IPS Update #65 dated November 2011). Observation: IPS Update #65 reflects the specific tests with its associated durations that NYCT will perform prior to Revenue Service. The lack of this information in prior integrated project schedule had been a concern of the PMOC. Concerns and Recommendation: None 2.2 Third-Party Agreement Status: During the 4th Quarter 2011 the SAS Project Team continued its Interagency Coordination as defined in Section 12 of the SAS PMP. Section 12 describes the plans and agreements that need to be made with city and state agencies and utility providers in order to expedite the construction process. Observation: MTACC/NYCT has entered into cooperative and force account agreements as needed with other agencies and utility providers to perform construction work for the Project. As of December 31, 2011, third-party reimbursements totaling $16,301,044 have been made. Revision 9 of the Current Working Budget has allocated $75,300,000 for third party reimbursements. Concerns and Recommendation: Given the completion of Contract C5A and near completion of Contract C1, a reimbursement of $16,301,004 does not appear to be indicative of the actual amount of work performed by the utility agencies. The PMOC is concerned about the apparent delay in the utility companies submitting its invoices. The PMOC recommends the SAS Project Team investigate and report on all outstanding invoices. 2.3 Contract Packages and Delivery Methods Status: Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway is being delivered via ten separate construction packages. Each construction contract package utilizes the design-bid-build process based upon a fixed price construction contract. Competitive procurements are based on NYCT standard procedures. Procurement of general construction packages has been primarily based on the IFB (lump-sum bid) process. Due to the technical complexity of the Systems Package (C6), the RFP process was
22
MTACC-SAS
judged to be the best procurement alternative. There was no change to the procurement or delivery method for any of the construction packages during the 4th Quarter of 2011. Table 2-1 below shows specific procurement procedures for each open construction contract package and its current status. Table 2-2 Construction Procurement Method and Status Procurement Pkg. C2B Contract C-26010 Description 96th Street Station: construction of the entrances and ancillary facilities, architectural finishes and MEP equipment. Type IFB Status Bid Phase Design Completed Design Completed
C4C C5C
C-26011 C-26012
72nd Street Station: construction of ancillary finishes, IFB station finishes and MEP equipment. 86th Street Station: construction of the ancillary facilities, station finishes and MEP equipment. Power, Signals and Communications; includes the installation of track, 3rd Rail traction power, way-side signals, and all communication components, integration of the communication network with the NEP SCADA system and commissioning the system for revenue service. IFB
C6
C-26009
RFP
Award Pending
Observation: Significant schedule delays have been encountered during the procurement of the last four (4) construction packages (C4B, C3, and C5B and C6). Procurement delays have made a significant contribution to the overall shift of construction activity later in the project. As the project schedule is compressed, the projects ability to absorb procurement delays without major schedule impact is reduced. Concerns and Recommendations: Standard NYCT procurement durations clearly do not reflect all issues associated with the procurement of large packages such as those included in SAS. The PMOC recommends the Project Team evaluate procurement durations based upon previous experience and consider revising the procurement duration for the station finish packages (C2B, C4C and C5C) accordingly. 2.4 Vehicles Status: No change.
23
MTACC-SAS
Observations: No additional vehicles will be procured for the SAS Phase 1 Project. MTACC/NYCTs assertion that recent services reductions will provide ample spare vehicles for the SAS Phase 1 Project has been reflected in the Rail Fleet Management Plan which was accepted by FTA Region II. A zero dollar budget for the procurement of vehicles is reflected in the projects Current Working Budget (CWB) and also in the latest cost estimate (Rev. 9). Concerns and Recommendations: None 2.5 Property Acquisition and Real Estate Status: Real estate acquisition and tenant relocation was performed in accordance with the approved SAS Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan and Relocation Plan. These plans address Title 49 CFR Part 24, which implements the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended and FTA real estate requirements 5010.1C. MTACC reports that as of October 25, 2011, all real estate acquisitions required for the construction of SAS Phase 1 have been completed. Observation: On December 1, 2011, the United States District Court rendered its opinion in Yorkshire Towers Company, LP, et al, versus United States Department of Transportation, et al. In this litigation, the plaintiffs sought to relocate the 86th Street Entrance from its current mid-block position in front of the Yorkshire Towers (Alternate 7) to the southeast corner of Second Avenue and 86th Street (Revised Alternative 5). The Court found the plaintiffs case to be without merit and it was dismissed. If the plaintiffs prevailed, additional real estate acquisitions would have been necessary, with a likely result of significant project cost increases and schedule delays. Conclusions and Recommendations: Real estate and right of occupancy acquisition has not affected construction progress to date. With the completion of all acquisition activities, the risk of delay involving property acquisition has been significantly reduced. 2.6 Community Relations Status: During the 4th Quarter of 2011, MTACC continued its public outreach by keeping the community, local elected officials and Community Boards (8 and 11) informed of construction work for all active contracts. Look-ahead schedules were posted on the MTA website, meetings were held with businesses and residents. MTACC continued to field questions via the field office telephone, SAS Hotline and MTA web mail. The Good Neighbor Initiative has resulted in cleaner work areas, prompt removal of trash and better lighting. Observation: MTACCs community relations efforts appear adequate.
24
MTACC-SAS
Concerns and Recommendations: MTACC should continue its prompt response to the community concerns and keep the neighborhood informed of construction activity on 2nd Avenue. 3.0 3.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUB-PLANS Project Management Plan
Status: The PMOC has completed its review of the Revision 8 submission of the draft SAS PMP (dated January 2011) and has forwarded its comments to FTA Region II. Upon FTAs concurrence with the PMOCs findings and recommendations, the results will be transmitted to the MTACC SAS Project Team. Observations: In general Revision 8 of the SAS PMP was updated in accordance with the PMP Update process defined in the ELPEP. Candidate Revisions were issued and approved by the Technical Advisory Committee for all Material Decisions, i.e., project decisions that affect scope, cost, schedule or funding. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is concerned that the processes identified in the PMP might not be implemented as defined by the recently developed procedures. The PMOC recommends that selected sections of the PMP be audited to verify implementation. [Ref: SAS-09-Jan10] 3.2 PMP Sub Plan Status: As part of the PMP review, the referenced Sub-Plans have been reviewed to confirm their conformance and consistency with the PMP. Observations: SAS Sub-Plan documents consist of: Project Quality Manual, Quality Assurance Plan, Risk Management Plan, Design Criteria Manual, Cost Management Plan, Schedule Management Plan, Project Design Quality Manual, Real Estate Acquisition Plan, Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan, Contingency Management Plan, and Quality Implementation Procedure. Concerns and Recommendations: None 3.3 Project Procedures Status: In conjunction with NYCT procedures utilized on the SAS Phase 1 Project, MTACC has approved and issued 75 procedures of its own. Four procedures are still under development. Observations: MTACC failed to meet its original commitment to have all the procedures approved and issued by April 12, 2010. MTACC has not specified a time period for the completion of the four
25
MTACC-SAS
procedures still under development. Of the four procedures under development, the PMOC believes that AD.15, Program Change Control, is critical to the management of the project. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is still concerned about the length of time it has taken MTACC to develop and issue the procedures. The PMOC recommends that the MTACC complete development of the remaining (additional) procedures, particularly AD.15, as quickly as possible, preferably by January 31, 2012. [Ref: SAS-11-Jan10] 4.0 4.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE STATUS Integrated Project Schedule
