MBTA
BOARD MEETING OF JULY 11, 2012
At the call of the Chair, a meeting of the Board of Directors of the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority was held at Ten Park Plaza, 3 rd
Floor, MassDOT and MBTA Board Room, Boston, Massachusetts, on
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.
There were present: Messrs. Jenkins, Alvaro and the Misses Levin and
Loux, being a quorum of the Board.
Also in attendance were: the Secretary, Mr. Davey, the Acting General
Manager, Mr. Davis, and Messrs. Kane, Special Counsel and Miss Rollins,
General Counsel to MassDOT and MBTA and Miss Fallon, Recording Secretary
to the Board.
The Chairman, Mr. Jenkins, presided.
Chairman Jenkins called the 1062nd Open Meeting to order. He thanked
everyone for attending an announced that Director Whittle will not be here but
there is still a quorum present. He also announced that the August 8 th Board
Board of Directors
John R. Jenkins, Chair • Ferdinand Alvaro, Jr. • Elizabeth Levin • Janice Loux • Andrew Whittle
meeting will be held in Gloucester and to check the website for more information.
Chairman Jenkins opened up public comment.
The first speaker was Margaret Crowdis. Ms. Crowdis commented that the
RIDE increase is steep for the users when they have a limited income and she
asks to please reconsider the RIDE.
A full list of speakers is attached to the minutes.
Chairman Jenkins closed public comment period.
The first item is the approval of the May 22 and June 6, 2012 Board
meetings.
On motion duly made and seconded it was unanimously;
VOTED: Approved the minutes of May 22, and June 6, 2012 Board
Meeting.
The next item on the agenda is the report from the General Manager. Mr.
Davis stated that in the interest of time he will give an abbreviated report and
submit his full report for the record. (Attached) The General Manager also gave
an update to the Board on Hunyadi Rotem. Anna Barry gave a briefing on the
schedule along with handouts. She noted that the final delivery will be the end of
July 2014. Ms. Barry stated that they are going to go to Philadelphia for a
meeting and she stated that she will update the Board on the outcome of the
meeting. Director Alvaro asked if we had an estimate on what we expect for
liquidated damages. The General Manager stated that he requested more
information on work force and more detailed information along with a tracking
metric. Ms. Barry stated that they when they go down they will go over the
schedule in detail. Once they get answers for their questions they will come back
after their meeting Philadelphia. She noted that they will be meeting with their
SEPTA colleagues because they have heard they have delays as well. Chairman
Jenkins asked that Ms. Barry gives the Board a summary on what they said and
where the GM thinks we are and what we think the plan will be. The Secretary
stated that make it clear that we will fire them if we are not satisfied.
Next item on the agenda is presented by Assistant General Manager Ed
Hunter. Mr. Hunter requested the authorization to execute Change Order No. 1
with S&R Construction Co., Inc. for an amount not to exceed $3,849,174.50, to
increase the track allowance line item for Contract No. S32CN01, “Construction
Services for the Assembly Square Station, Orange Line. Director Alvaro asked
about a line in the staff summary where it says that we hired someone to do the
scope and then they didn’t fully scope the project. He asked if we went out with
an RFP without a finished scope. Mr. Hunter stated that the developer was the
lead on this and they hired AECOM. He stated that there was a rush on this to be
put out to meet certain commitments with the understanding that there was going
to be some additional work with the track throw. Director Alvaro stated that they
went out with the RFP knowing that you didn’t have a budget. Mr. Hunter stated
yes that was the case but it was needed to meet the commitment for the
Assembly Square project. Director Alvaro asked what would have happened if
we didn’t go forward with the RFP. The Secretary stated that people may not
have been happy and this project may not have moved forward. Mr. David
Mohler from MassDOT planning added that the closing on the housing portion
would not have happened resulting in not having a viable project in a timely basis
for the Assembly Square development. Director Alvaro stated that this was not a
narrow miss. The Secretary noted that he is correct but where the MBTA was not
contributing money they decided to move forward with the developer realizing
that there was a risk. Even with this change order the project will still within the
budget that is being paid by other sources. Director Levin stated that when she
saw the station it was before it was a lower cost and she stated that she asked
the question then what would happen if there costs went over. She said that she
was told the developer would take on any extra costs. She clarified that the
MBTA doesn’t have any money in this project and it is within in the budget. Mr.
Davis stated that is correct. Director Alvaro stated that even though the MBTA
may not have to pay the Commonwealth will still be paying a portion therefore we
are paying. Mr. Hunter stated that any money spent above the $56 million will be
paid for by the developer but if it is below then it would proportionately be
disbursed to the contributors. Mr. Hunter stated that we are working to get the
negatives back and working on getting the credits from the developer and the
contractor and the subs. Director Alvaro asked if he will still go back to get the
credits. Mr. Hunter said yes that he will be going back to the developer and subs
and work on getting back credits. Director Alvaro then asked what it means when
it says that something is part of the scope but not part of the budget in regards to
the negative return cable. Mr. Hunter asked if they could go into to executive
session. Chairman Jenkins stated that we will go into executive session if there
are legal implications. Mr. Hunter said that currently there are no legal
implications now but there may be in the future. The Secretary stated that we can
go into executive session and if we decide if it is an executive session items them
we can release the minutes.