Status: The IPS is a management level schedule that integrates all ten construction packages along with design, procurement, startup and other support activities. IPS Update #65 was received on January 5, 2012 and is based on a Data Date of December 01, 2011. Update #65 contained a narrative report, a schedule variance report, a schedule revision log and PDF versions of several schedule reports. Project schedule completion milestone dates remained essentially unchanged for this period; however MTACC now forecasts completion of all construction on 10/25/16, with 67 calendar days of contingency until its committed RSD of December 30, 2016 . Significant schedule-related accomplishments during December 2011 include: Incremental refinements for the NYCT Pre-Revenue Operation Activities were incorporated into the IPS. MTACC has initiated a SAS Schedule Contingency Task Force that will explore additional means of enhancing the project schedule contingency. Table 4-1: Summary of Schedule Dates Forecast Completion FFGA Begin Construction Construction Complete Revenue Service January 1, 2007 December 31, 2013 June 30, 2014 Grantee March 20, 2007A October 25, 2016 December 30, 2016 PMOC March 20, 2007A October 2017 February 2018
During the month of December 2011, progress continued on six (6) active construction packages: C-26002 (C1) TBM Tunneling and 96th Street Box, C-26005 (C2A) 96th Site Work and Heavy Civil, C-20006 (C3) 63rd Street Station Rehabilitation, C-26007 (C4B) 72nd Street Station Cavern Mining & Lining, C-26013 (C5A) Open Cuts and Utility Relocation, C26008 (C5B) 86th Street Station Cavern Mining & Lining.
26
MTACC-SAS
No major additions, deletions or significant changes were made to the schedule during the latest update period. Changes were limited to routine updating to reflect the current status of the ongoing activities. The schedule status of individual construction contracts is illustrated in the table below. Table 4-2: Summary Schedule Performance by Construction Package Pkg. C1 Award Date 3/20/2007 Contract S/C 7/20/2010 1/7/2013 7/20/2015 5/13/2014 Upd. #62 Forecast S/C 2/16/2012 6/4/2013 7/23/2015 5/13/2014 2/4/2014 6/16/2015 10/10/2011 9/4/2014 3/11/2016 8/31/2016 Upd. #65 Forecast S/C 3/18/2012 5/30/2013 7/20/2015 6/2/2014 12/16/2013 6/2/2015 11/16/2011 9/4/2014 4/8/2016 8/31/2016 % Complete 91.7% 54.5% 0% 8.3% 30.1% 0% 92.5% 1.44% 0% 0% Contract Schedule Status 607 143 0 20 46 0 313 0 0 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Quarter Change 31 -5 -3 20 -50 -14 37 0 28 0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
C2A 5/28/2009 C2B C3 Future 1/13/2011
C4B 10/1/2010 10/31/2013 C4C C5A C5B C5C C6 Future 7/9/2009 8/4/2011 Future Future 6/2/2015 1/7/2011 9/4/2014 4/8/2016 8/31/2016
1. "Future" contracts use MTACC estimated dates based upon preliminary schedules. 2. Monthly Change reflects schedule gain/loss over most recent reporting period. Negative sign denotes time gain and positive sign denotes time loss. 3. The contracts marked as Future have not been bid or awarded. 4. C5A Substantial Completion achieved on November 16, 2011. 5. The Contract 5B baseline schedule has not been incorporated into the IPS. There is no baseline against which to measure actual progress. 6. % Complete based on payments through December 2011. C5A is 100% physically complete.
Observations and Analysis: Based on a review of construction contracts, schedule progress (Table 4-2) during the 4th Quarter of 2011 was acceptable. Contracts C1 and C5A are at a high level of completion and have achieved all interface milestones with other contracts. Incidental delays to these packages do not affect the overall project schedule. Overall progress for contracts C2A and C4B was slightly ahead of schedule. Contract C3 was delayed by structural steel fabrication late this quarter; recovery from this delay is forecast. Schedule progress for C5B cannot be evaluated as the baseline schedule has not been approved. Approval and incorporation into the IPS is forecast for January 2012. At the request of the FTA, the PMOC has initiated quarterly tracking of major schedule activities and/or milestones that are in progress during that quarter as a means of reviewing and evaluating the projects ability to achieve short-term schedule goals. Due to the one-month lag
27
MTACC-SAS
in reporting schedule update progress, the 4th Qtr. 2011 baseline and intermediate results are published in this report and shown in the following table: Table 4-3: Quarterly Schedule Target Comparison
Pkg. Act. Description 3rd Qtr. Tracking Milestones (Carryover) C2A 4S200 Compl Slurry Walls South 95-97; West 4N200 Compl Slurry Walls North 97-99; West C4B 72C1035 Excavate Top Heading Area 3 72C1185 Excavate Top Heading Area 2 C6 PR40 Award Systems Contract 4th Qtr. Tracking Milestones C1 S6A40 Compl West Tunnel Concrete S9A10 Complete East Tunnel Concrete C2A A117 Complete ANC #1 Secant Piles 4N210 Compl Deck Install North - West Side 4S210 Compl Deck Install South - West Side C2B PR20m Advertise Bid package PR25d Open Bids PR40 Award C2B Contract C3 LP025 Complete Demo Lower Platform UP040 Complete Demo Upper Platform C4B 72C1035 Excavate Top Heading Area 3 72C1185 Excavate Top Heading Area 2 72C1225 Excavate Cavern Bench Compl Horseshoe Tunnel 155+94HST1000 >152+94 NCC1000 North Crossover Excavate Hand-off C5A/C5B; No shaft for Mech HO2 C5A Mining Hand-off C5A/C5B; So shaft for Mech HO1 Mining XX C5B Submit Detailed Baseline Schedule PR35h C6 Commence Negotiations Select Contractor Selection PR35l Committee PR35u MTA Board Action Tracking Milestone Dates Baseline Current 1-Jul-11 1-Dec-11 16-Nov-11 29-Nov-11 A 13 28-Nov-11 11-Nov-11 A -17 18-Oct-11 14-Oct-11 A -4 30-Jun-12 22-Feb-12 -129 27-Oct-11 28-Dec-11 62 1-Oct-11 1-Dec-11 5-Jan-12 18-Jan-12 13 29-Feb-12 6-Mar-12 6 11-Jul-12 13-Jul-12 2 10-Feb-12 20-Jan-12 -21 27-Feb-12 22-Feb-12 -5 28-Nov-11 5-Dec-11 7 6-Feb-12 7-Feb-12 1 30-Apr-12 30-Apr-12 0 31-May-12 23-May-12 -8 11-Apr-12 30-Apr-12 19 18-Oct-11 14-Oct-11 A -4 28-Feb-12 8-Dec-11 -82 9-May-12 19-Apr-12 -20 20-Mar-12 4-May-12 14-Oct-11 17-Oct-11 16-Sep-11 12-Oct-11 22-Nov-11 21-Dec-11 7-Feb-12 4-Apr-12 1-Nov-11 A 16-Nov-11 A 16-Sep-11 A 12-Oct-11 A 22-Nov-11 A 21-Dec-11 -42 -30 18 30 0 0 0 0
Of the 26 activities (21 4th Quarter and 5 carryover from 3rd Quarter) monitored 9 have been completed. For these activities, the average variance between baseline and current forecast completion is -7.35 CD. Based upon these milestones, schedule performance through the first two months of the 4th Quarter has been acceptable.
28
MTACC-SAS
Conclusions and Recommendations: Based upon schedule progress through December 01, 2011: Construction schedule progress through the first two months of the 4th Quarter, 2011 has been acceptable. The Project is generally progressing in accordance with previous forecasts generated by the IPS. The IPS has proven to be a reasonably accurate predictor of project activity. The SAS Project Team actively uses the IPS in the coordination and management of the project. Final development and approval of the C5B baseline schedule and any reconciliation of the milestones restraining the start of cavern excavation should be given a high priority in order to provide an accurate IPS forecast. 90-Day Look-Ahead
4.2
Status: Based on the Integrated Project Schedule (IPS) Update#65 (DD=12/01/11), major activities that can be anticipated to either start or complete over the upcoming 90 days include the following: Table 4-4: 90-Day Look-Ahead Schedule
Activity ID C1- TBM Construction Tunnel 96th Box (91st to 95th) Start Finish
West Tunnel Concrete Complete East Tunnel concrete Complete Handoff from C1 to C4B, C5B for Cavern Mining C1 substantial Completion
C2A 96th Street Station Sitework& Heavy Civil
01/18/12 03/18/12 01/18/12 03/18/12 11/01/11A 02/22/12 02/23/12 02/16/12 02/29/12 02/29/12
03/23/12 02/12/12 02/06/12 05/21/12
Stage 4 Decking Installation Start Stage 5 Slurry Wall Installation Ancillary #2: Complete Precast Decking
C2B 96th Street Station Concrete, Finishes & Utilities Bid Opening C3 63rd Street Station Rehab Low Platform, Area 4-Demo Slab & Walls Demo Upper Platform & Track 1 Begin Fabrication - Elevators Complete Steel shop drawing review/approval C4B 72nd Street Station Mining & Lining
Begin 72nd Street Cavern pressure relief system Ancillary 2 Complete Decking Entrance 1 Adit Excavation
C5B 86th St. Station Mining & Lining (IFB)
03/14/12 03/08/12 03/08/12
29
MTACC-SAS
Activity ID Complete Instrumentation Continue Mobilization
Start
Finish
Continue Muck Handling Shed foundations

Begin Erection of South Gantry Crane C6 Systems (RFP) MTA Board Approves Contract Award Recommendation Award Construction Contract C6
Based on look-ahead forecast at job progress meetings. Baseline schedule not approved. 12/21/11 01/11/12 12/21/11 01/11/12
Observations and Analysis: 90-Day Look-Ahead Notes: 1. C3 site activities primarily limited to demolition & prep work over next 90 days. Procurement of long-lead items (structural steel, vertical transportation, control systems) is underway. 2. MTACC reports the bidding of Contract C2B will proceed in accordance with the current schedule update. 3. C5B is currently forecasting the start of excavation activities in April 2012. 4. C1 should achieve Substantial Completion/Beneficial Occupancy during the next 90 days. Concerns and Recommendations: In order to generally maintain the current schedule, the following activities must occur over the next 90 day period. 1. The award of construction package C6. 2. Receipt of bids for construction package C2B. 3. Completion of C5B mobilization activities. 4. Resolution of delays to excavation progress on C4B. The following discussion on the schedule critical and near-critical paths will substantiate and support these conclusions and recommendations. 4.3 Critical Path Activities Status: Project Critical Path: The project critical path is unchanged from the November 2011 Monthly Report. The majority of the project critical path spans the schedules of individual construction packages that are mobilizing to commence construction or otherwise not active and; therefore, not updated each month. The critical path begins with the contractual Access Restraint (NOA+10 MO or June 5, 2012) for blasting, followed by excavation of the South Shaft. The critical path continues through completion of C5B North and South Cavern mining and concrete operations for both locations at the 86th Street Station (C5B Milestone No. 1 and S/C). Upon
30
MTACC-SAS
achieving MS #1 in early March 2014, the critical path shifts to start and completion of Contract C5C mezzanine and platform concrete work, followed by the start of concrete work in early September 2014, then shifting to 1st and 2nd fix work in 86th Street Station south Ancillary (No. 1), where it is handed over to C6 in April 2015. The critical path continues into C6 Systems Signal and Traction Power work for the next six (6) months within the 86th Street Station, followed by Integrated Testing of the Traction Power system beginning in mid-December 2015. Upon completion, this area is handed over for Pre-Revenue Operations Testing beginning in late June 2016 and is forecast to complete by 25-Oct-16. The MTACCs forecast RSD remains as 30-Dec-16. Secondary Paths: Construction involving the 86th Street Station (C5B -> C5C -> C6) occupies all secondary float paths between +1 and +72 Calendar Days (CD) (except as noted below). Major secondary float paths of significance to the overall status of the project are presented in Work Day (WD) order, and include the following: +50 WD: NYCT Pre-Revenue Operation Activities, scheduled to start on August 18, 2014. +74 WD: C4B -> C4C handoff (8/14/13) followed by mezzanine and platform concrete construction. +96 WD: This path extends through the construction of the 96th Street Station (C2A -> C2B -> C6) starting with slurry wall installation from 95th Street to 97th Street. Following excavation and cleanup, this path passes to C2B for structural, architectural and MEP installation. +85 WD: C4B -> C4C handoff (8/14/13) followed by Ancillary 2 structural and architectural construction. The C4C contractor has thirteen (13) months to construct Ancillary 2 (including MEP) and makes spaces available to the C6 contractor for systems installation. +92 WD: Procure and award construction contract C2B. +95 WD: Award of C6 Contract and preconstruction submittals. +98 WD: Completion of the west tunnel concrete liner from 72nd Street to the 96th Street Launch Box is work controlling the completion of Contract C1. +138 WD: Cost-to-cure construction at Chase Bank: Completion of this construction and delivery of this site for Ancillary #2 construction is forecast by June 1, 2012. Observations and Analysis: As previously noted, the critical path spans construction packages that are mobilizing to commence construction or otherwise not currently active. The reliability of the critical path will be enhanced when the actual construction schedule for these packages is incorporated into the IPS. Several recent initiatives will add to the functionality and overall usefulness of the IPS: Addition of NYCT pre-revenue operation activities will aid in ensuring operational readiness for the RSD. Inter-contract milestones and turnover requirements will assist in management of the multiple prime contractors and satisfaction of MTAs access obligations.
31
MTACC-SAS
Concerns and Recommendations: With a planned remaining duration of approximately 1680 CD, the project schedule has 67 CD of float. Achieving project schedule goals is possible; however, the projects ability to absorb further unanticipated delays is limited. The C5B -> C5C -> C6 sequence is clearly the controlling path leading to the RSD. Development of potential schedule recovery scenarios and delay mitigation strategies should be focused on this path. Pre-emptive incorporation of lessons learned from C4B should assist in increasing the confidence in achieving the current schedule. 4.4 Compliance with Schedule Management Plan Status: Since August 2010, the PMOC has monitored and evaluated the SAS Project Teams compliance with its Schedule Management Plan, developed as part of the overall ELPEP process. The PMOC will continue this effort until the MTACC undertakes the role of ELPEP compliance reporting and verification. Observations and Analysis: In the opinion of the PMOC, SAS Phase 1 is in compliance with the metrics, deliverables and intangible goals enumerated in the Enterprise Level Project Execution Plan (ELPEP), dated January 15, 2010 (Section IV. b, page 8) and as further described by the Schedule Management Plan (SMP). Specifically: Forecast Revenue Service Date o ELPEP Requirement: February 28, 2018 o Current Forecast: December 30, 2016 Minimum schedule contingency (measured against February 28, 2018 RSD) o ELPEP Requirement: 240 CD o Current Forecast: 490 CD Minimum Allowable Float; Real Estate Acquisition o ELPEP Requirement: 60 CD o Current Forecast: All Real Estate Takings are complete as of November 1, 2011. Minimum Allowable Secondary Float Path o ELPEP Requirement: 25 Calendar Days o Current Forecast: 134 CD (96 WD) through construction and fit-out of the 96th Street Station Secondary Schedule Mitigation (critical path compression) o ELPEP Requirement: 125 CD o Current Forecast: The estimate of secondary schedule mitigation achieved as a result of renegotiating C5B contract milestones has been reduced to 30 CD (). Other strategies to achieve this goal are under active consideration by the project team.
32
MTACC-SAS
In addition to the metrics above, the MTACC continues to demonstrate that it is using the IPS to actively plan, organize, direct and control individual packages and the overall project, and to provide reliable forecasts of the SAS revenue service date (RSD) and other major accomplishments. These beneficial outcomes are significant components of ELPEP/SMP compliance. Concerns and Recommendations: With respect to schedule, the MTACC is realizing the beneficial outcomes envisioned by the ELPEP on SAS. MTACC is generally in compliance with its Schedule Management Plan and the schedule requirements established by the ELPEP. 5.0 5.1 PROJECT COST STATUS Budget/Cost
Status: The FFGA baseline budget and current working budget are broken down into Standard Cost Categories in year of expenditure dollars as follows: Table 5-1: Allocation of Current Working Budget to Standard Cost Categories Std. Cost Category (SCC) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Subtotal Financing Cost Total Project
* Includes $47M Cost-to-Cure ** FTA has not approved the removal of the vehicles from the scope of work.
Description Guideway & Track Elements Stations, Stops, Terminals, Intermodal Support Facilities Site Work & Special Conditions Systems ROW, Land, Existing Improvements Vehicles Professional Services Unallocated Contingency
FFGA $612,404,000 $1,092,836,000 0 $276,229,000 $322,708,000 $240,960,000 $152,999,000 $796,311,000 $555,554,000 $4,050,000,000 $816,614,000 $4,866,614,000
MTAs Current Working Budget $728,617,000 $1,276,632,000 $562,000 $537,621,000 $247,627,000 $292,000,000* 0** $885,941,000 $482,000,000 $4,451,000,000 $816,614,000 $5,267,614,000
33
MTACC-SAS
The PMOC notes that this MTACCs CWB omits the cost for new Rolling Stock or corresponding reduction in funding and that this CWB does not represent an approved budget modification in any form. Observation and Analysis: A summary of the completion status of the active construction contracts as of December 31, 2011, based upon cost incurred through that date, is as follows: C26002 (Tunnel Boring) 91.7% C26005 (96th Street Station) 54.5% C26013 (86th Street Station) 92.5% C26008 (86th Street Station) 4.93% C26006 (63rd Street Station) 8.3% C26007 (72nd Street Station) 30.1% 59.4% of all construction work is under contract 45.2% of active construction contracts are complete 26.3% of all construction is complete Value of construction in place this period = $25,302,179 Estimated value of construction remaining = $1,995,760,819 Estimated months remaining at current rate of progress = 79 Forecast construction completion at current rate = January 22, 2018 Target construction completion = August 1, 2016 # Months remaining = 56
Aggregate Construction % Completion:
Based upon cost data received from MTACC for December 2011:
Average rate of construction required to achieve target completion date = $35,638,582/MO Notes to this evaluation include: For December 2011, no progress was reported for two construction contracts (C3, C5A), artificially reducing the progress calculated for the period. The average progress (payments) for the past 6 months equals $32,824,798. Contract C5A has been 100% physically complete since mid-November 2011, yet is still only 92.5% complete based upon payments, demonstrating the inherent lag or variance in this type of analysis. A similar lag may also exist for C1.
Using IPS Update #64 (DD=Nov. 1, 2011), current cost information reported by MTACC and Estimate Revision 9 estimates for future construction, the PMOC has constructed cash flow models based on early and late schedule dates. These models form the upper and lower boundaries of estimated progress per month that will achieve current schedule goals. For December 2011, this range is defined by:
34
MTACC-SAS
Upper Limit (Early Dates): $51,045,000 Lower Limit (Late Dates): $37,400,000
Using cost data for December 2011, the PMOC concludes that insufficient overall progress was made on the project during this period to support current schedule goals. Conclusions and Recommendations: This analysis suggests that overall construction progress is trending along the lower limit or late finish dates from the IPS, but suggests that current project schedule goals can still be achieved. This conclusion is consistent with the schedule based analysis. The PMOC recommends that schedule improvement initiatives for both critical and near-critical paths be implemented where feasible as a means of enhancing the chances for achieving project schedule goals. 5.1.1 Project Cost Management and Control Status: SAS estimates the percent of work complete based on cumulative payments divided by contract (or budget) value as may be appropriate. As of December 31, 2011, MTACC reports total project expenditures of $1,538,609,469. When compared against the CWB of $4,451,000,000, this results in an estimated total project completion of 34.57%. Observation: When compared against values reported as of November 30, 2011, expenditures for the month of December 2011 equal $36,298,523. Based on these values, approximately .82% of SAS Phase 1 was completed during this period. This evaluation does not take into account payment lag or other time offsets. Concerns and Recommendations: The SAS Project Team has demonstrated effective and comprehensive cost tracking and reporting capability. These capabilities should be augmented to conform to the requirements of the Cost Management Plan. 5.1.2 Project Expenditures and Commitments: Status: As of December 31, 2011, a summary comparison of the SAS Current Working Budget (Estimate Revision #9) and expenditures is as follows: Description
Total Construction Total Soft Cost Subtotal CWB $2,775,988,299 $1,675,011,701 $4,451,000,000 Expended $732,411,873 $806,197,596 $1,538,609,469 % 26.3% 48.1% 34.6%
35
MTACC-SAS
Observations: The PMOC notes that expenditures are generally representative of the level of completion of each project element. Concerns and Recommendations: None at this time 5.1.3 Change Orders Status: As of December 31, 2011, the status of Additional Work Orders (AWOs) on Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway Project is summarized as follows: Table 5-2: AWO Summary
Exposure Contract % Complete 91.7% 54.5% 8.3% 30.1% 92.5% 4.93% Award $ % of Award $ Executed % of Award 13.19% 4.02% 0.03% 0.11% 10.59% 0.0% 3.80%
C26002 (1) C26005 (2A) C26006 (3) C26007 (4B) C26013 (5A) C26008 (5B) TOTAL
$337,025,000 $45,007,942 13.35% $44,447,514 $325,000,000 $16,631,853 $176,450,000 $447,180,260 $34,070,039 $301,860,000 $57,500 $4,183,738 5.12% $13,069,352 .03% .94% $57,000 $502,675
$6,559,848 19.25% $3,607,774 $92,418 .03% $0
45.2% $1,621,585,000 $72,440,881
4.47% $61,684,815
Observation and Analysis: The value of AWOs reported by NYCT in November and December 2011 are summarized as follows: Executed AWOs AWO Exposure Nov-11 Dec-11 $62,921,292 $61,684,815 $70,915,352 $72,440,881
Monthly < $1,236,477> $1,525,529 Change All changes reported in December 2011 occurred in C1. Increases in the estimated exposure value for the following three (3) AWOs account for the monthly increase.
36
MTACC-SAS
AWO # Description 88 High Rock at the 69th & 72nd Street Shaft Sites 108 Differing Conditions - Cellar Ties 112 Delete CIP Lining and Waterproofing 73rd - 83rd Street The decrease in the value of executed AWOs results from the approval of AWO # 123, Reduced Mining Time (AWO 92) for a credit of <$1,236,477>. Concerns and Recommendations: The PMOC is concerned that the rate at which AWOs are executed has remained relatively constant throughout 2011. This suggests that staffing or process improvements implemented by the MTACC have not had a significant impact on AWO processing. The PMOC will continue to review and evaluate AWO processing to monitor the effectiveness of MTACC management and execution of this process. [Ref: SAS-20-Dec10] 5.2 Project Funding Status: Total Federal participation is currently $1,350,692,821. Appropriated, obligated and disbursed totals are shown below: Table 5-3: Appropriated and Obligated Funds (Federal)
Grant Number NY-03-0397 NY-03-0408 NY-03-0408-01 NY-03-0408-02 NY-03-0408-03 NY-03-0408-04 NY-03-0408-05 NY-03-0408-06 NY-03-0408-07 Amount ($) $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $274,920,030 $237,849,000 Obligated ($) $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $274,920,030 $237,849,000 Disbursement ($) thru December 31, 2011 $4,980,026 $1,967,165 $1,968,358 $24,502,500 0 0 $167,810,300 $157,092,845 0
NY-03-0408-08
NY-17-X001-00 NY-36-001-00* NY-95-X009-00 NY-95-X015-00 Total
Pending
$2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00
Pending
$2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00
0
$2,459,821 $78,870,000 $8,652,432 $36,884,999
$502,169,014.00
* Denotes American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds
37
MTACC-SAS
Local funds totaling $1,036,440,455 ($1,538,609,469 $502,169,014) have been spent as of December 31, 2011. MTAs approved 2000-2004 and 2005-2009 Capital Programs provided $2,964 million for SAS Phase 1 ($1,050 million and $1,914 million respectively). The proposed 2010-2014 Capital Program budgets $1,487 million to complete the SAS Phase 1 project. Of the $1,487 million, $545 million was approved for the 2010-2011 timeframe. MTA needs to approve $942 million for the 2012-2014 timeframe. Observation and Analysis: Concern over the availability of both local and federal funding has prompted considerable speculation regarding the future of the project. Concerns and Recommendations: The availability of funds and its impact on the manner in which the project progresses is a key concern for all parties. As part of the proposed amendment of the SAS FFGA, local funding sources should be identified and committed to by the MTA. PMOC will continue to monitor the situation and assist all parties in evaluating the funding situation. 5.2.1 Overall Project Funding Refer to Section 5.2 of this Report. 5.2.2 Local Funding Refer to Section 5.2 of this Report. 5.3 Cost Variance Analysis Status: Using the MTACC financial reporting format contained in its Capital Construction Reports, the PMOC will maintain an independent Estimate-At-Completion (EAC) report for Phase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway Project until such time as the MTACC assumes this reporting function in accordance with its recently submitted Cost Management Plan. This EAC is based on the following: The results of MTACCs cost estimate (Revision 9) for SAS Phase 1. Cost information provided by the SAS project team through established periodic reporting.
During the 4th Quarter 2011, no significant cost events were reported that suggest a change to the previously calculated EAC of $4,263,538,288. Observation and Analysis: Through December 2011, the EAC generally corresponds with values contained within the recently completed and approved Cost Estimate Revision 9. As variances are observed and evaluated, they will be incorporated in the EAC and reconciled when the next project cost estimate is prepared.
38
MTACC-SAS
Table 5-4: Estimate @ Completion Budget Description