On motion duly made to move this agenda item to executive session where it can
be further decided if it is appropriate to be in executive session; it was
unanimously;
VOTE: To move to executive session.
The next item on the agenda presented by Mary Ainsley is the
authorization to request the Inspector General’s office to utilize Construction
Manager/General Contractor, as an alternate project delivery method for the
Green Line Extension Project. Ms. Ainsley noted that on June 9th legislation was
passed and on June 11th FTA gave them permission to enter preliminary
engineering and on July 9th they completed their MEPA process with the Federal
Government and the received the finding of no significant impact (FONSI).
Chairman Jenkins asked if they were the last hurdle in the approval. Ms. Ainsley
answered that they needed one more approval from the Inspector General’s
Office. Director Levin stated that we have the consultant HDR Gilbane and then
we will have a designer. She asked if the designer will have competition. Ms.
Ainsley stated that they will be coming to the Board in September for the
approval. Director Levin stated that the designer and contractor will work together
on their means and methods to coordinate together. Director Levin asked Ms.
Ainsley to go through the pricing process to make sure we are getting the best
pricing during the projects. Ms. Ainsley stated that we will be hiring an
independent cost estimator. This independent cost estimator will be one
component on who does the cost estimates and the final designer will produce
the quantities for the line items. Then HDR Gilbane, the general contractor and
the independent cost estimator will sit down at many meetings and will discuss
items on specific work where they want a specific maximum price. The
Contractor will then have a bid opening and see where we are and see if we can
final negotiate a number. After we agree on a price then they open the
independent cost estimator price if you are within 10% then it is considered a
new price if you are not you go back and negotiate a new price to get within 10%.
Director Alvaro noted that he still believes it is a waste to talk about the project
with no funding sources. Chairman Jenkins noted that this is not what is being
asked today and he noted we are not spending money on the item today but for
today it is just a question on the use of CM/GC. Director Loux stated that the
Green Line Project is a very important project. It will provide a much needed
transit service to a densely populated urban area choked by traffic, noise,
congestion and poor air Quality and for the same reason the project is so
important, it is sure to pose many challenges for the project team. Building a
project of this scale in urban areas will require a tremendous amount of
coordination with third parties, municipal officials and State and Federal
regulators. Controlling costs and maintaining schedules will be a major
challenge. Also, careful planning and construction phasing is crucial to noise and
traffic mitigation, minimize land taking issues, permitting and the efficient staging
of construction operations. We know from decades of similar experiences that
the very nature of the project is likely to give rise to disputes and claims. For this
reason, a project delivery model with a very strong Construction Management
component will provide the necessary coordination and communication in order
to have a successful Green Line Extension Project. Director Loux further stated
that she thinks Mr. Hunter and Ms. Ainsley’s recommendation makes a lot of
sense and reflects his years of experience dealing with major horizontal
construction projects.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That, the Board of Directors hereby grants in the name and
on behalf of the Authority, subject to the approval of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) permission
to utilize the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) as
an alternate project delivery method for the Green Line Extension
(GLX).
The next two items on the agenda were presented by Ed Hunter. The first
was the authorization to approve a contract with Pandrol USA, LP, for
$8,230,633.00 to furnish and deliver 572,000 Resilient Fasteners, 609,700 screw
spikes, and 285,400 tie plate-resilient fasteners required for the construction of
the Knowledge Corridor/ Restore Vermonter Project.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, subject to the approval of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and in the
form approved by General Counsel, a contract with Pandrol USA, LP,
for the manufacture and delivery of Resilient Fasteners, Screw
Spikes and Tie Plates – Resilient Fasteners, required to construct the
Knowledge Corridor/Restore Vermonter Project, at a total cost not to
exceed $8,230,633.00; said company being the lowest responsible
and eligible bidder in response to requests for sealed proposals.
The next item is the authorization to approve a contract with Koppers, Inc,
for $ 4,131,833.32 to furnish and deliver 69,048 treated crossties which are
required for the construction of the Knowledge Corridor/ Restore Vermonter
Project.
VOTED: That the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, subject to the approval of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and in the
form approved by General Counsel, a contract with Koppers, Inc., for
the manufacture and delivery of Treated Crossties, required to
construct the Knowledge Corridor/Restore Vermonter Project, at a
total price not to exceed $4,131,833.32; said company being the
lowest responsible and eligible bidder in response to requests for
sealed proposals.