Current Working Budget (Est. Rev 9) $337,025,000 $325,000,000 Estimate Rev. 9 Estimate Rev. 9 $176,450,000 $447,180,000 Estimate Rev. 9 Estimate Rev. 9 $34,070,000 $301,860,000 Estimate Rev. 9 Estimate Rev. 9 Estimate Rev. 9 Estimate Rev. 9 $1,106,587,492 $2,728,172,492 $239,041,633 $173,724,508 $4,775,123 $43,000,000 $116,000,000 $576,541,264 $172,000,000 $75,300,000 $245,000,000 $36,500,000 $6,000,000 $534,800,000 $ 14,797,023 $ 281,727,509 $ 19,572,146 $ (4,775,123) $1,227,598,076 $3,009,900,001 $432,338,287 $0 $43,000,000 $116,000,000 $591,338,287 $172,000,000 $75,300,000 $245,000,000 $36,500,000 $6,000,000 $534,800,000 $34,070,000 $6,563,000 $301,860,000 $30,186,000 $176,450,000 $8,822,500 $447,180,000 $22,359,013
Forecast
Revision EAC $337,025,000 $55,977,604 $325,000,000 $26,103,000
Contract 1 - Tunnel Boring Contract 2A - 96th St. Stn. Heavy Civil Contract 2B - 96th St. Stn. Finishes Contract 3 - 63rd St. Station Contract 4B - 72nd St. Stn. Cavern Contract 4C - 72nd St. Stn. Finishes Contract 5A - 86th St. Stn. Sitework Contract 5B - 86th St. Stn. Cavern Contract 5C - 86th St. Stn. Finishes Contract 6 - Track and Systems Contracts to Be Bid Total Construction Preliminary Engr. & EIS Final Design Final Design Reserve Construction Admin Construction Mgmt. Engineering Services Subtotal OCIP (Insurance) 3rd Party Reimbursement Property Acquisition Cost-To-Cure Rolling Stock Artwork Allowance Third Party Expenses
39
MTACC-SAS
Budget Description
TA Labor Eng. Force Account AFCE+FOC TA Expenses Contingency Executive Reserve Subtotal Current Working Budget (Est. Rev 9) $40,000,000 $75,000,000 $9,500,000 $124,500,000 $326,986,244 $160,000,000 $4,451,000,000
Forecast
Revision $ 3,000,000 EAC $43,000,000 $75,000,000 $9,500,000 $127,500,000 $296,524,532 $27,461,712 $4,263,538,288
Conclusions and Recommendations: Based on the information available, the PMOCs EAC validates the reasonableness of the MTACCs Current Working Budget of $4.451B. Based upon current information, this effort suggests the project can be built within the limits of the Current Working Budget. This effort will be revisited periodically, to incorporate updated information and evaluate its effect on the overall EAC. 5.4 Project Contingency Status: The ELPEP requires the MTACC to maintain specific contingency funds in accordance with the following achievement driven schedule: $220 million through 90% Bid and 50% Construction $140 million through 100% Bid and 85% Construction $45 million through Start Up and Pre-Revenue Operations
The independent analysis of contingency drawdown maintained by the PMO is generally consistent with that maintained by the SAS Project team and confirms it to be in compliance with the required minimum contingency balance of $220,000,000. Observations and Analysis: Using the monthly AWO Tracking Logs, the PMOC has calculated the contingency balance based on AWO Exposure. The current contingency balance exceeds both the planned balance and the ELPEP Threshold. Planned Balance: Actual Balance (using AWO Exposure): $ $ 363,851,850 397,158,277
The actual contingency balance incorporates the soft cost contingency transfer of approximately $66,516,000 which resulted from incorporation of Estimate Revision 9 into the project CWB. Periodic adjustment of this analysis is necessary in order for it to reflect the current construction schedule and other events.
40
MTACC-SAS
In graphic form:
Concerns and Recommendations: To date, this evaluation has been limited to contingency usage required by the active construction packages. The available contingency must also be applied to any soft cost overruns. This contingency evaluation process must be extended to include all project costs.
41
MTACC-SAS
6.0 6.1 6.2
PROJECT RISK Initial Risk Assessment Risk Updates
No change this period. Status: Risk Mitigation Meeting #11 was held on December 7, 2011. Observation and Analysis: A summary of issues discussed and actions to be taken as a result of this meeting include the following: Risk CNS 4 (C6) Discussion Problems related to managing the contractual interfaces during construction may result in delays and related claims. Differing site conditions during cavern mining lead to lost productivity and contractor delay resulting in change requests. Actions Taken 1. Interface spreadsheet has been populated. Major interfaces to be added to IPS. 2. Continue Critical Issues meetings. 3. Develop interface report. 1. CM is mapping exposed rock face in a timely manner. Rock @ 72nd Street is better than expected; 86th Street expected to be better than 72nd Street. 2. Based on current status, this risk will be placed on hold for two months. 1. Complete evaluation of this risk requires the C6 Integration Testing Plan, prepared by the C6 Contractor. 2. Availability of adequate NYCT resources to supervise and approve tests is the major risk. 3. NYCT continues to indicate it can support the current schedule 4. This risk to be placed on hold for six months. 1. Continue discussions with Fed and State Safety representative and determine if SSMP addresses the needed process. 1. C4B issues have been resolved with no similar problems forecast. 2. This risk is on hold pending reports of additional concerns or issues. 1. Develop measures to recover some of the time lost in procurement during the baseline schedule development process. 2. Reformulate this risk as part of an overall schedule risk item.
89 (C5B)
TRP 4 (C6)
Systems Integration Testing Problems (Traction Power SCADA).
CNS 8 (C6)
Delayed Safety Certification Vibration from mining operation
147
TBD
Procurement Delay-Risk (C5B)
42
MTACC-SAS
Risk
91 (C5B)
Discussion Yorkshire Towers lawsuit settlement results in cost and delay. This may result in moving the elevator entrance on the corner of the building. Shop Drawings--the review process for shop drawings is too timeconsuming. MTACC president wants the process streamlined so that it can be done in 20 days. Completion of damage repair to adjacent fragile building will delay excavation of the egress/service adit Delays in obtaining utility relocation approval from uncooperative adjacent owner. Delay in access to adjacent building for underpinning and utility relocation.
Actions Taken
The favorable resolution of this lawsuit has eliminated this risk.
TBD
1. Modified process with multiple reviewers defined and implemented. 2. Bi-weekly meeting evaluate progress. Results to date generally satisfactory. 3. Detailed evaluation by discipline to be performed to identify potential problem areas.
C4B Ancil 1
Obtain approval by 226 E 70th on superstructure crack repair and confirm it is blast ready.
C4B Ent. 1
Major risk. Resolution of the issue to be escalated with concurrent evaluation of other options, including deferring to C4C. Some progress in resolving issue reported. Continue current efforts and monitor.
C4B Ent. 2
Concerns and Recommendations: The Risk Mitigation Meetings are effective in identifying, clarifying and updating significant risks to project cost and schedule and developing and implementing mitigation or management strategies. SAS Senior Managers support and participate in this process. Follow-up to tasks assigned at these meetings has been good. In its September 2011 Monthly Report, the PMOC expressed concern that construction risks were not represented in this effort. Discussions documented at Meeting #11 demonstrate an increased the construction staff participation and focus on construction issues. 6.3 Risk Management Status Status: Risk Management is an ongoing activity that is a follow-up to the Risk Mitigation Meetings described in Section 6.2 of this Report. The SAS Risk Manager supports and coordinates specific risk management efforts, which may involve a wide range of senior project management personnel.
43
MTACC-SAS
Observation and Analysis: During 2011, the forecast substantial completion dates of the Future contract packages have changed significantly. Forecast S/C Pkg. C2B C4C C5C C6 Upd #65 DD=12/01/11 7/20/15 6/2/15 4/8/16 8/31/16 Upd #54 DD=01/01/11 6/15/15 3/18/15 10/8/15 5/23/16 (CD) 35 76 183 100
During this period, project schedule contingency (float) was reduced from +165 CD to +67 CD, as measured against the 12/30/16 target RSD, which is unchanged. This loss of project contingency (98 CD) should be concurrent with the delays to substantial completion to C5C and C6 respectively. While not affecting the project critical path directly, the remaining delays to non-critical paths represent: Wringing out of latent schedule contingency embedded in conservative activity sequencing. Compression of intra-contract sequencing and activity relationships generally involving station finish and systems packages.
In the opinion of the PMOC, this schedule compression significantly increases the risk of delay to the project resulting from contractor coordination and performance issues. The obligation to coordinate multiple prime construction contractors is retained by the owner and cannot be effectively transferred or otherwise avoided. The SAS Project Team has responded to this risk and is currently engaged in developing a process that will: Identify all interface points Define the work to be performed and its required sequencing Integrate these interfaces into the overall project IPS Provide 90-day look-ahead reporting for pending interfaces Provide a framework to facilitate the ongoing review, updating and management of this risk.
This risk has been identified in the Risk Register as CNS 4. The project teams ability to manage this risk is considered critical to the successful management of the construction phase. Conclusions and Recommendations: Effective management of the interfaces between multiple prime contractors is critical to the success of this project. The current initiative provides a framework for managing this risk that can be expanded to include the individual contract teams as they are mobilized. This approach
44
MTACC-SAS
will not ensure the trouble-free construction of all elements requiring multiple prime contractor participation but does demonstrate a pro-active approach to the management and mitigation of the impact of this retained risk. The PMOC will monitor ongoing development of this initiative. 6.4 Risk Mitigation Actions Status: The SAS Project Team is actively engaged in the mitigation of project risk including those risks directly retained by the MTACC as well as those risks for which direct responsibility has been transferred to other parties. Observation and Analysis: To date, the tangible mitigation of risk is generally associated with the completion of an activity or achievement of a specific milestone. The following major achievements signify the mitigation of significant project risk: Substantial Completion Contract 5A: geotechnical risk, utility interface, inter-contract coordination. Completion of TBM mining Contract 1: geotechnical risk, inter-contract coordination. Completion of Real Estate Acquisition access delays to construction. NYCDEP approval of 60 water main design delay, scope (cost/schedule) increase.
A complete tabulation of risks, their impact on the project and their probability of occurrence is contained in the contract and overall project risk registers. These risks are updated regularly and provide a comprehensive tabulation of the project risk status. During the 1st Quarter of 2012, the SAS Project Team will integrate the updated risk register with the EAC forecasting process. Risk information will be used instead of fixed percentages of construction cost to forecast remaining cost exposure and the contract and project EAC. Concerns and Recommendations: Integrating the risk management process with the EAC forecasting process is a potentially very significant enhancement in the management of the project. This process will capture the net effect of incremental changes in risk exposure and forecasting that might otherwise not be reported. It will further integrate the risk management processes into the mainstream of project management and create collaboration between processes that will mutually enhance reliability. 6.5 Cost and Schedule Contingency 6.5.1 Cost Contingency Status: Refer to Section 5.4 of this report.
45
MTACC-SAS
6.5.1 Schedule Contingency Status: Schedule contingency reported by MTACC, based upon Update #65 of the SAS IPS, conforms to schedule contingency threshold limits established by the ELPEP. Based on this update, schedule contingency measured against MTACCs RSD commitment date of 12/31/16 is 67 CD. When measured against the FTA/PMOC RSD estimate of 02/28/18, the contingency is currently 490 CD vs. the 240 CD stipulated by ELPEP. Observations: Tracking available schedule contingency over recent schedule updates is summarized in the following table: Table 6-1: Schedule Contingency IPS Update # Data Date Contingency (CD) RSD=12/31/2016 RSD=02/28/2018 Concerns and Recommendations: Schedule contingency has remained fairly constant over the 4th Quarter of 2011 and for most of calendar year 2011. This is discussed further in Section 4 of this report. Previous forecasts of the recovery of as much as 70 CD of float through mitigation of the C5B procurement delay have been reduced to a maximum of approximately 30 CD. The project team should continue to evaluate schedule mitigation strategies, particularly along the critical and near-critical paths as a means of increasing schedule contingency and offsetting the impact of future delays. 59 62 65 06/01/11 09/01/11 12/01/11 67 490 67 490 67 490
46
MTACC-SAS
7.0
LIST OF ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1 Critical 2 Near Critical Issues/Recommendations The PMP and its sub-plans must be updated to reflect the new management processes and strategies of the ELPEP. PMOC Recommendation: Update the PMP and its sub-plans within the timeframes established in the ELPEP. Update: This effort is underway. MTACC has initiated new management processes in the areas of schedule, cost and risk management in advance of the formal completion of new plans or procedures. Candidate Revisions to the PMP have been identified and the associated sections of the PMP are being updated. Update (January 2011): Revised draft PMP issued and currently being reviewed by PMOC. Review anticipated to be completed by February 2011. Update (March 2011): PMOC review of PMP update is substantially complete. Update (April 2011): The PMOC has completed its review of PMP Revision 8 (update). The PMOC will review its findings with the FTA and compare findings with the corresponding PMP review which is currently underway for the East Side Access Project. After these tasks are complete, the PMOC and FTA will present findings and recommendations to the MTACC. Update (May 2011): No additional information this period. Update (June 2011): PMOC is monitoring the implementation and effectiveness of Candidate Revisions per discussions with FTA. Results to be included in review comments. Update (Sept 2011): In general, Revision 8 of the SAS PMP was updated in accordance with the PMP Update process defined in the ELPEP. Candidate Revisions were issued and approved by the Technical Advisory Committee for all Material Decisions, i.e., project decisions that affect scope, cost, schedule or funding. Update December 2011: Resolution of PMOC comments/recommendation and FTA concurrence is anticipated by mid February 2012 Criticality 2
Priority in Criticality column Number with Date Initiated SAS-09Jan10 Section 3.0 PMP
47
MTACC-SAS
Number with Date Initiated SAS-10Jan10
Section
Issues/Recommendations
Criticality
3.1 PMP SubPlans
MTACC is required to develop and finalize a Cost and Schedule Management Plan, and a Cost and Schedule Contingency Management Plan for the SAS in conformance with ELPEP requirements within 60 days of January 15, 2010. The PMOC is concerned that the 60-day requirement may not be met. Update: This process is ongoing. Schedule Management Plan complete; conditional approval forwarded by FTA on October 25, 2010. Review of Cost and Cost Contingency Management Plan is in progress. Update (March 2011): SMP outstanding comments resolved. Updated CMP submitted and PMOC comments returned. Reconciliation of comments to be scheduled in April 2011. Update (April 2011): Revisions to the CMP are anticipated on May 3, 2011 and will be discussed at the ELPEP meeting on May 5, 2011. Based upon the clarifications and understandings achieved at this meeting, MTACC will revise the CMP accordingly and resubmit it on or about May 13, 2011. Update (May 2011): A final revision to the CMP will be published in June 2011 based upon comments received to date. The CMP is at a high level of completion. Final comments should be developed in June leading to a conditional approval of the plan. Update (June 2011): PMOC final review comments transmitted to MTACC. Update (Sept 2011): Schedule & Schedule Contingency Management Plan The PMOC has verified SAS substantial compliance with the SMP since August 2010. The process of transferring the verification process to the respective project teams has been generally discussed in several recent ELPEP meetings. Refer to Conformance Demonstration for additional information. Cost & Cost Contingency Management Plan (CMP) Conditional approval of this plan was transmitted to the MTACC from the FTA on September 1, 2011. The MTACC is working to address the five (5) Candidate Revisions upon which final approval is conditioned. Update (December 2011): MTACC has submitted its final revisions to the CMP, which
48
MTACC-SAS
Number with Date Initiated
Section
Issues/Recommendations incorporate its responses to those Candidate Revisions. FTA/PMOC final review of these revisions is in progress
Criticality
SAS-11Jan10
3.3 Procedures
The PMOC is concerned whether the new procedures will actually be utilized by the different operating agencies within the MTACC, given that NYCT will implement SAS, and the procedures of the SAS PMP reflect the NYCT quality management system. PMOC Recommendation: The PMOC recommends that the MTACC develop a process to assure itself that all of these procedures are in use on all of its projects. An example of such a process would be a new procedure distribution system that would require the recipients (the individual Project Managers) to acknowledge receipt of each new procedure as it is released for implementation. This system could be monitored by the parent MTACC to assure implementation across all its organizations and provide it with the opportunity to correct any non-conformances as they develop. Update (April 2011) The MTACC is behind schedule in developing the revised project procedures. To date, it has adopted a total of 69 revised procedures of 75. MTACC originally committed to have all revised procedures adopted by April 12, 2010 Update (May 2011): No update this period. Update (June 2011): No update this period. Update (Sept 2011): The MTACC released one additional procedure during September 2011. The total number of revised procedures is now 73 of a potential 75. Update (December 2011): Two procedures were issued which brings the total number of procedures issued to 75. Four additional procedures are under development with no specific time period identified for their completion.
49
MTACC-SAS
Number with Date Initiated SAS-20Dec10
Section