The next items to be presented by Claudia Russell are items 7 and 9. Item
7 is the Authorization to enter into a contract with A. L. Prime Energy, Inc for the
supply of gasoline as called for during an estimated, depending on usage, threeyear period, with two one-year options, subject to price in effect at time of
delivery at a cost not to exceed $7,398,842.00.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, subject to the approval of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and in the
form approved by General Counsel, a contract with A. L. Prime
Energy, of Wakefield, Massachusetts for the supply of gasoline as
called for during an estimated, depending on usage, three-year
period, with two one-year options, subject to price in effect at time of
delivery, at a total cost not to exceed $7,398,842.00; said company
being the lowest responsible and eligible bidder in response to
requests for sealed proposals.
Next Ms. Russell presented Item 9. Ms. Russell requested Authorization to
enter into a contract with Alstom Transportation, Inc. for the Mid-Life Overhaul of
74 Bi-Level Commuter Rail Coaches for a cost not to exceed $114,719,722 first
completed coach must be delivered within 15 months from Notice To Proceed
(NTP) and the final coach not more than 55 months also from NTP. Director Loux
asked if they have done work with us before. Mr. Mudge stated that they have
done work for us and we were very happy with their work.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That, subject to approval of the Massachusetts Department
of Transportation, and the completion of FTA Buy America audit
requirements, the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, and in the form approved by General
Counsel, to execute a formal contract with Alstom Transportation,
Inc., New York, NY, for the Mid Life Overhaul of 74 Bi-Level
Commuter Rail Coaches (model years 1990-1991), including Options
II, XI, XIII, XVII, and XVIII, manuals, training program and hidden
damage in accordance with Technical Specifications No. SR-43, at a
total not to exceed delivered cost of $114,719,722.
The next item on the agenda is item 8 presented by Steve Mudge. Mr.
Mudge requested the Boards Authorization to execute a change order to formal
contract No. 671 with MotivePower, Inc. for the purchase of seven (7) New
Diesel Electric Locomotives at a total cost not to exceed $37,695,000 with the
last locomotive being delivered no later than December 31, 2014. Director Loux
asked if last time we bought locomotives from Utah. Mr. Mudge said that we did
buy them but then we couldn’t find any more anywhere else.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That, subject to approval of the Massachusetts Department
of Transportation, and the completion of FTA Buy America audit
requirements, the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, and in the form approved by General
Counsel, to execute Change Order No. 1 to Formal Contract No. 671,
with MotivePower, Inc., Boise, Idaho, for the purchase and delivery of
seven (7) New Diesel Electric Locomotives (option I), at a total not to
exceed delivered cost of $37,695,000.
The next item on the agenda presented by Randy Clarke is the
authorization for approval to execute a contract with J. F. White Contracting Co.
for Phase II of the Emergency Training Center within the abandoned tunnel near
Broadway Station for a sum not to exceed $5,744,000.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That, subject to the approval of the Massachusetts
Department of Transportation, the General Manager be, and hereby
is, authorized to approve the execution in a form approved by
General Counsel, of a contract with J. F. White Contracting Co., of
Massachusetts to build the MBTA’s first responder emergency
training center in the amount of $5,744,000; said company being the
low responsive and responsible bidder in reply to an Invitation for
Bids.
The next two items 11 and 12 on the agenda will be presented by Mark
Boyle. Mr. Boyle requested the Authorization for approval to enter into a NinetyNine (99) year long lease agreement with the City of Lawrence for a portion of
the abandoned Manchester and Lawrence Branch Railroad Right of Way for use
as a bike path.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That the General Manager be, and hereby is, authorized in the
name of and on behalf of the Authority, and in a form approved by the
General Counsel, to enter into a Ninety-nine (99) year Long Term Lease
Agreement, and any and all other instruments deemed necessary for the
long term lease of that certain section of abandoned railroad right of way
know as the Manchester and Lawrence Branch, extending from Milepost
1.4 in Lawrence to the Methuen line consisting of approximately 1,400
linear feet or quarter mile and shown on Valuation Plans, V7.4, sheet 2 with
the City of Lawrence, all for nominal consideration and solely for use as an
Alternative Transportation Corridor open to the public. Said Lease
Agreements and any other necessary instruments and documents shall
contain such other terms and conditions as determined to be necessary
and/or advisable by the General Counsel.