Issues/Recommendations Processing duration for AWOs is excessive. The average processing duration currently equals the published MTA maximum duration of 90 days. Improvement is required to facilitate contractor cooperation and reduce risk of backlash through perceived unfair treatment. Update (February 2011): Meeting to be set up with MTACC/SAS/ESA for review and comparison of AWP processing procedures and identification of specific ways to accelerate SAS process. Update (March 2011): Meeting with MTACC/SAS/ESA not scheduled. No improvement in processing observed to date. Open Item Update (April 2011): With regard to the procurement of additional work orders (AWO's), NYCT and MTACC have jointly implemented a more streamlined approach to approving Procurement Staff Summaries. This adjustment has reduced the number of signatures necessary for approval and should save time during the approval phase of the AWO process. Specifically, NYCT has removed the following 4 executive level signatures: NYCT President, NYCT Executive Vice President, NYCT General Counsel, and NYCT Chief Officer -Civil Rights. Additionally, the NYCT VP Capital Programs and the NYCT VP Subways have been replaced with lower level designees who should cut down further the amount of time necessary for approval. Update (May 2011): Some marginal improvement in AWO processing has been noted see section 5 of this report. PMOC will continue to monitor and report. Update (June 2011): Some marginal improvement in AWO processing has been noted see section 5 of this report. PMOC will continue to monitor and report. Update (Sept 2011): In recent months, the MTACC has implemented certain staffing changes and process improvements directed at reducing the time required to estimate, negotiate and administratively process Additional Work Orders (AWOs). The PMOC is monitoring and evaluating the quantifiable indicators associated with AWO processing in an effort to evaluate the effectiveness of the MTAs improvement efforts.
Criticality
5.1.3 Change Orders
50
MTACC-SAS
Section
Issues/Recommendations Update (December 2011): PMOC monitoring of the AWO process is on-going. To date, no significant reduction in the time to process an AWO has been noted
Criticality
SAS-21Dec10
2.1.2 Procurement
Excessive recent delay to C-26009 package is noted. PMOC recommends MTACC initiate corrective action and/or develop recovery schedule to regain time lost. Update (February 2011): Additional delays noted. Update (March 2011): RFP documents were made available to the qualified proposers on March 7, 2011 and the pre-proposal meeting was held on March 31, 2011. Update April 2011: Receipt of proposals has already been delayed from May 18, 2001 to June 3, 2011. Further, unspecified delays are forecast for the receipt of proposals for this package as a result of MTAs intention to coordinate systems procurement among the three mega-projects (No. 7 Line, SAS, and ESA). Update (May 2011): Additional one-month delay to package award was realized during May 2011 as a result of ongoing coordination with other systems procurements. MTA Executive Management is apparently directing this effort. Update (June 2011): Additional one-month delay to package award was realized during June 2011 as a result of bidder requests for a time extension. Criticality of other delays have superseded this issue PMOC to continue monitoring progress of this procurement. Update (Sept 2011): Additional one-month delay to package award was realized during June 2011 as a result of bidder requests for a time extension. Criticality of other delays have superseded this issue PMOC to continue monitoring progress of this procurement. Update (December 2011): On December 21, 2011 the MTA Board approved the Track, Power, Signals and Communication Systems Contract C-26009 (C6) for award. Notice of Award is scheduled for mid-January 2012. This concern is closed with no further action planned by the PMOC.
51
MTACC-SAS
8.0
GRANTEE ACTIONS FROM QUARTERLY AND MONTHLY MEETINGS
Priority in Criticality column 1 Critical 2 Near Critical Number with Date Initiated SAS-A17Aug08 Projected Resolution 7/30/10
Section 2.4 Vehicles
Grantee Actions The PMOC requested additional information regarding certain statements in the draft Rail Fleet Management Plan: NYCT should provide a test plan for increasing the period between inspections of the new technology fleet. NYCT should explain why, in light of the ongoing state of good repair fleet replacement program, the cars financed under the SAS project are no longer needed. MTACC should explain why they are considering removing the vehicles from the project scope without reducing the project funding.
Criticality 2
Update: The supply of vehicles for SAS Phase 1 will be addressed in the Draft Fleet Management Plan, scheduled for distribution in July 2010. Update: A Draft Fleet Management Plan was not submitted during July 2010. This item remains open. Update: As of August 31, 2010, a Draft Fleet Management Plan has not been submitted. Update: A Draft Fleet Management Plan was received, reviewed with
52
MTACC-SAS
Section
Grantee Actions comments provided to the FTA. Update: Vehicle requirements and associated cost to be addressed as part of the FFGA amendment. Update: No additional vehicles will be procured for the SAS Phase 1 Project. MTACC/NYCTs assertion that recent services reductions will provide ample spare vehicles for the SAS Phase 1 Project has been reflected in the Rail Fleet Management Plan which was accepted by FTA Region II. A zero dollar budget for the procurement of vehicles is reflected in the projects Current Working Budget (CWB) and also in the latest cost estimate (Rev. 9). No further action is planned by the PMOC.
Criticality
Projected Resolution
SAS-A18Aug08
ELPEP Updates
The change in the Contingency Drawdown Curve, particularly the latent contingency, needs to be clarified. Update: At the quarterly meeting, a new contingency drawdown curve was presented. Management of the contingency is being addressed in the newly required Cost Contingency Management Plan. Update: The latest submission of the Cost Contingency Management Plan is under review. MTACC has initiated contingency management and reporting which generally conforms to the requirements of the ELPEP. Update: Review and resolution of all issues is anticipated to be completed in February 2011. Update: See ELPEP section of report.
6/30/10
53
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX A -- LIST OF ACRONYMS AFI ARRA AWO BCE BFMP CCM CD CMAQ CPM CPRB CR DHA DOB EAC ELPEP FD FEIS FFGA FTA HLRP IFP IPS LF MEP MTACC N/A NTP NYCDEP NYCT PE PMOC PMP PQM RAMP RFMP RFP ROD ROD RSD S3 SAS SCC SSMP SSOA
Allowance for Indeterminates American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Additional Work Order Baseline Cost Estimate Bus Fleet Management Plan Consultant Construction Manager Calendar Day Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Critical Path Method Capital Program Review Board Candidate Revision DMJM+Harris and ARUP New York City Department of Buildings Estimate at Completion Enterprise Level Project Execution Plan Final Design Final Environmental Impact Statement Full Funding Grant Agreement Federal Transit Administration Housing of Last Resort Plan Invitation for Proposal Integrated Project Schedule Linear Feet Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing Metropolitan Transportation Authority Capital Construction Not Applicable Notice to Proceed New York City Department of Environmental Protection New York City Transit Preliminary Engineering Project Management Oversight Contractor (Urban Engineers) Project Management Plan Project Quality Manual Real Estate Acquisition Management Plan Rail Fleet Management Plan Request for Proposal Record of Decision Revenue Operations Date Revenue Service Date Skanska, Schiavone and Shea, JV Second Avenue Subway Standard Cost Categories Safety and Security Management Plan State Safety Oversight Agency
A-1 MTACC-SAS
SSPP TBD TBM TCC TIA UNO WD
System Safety Program Plan To Be Determined Tunnel Boring Machine Technical Capacity and Capability Plan Time Impact Analyses Unless Noted Otherwise Work Day
A-2
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX B-- PROJECT OVERVIEW AND MAP Project Overview and Map Second Avenue Subway
Scope Description: The project will connect Manhattans Central Harlem area with the downtown financial district, relieving congested conditions on the Lexington Avenue line. The current project scope includes: tunneling; station/ancillary facilities; track, signal, and electrical work; vehicle procurement; and all other subway systems necessary for operation. The current phase, Phase 1 of 4, will provide an Initial Operating Segment (IOS) from 96th Street to 63rd Street, and will connect with the existing Broadway Line that extends to Lower Manhattan and Brooklyn. Subsequent phases will extend the line northward to 125th Street and to the southern terminus at Hanover Square in Lower Manhattan. Guideway: Phase 1 is 2.3 miles long, from 63rd Street to 105th Street. It is a two-track project that is below grade in tunnels, and does not include any shared use track. Stations: In Phase 1 there are: two new mined stations located at 72nd and 86th Streets, one new cut and cover station at 96th Street, and major modifications of the existing 63rd Street Station on the Broadway Line. Support Facilities: There are no additional support facilities planned for Phase 1 of the project. Vehicles: MTA envisions the need for eight-and-one-half train sets to satisfy the Phase 1 operating requirements (7) and to provide sufficient spares (1). Ridership Forecast: Upon completion of Phase 1, ridership is expected to be 191,000 per average weekday (MTAs Regional Travel Forecast Model).
B-1
MTACC-SAS
Schedule 12/20/01 Approval Entry to PE 04/18/06 Approval Entry to FD 11/19/07 FFGA Signed 06/12 03/14 Estimated Rev Ops at Entry to PE Estimated Rev Ops at Entry to FD
06/30/14 Estimated Rev Ops at FFGA
12/30/16 Revenue Operations Date at date of this report (MTA schedule) 22.5% 65% Percent Complete Construction at June 30,2010 Percent Complete Time based on Rev Ops Date of December 30, 2016 06/12 03/14 Estimated Rev Ops at Entry to PE Estimated Rev Ops at Entry to FD
12/20/01 Approval Entry to PE 04/18/06 Approval Entry to FD 11/19/07 FFGA Signed
06/30/14 Estimated Rev Ops at FFGA
12/30/16 Revenue Operations Date at date of this report (MTA schedule) 22.5% 65% Percent Complete Construction at June 30, 2011 Percent Complete Time based on Rev Ops Date of December 30, 2016
Cost ($) 3,839 M Total Project Cost ($YOE) at Approval Entry to PE (w/o Financing Costs) 3,880 M Total Project Cost ($YOE) at Approval Entry to FD (w/o Financing Costs) 4,866 M Total Project Cost ($YOE) at FFGA signed (w/ $816 M Financing Costs) 4,673 M Total Project Cost ($YOE) at Revenue Operations (w/o Financing Costs) 5,489 M Total Project Cost ($YOE) at date of this report including $ 816 M in Finance Charges $1,539M Amount of Expenditures at date of this report from Total Project Budget of $4,451M 34.6% Percent Complete based on Expenditures at date of this report $421M Total Project Contingency remaining (allocated and unallocated contingency) * Being revisited as a result of the Enterprise Level Project Execution Plan
B-2
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX C LESSONS LEARNED There were no Lessons Learned to report for 4th Quarter for 2011 #
1
Date
Oct-09
Phase
Construction
Category
Schedule
Subject
Delays to excavation caused by adjacent Fragile Buildings
Lessons Learned
The PMOC recommended and MTACC adopted a plan to review the stability of all of the buildings affected by the Second Avenue Subway project. MTACC instructed their Designer to review all the buildings along the project. Furthermore, they have the designer developing shoring plans for the fragile buildings and including this work in the future contracts. In this way the stabilization work cannot delay the contracts as it is part of the contract. The PMOC recommended that MTACC get the utility companies to agree that once they have approved the plans, they cannot make major changes after award. MTACCs SAS Project Executive is meeting with the utilities to work out this problem.
Nov-09
Construction
Schedule
3rd Party Utilities changed the size of an electric volt after construction began.
C-1
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX D PMOC STATUS REPORT
(Will be transmitted with Final Report)
D-1
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX E SAFETY AND SECURITY CHECKLIST Project Overview Project mode (Rail, Bus, BRT, Multimode) Project phase (Preliminary Engineering, Design, Construction, or Start-up) Project Delivery Method (Design/Build, Design/Build/Operate/Maintain, CMGC, etc.) Project Plans Safety and Security Management Plan Version 7041.01.007308-0 7041.01.007308-0 Appendix D Rail Design and Construction
Design/Bid/Build Review by FTA 11/15/07
Status Approved by FTA Certification by New York State Public Transportation Safety Board (NYSPTSB)
Safety and Security Certification Plan System Safety Program Plan System Security Plan or Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan (SEPP)
Construction Safety and Security Plan
Each construction contractor is assigned the responsibility for developing a Construction Safety and Security Program Plan, as defined in the Contract Documents and Section 8 of the SSMP.
Safety and Security Authority Is the grantee subject to 49 CFR Part 659 state safety oversight requirements? Has the state designated an oversight agency as per Part 659.9? Has the oversight agency reviewed and approved the grantees SSPP as per Part 659.17? Has the oversight agency reviewed and approved the grantees Security Plan or SEPP as per Part 659.21? Did the oversight agency participate in the last Quarterly Program Review Meeting? Y Y NYSPTSB The NYSTB issued a letter of recertification on September 2, 2010.
E-1
MTACC-SAS
Project Overview Has the grantee submitted its safety certification plan to the oversight agency? Has the grantee implemented security directives issues by the Department Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration? SSMP Monitoring Is the SSMP project-specific, clearly demonstrating the scope of safety and security activities for this project? Grantee reviews the SSMP and related project plans to determine if updates are necessary? Does the grantee implement a process through which the Designated Function (DF) for Safety and DF for Security are integrated into the overall project management team? Please specify. Does the grantee maintain a regularly scheduled report on the status of safety and security activities? Has the grantee established staffing requirements, procedures and authority for safety and security activities throughout all project phases? Does the grantee update the safety and security responsibility matrix/organizational chart as necessary? Has the grantee allocated sufficient resources to oversee or carry out safety and security activities? Has the grantee developed hazard and vulnerability analysis techniques, including specific types of analysis to be performed during different project phases? Does the grantee implement regularly scheduled meetings to track to resolution any identified hazards and/or vulnerabilities? Does the grantee monitor the progress of safety and security activities throughout all project phases? Please describe briefly. N
Y/N Y
Notes/Status
Activity included in the monthly and quarterly reports from the grantee. Responsibilities during the design and construction phases identified
Included in Appendix F of the SSMP
Frequency to be increased Three active construction contracts being daily monitored by the CCM with oversight being
E-2
MTACC-SAS
Project Overview performed by the grantee.
Does the grantee ensure the conduct of preliminary hazard and vulnerability analyses? Please specify analyses conducted. Has the grantee ensured the development of safety design criteria? Has the grantee ensured the development of security design criteria? Has the grantee ensured conformance with safety and security requirements in design? Has the grantee verified conformance with safety and security requirements in equipment and materials procurement? Has the grantee verified construction specification conformance? Has the grantee identified safety and security critical tests to be performed prior to passenger operations? Has the grantee verified conformance with safety and security requirements during testing, inspection and start-up phases? Does the grantee evaluated change orders, design waivers, or test variances for potential hazards and /or vulnerabilities? Has the grantee ensured the performance of safety and security analyses for proposed work-arounds? Has the grantee demonstrated through meetings or other methods, the integration of safety and security in the following: Activation Plan and Procedures Integrated Test Plan and Procedures Operations and Maintenance Plan Emergency Operations Plan Has the grantee issued final safety and security certification? Has the grantee issued the final safety and security verification report?
Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis Included in SAS project Design Criteria Manual Included in SAS project Design Criteria Manual Ongoing part of design review process
Y Y
Y Reference Section D3.4 Construction Criteria Conformance of the SSMP Reference Section D3.2 Certification Items List of SSMP Project is currently in the Design/Construction Phase Part of formal configuration control process
NA
NA
N N
To be covered as part of the testing in Contract 6 To be covered as part of the testing in Contract 6
E-3
MTACC-SAS
Project Overview Construction Safety Does the grantee have a documented/implemented Contractor Safety Program with which it expects contractors to comply? Does the grantees contractor(s) have a documented companywide safety and security program plan?
Y Reference sections 011150 Safety Requirements and 011160 Security Requirements of the Contract Terms and Conditions
Does the grantees contractor(s) have a site-specific safety and security program plan?
Provide the grantees OSHA statistics compared to the national average for the same type of work?
The Lost Time Accident Rate and OSHA Recordable Accident Rate from the start of construction until November 31, 2011 are 1.92 and 4.60, respectively. The Lost Time Accident rate is below the national average of National Average 2.2 and 2.2 and the OSHA Recordable 4.2 respectively Accident rate is above the national average of 4.2. The cumulative construction time worked since the project inception is 2,914,378 hours. Cumulative lost time injuries since project inception is 28 and the cumulative recordable injuries are 39 MTACC has expanded its safety program to include a monthly walk-thru of the various work zones by the SAS Project Management Team. In addition the SAS Project Safety Manager holds a monthly meeting with all Contractor Safety Managers, OCIP Representative, and the insurance carrier
E-4 MTACC-SAS
If the comparison is not favorable, what actions are being taken by the grantee to improve its safety record?
Project Overview
representative in order to make all aware of the safety concerns on the project and to exchange lessons learned
Does the grantee conduct site audits of the contractors performance versus required safety/security procedures? Federal Railroad Administration If shared track: has grantee submitted its waiver request application to FRA? (Please identify specific regulations for which waivers are being requested) If shared corridor: has grantee specified specific measures to address shared corridor safety concerns? Is the Collision Hazard Analysis underway? Other FRA required Hazard Analysis Fencing, etc.? Does the project have Quiet Zones? Does FRA attend the Quarterly Review Meetings? Y
NA
NA
NA NA NA NA
E-5
MTACC-SAS
APPENDIX F ON-SITE PICTURES (will be transmitted with Final Report)
F-1
MTACC-SAS

Second Avenue Subway Monthly Report For Dec11

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Second Avenue Subway Monthly Report For Dec11

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PMOC MONTHLY REPORT Second Avenue Subway Phase 1 (MTACC-SAS) Project Metropolitan Transportation Authority New York, New

York December 1 to December 31, 2011

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

d. Continuing and Unresolved Issues

e. New Cost and Schedule Issues

December 2011 Monthly Report

PROJECT STATUS SUMMARY AND PMOC ASSESSMENT

December 2011 Monthly Report

Total FHWA share:

Total Local share: State share Agency share City share

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

GRANTEES CAPABILITIES AND APPROACH Technical Capacity and Capability

Grantees Approach to FFGA and other FTA/Federal Requirements

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

Grant Number NY-17-X001-00 NY-36-001-00* NY-95-X009-00 NY-95-X015-00 Total

Amount ($) $2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00

Obligated ($) $2,459,821 $78,870,000 $25,633,000 $45,800,000 $866,760,200.00

* Denotes American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

FTA Compliance Documents

December 2011 Monthly Report

PROJECT SCOPE Status & Quality: Design/Procurement/Construction

No other construction packages will be advertised for bid until mid-2012.

December 2011 Monthly Report

Table 2-1: Construction Procurement Activity # Description Date* Comment

December 2011 Monthly Report

Contract C-26006 (C3) 63rd Street Station Upgrade

Contract C-26007 (C4B) 72nd Street Station Mining and Lining

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

For Contract C2A:

For Contract C4B:

For Contract C5A:

For Contract C5B:

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

C2A 5/28/2009 C2B C3 Future 1/13/2011

December 2011 Monthly Report

03/14/12 03/08/12 03/08/12

Activity ID Complete Instrumentation Continue Mobilization

Continue Muck Handling Shed foundations

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report

Aggregate Construction % Completion:

December 2011 Monthly Report

$6,559,848 19.25% $3,607,774 $92,418 .03% $0

45.2% $1,621,585,000 $72,440,881

December 2011 Monthly Report

* Denotes American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds

December 2011 Monthly Report

December 2011 Monthly Report