Next Mr. Boyle asked Authorization for approval to enter into a NinetyNine (99) year long lease agreement with the Towns of Medfield, Dover and
Needham and the City of Newton for a portion of the abandoned Right of Way for
use as a bike path.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That the General Manager be, and hereby is, authorized in the
name of and on behalf of the Authority, and in a form approved by the
General Counsel, to enter into a Ninety-nine (99) year Long Term Lease
Agreement, and any and all other instruments deemed necessary for the
long term lease of that certain section of abandoned railroad right of way
know as the Dover Secondary extending from Medfield Junction to the
Medfield/Dover line consisting of approximately 1.5 miles and shown on
Valuation Plans V 4.28-29, sheet 11 and V 4.28 sheet 10 with the Town of
Medfield, that certain section of abandoned railroad right of way known as
the Dover Secondary Branch extending from the Medfield/Dover line to the
Dover/Needham line consisting of approximately 3.6 miles and shown on
Valuation Plans, V 4.28, sheets 6,7,8,9 and 10, that certain section of
abandoned railroad right of way known as the Needham Secondary Branch
extending from the Dover/Needham line to the Needham/Newton line
consisting of approximately 3 miles and shown on Valuation Plans, V 4.27,
sheets 2 and 3, V. 4.27-28, sheet 4, V 4.28, sheets 5 and 6 and that certain
section of abandoned railroad right of way known as the Needham
Secondary Branch extending from Needham/Newton line to Cook Street,
Newton consisting of approximately 1 mile and shown on Valuation Plans,
V 4.27, sheets 1 and 2, all for nominal consideration and solely for use as
an Alternative Transportation Corridor open to the public. Said Lease
Agreements and any other necessary instruments and documents shall
contain such other terms and conditions as determined to be necessary
and/or advisable by the General Counsel.
The final item on the agenda under other business is an update on the
Naming Rights Corporate Partnership Program also presented by Mark Boyle.
Mr. Boyle described the proposed Corporate Partnership Program for the Station
Naming Rights to gain additional non fare revenue. The hired a consultant
company ING Worldwide to help on this project. ING went out to test to see if
there was a market here in Boston and they found that there is a market. He
noted that they went out and tested these concepts with focus groups to get their
feedback on the program. He stated that they will be able to get an 8 year term
with the amount exceeding the General Manager’s limit which would need Board
action so they will be able to review each contract. They also had extensive
discussions with BCIL on the program and they decided that out of the three
options the option that had the same color and font would be less confusing.
Another positive aspect of the program is that now they will also be able to
update the signage to go along with the settlement with the BCIL where before
we didn’t have the money to completely change the signage. In the contract with
the sponsor they will include the right to refuse any corporate sponsor that they
deem inappropriate. He noted that they are ready to move forward in mid to late
summer. Director Levin asked that when it is launched we should follow up to
see if it is working. She also suggested doing some more focus groups and to
really try and stretch the boundaries.
The next item to be discussed is Ed Hunter’s item from earlier on
Assembly Square. It was decided that the item should be discussed in open
session. Director Alvaro again asked why there was work scoped but not
budgeted. Mr. Hunter answered that he wasn’t aware why that was done
because it was done before he was here. Director Levin asked about how
expensive it will be. Mr. Hunter answered it is about $900,000. Mr. Hunter stated
that there is an allowance in the contract for a contractor to construct the station
and one item in there is an allowance item to do the track throw of which an item
of the track throw scope of work includes a negative return cable. This allowance
includes this work to be done. Chairman Jenkins asked if this is a not to exceed
regardless of who absorbs the money. He reiterated that if the money is from
anywhere in state budget it is our money. Mr. Hunter stated that the amount can
be reduced once they have fully vetted out what the credits may be. He may not
use all the money authorized but they need the approval to get the work going.
Mr. Davis fully backs this item and he does acknowledge that this may not be the
best approach. Director Alvaro stated again that there is no option to approve this
item and he doesn’t like being pushed into a corner to approve an item. Mr. Davis
stated that the point is well taken.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: That the Acting General Manager and Rail and Transit
Administrator be, and hereby is, authorized to execute in the name of
and on behalf of the Authority, subject to the approval of the
Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and in the
form approved by General Counsel, a contract with S&R
Construction Co., Inc. dba S&R Construction Enterprises for, MBTA
Contract No. S32CN01, entitled “Construction Services for the
Assembly Square Station, Orange Line, Somerville, MA” for a sum
not to exceed $3,849,174.50, based upon a schedule of unit, lump
sum and allowance bid prices, said Contractor being the lowest
responsible and eligible bidder in response to requests for sealed
proposals.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: To enter executive session for the purpose of discussing a
collective bargaining matter.
After discussing the MBTA Superior Officers’ Memorandum of
Understanding in executive session it was brought back into open session to be
ratified.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: To ratify the vote made in executive session to authorize the
General Manager is hereby authorized to enter into a collectively
bargained Agreement in the name and on behalf of the Authority, in
the form of a Memorandum of Understanding between the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and the MBTA Police
Superior Officers' Association relative to the terms and conditions
of employment for a period commencing July 2010, through and
including June 30, 2014 and the General Manager is authorized
to execute said Memorandum of understanding in the name and
on behalf of the Authority upon ratification by the MBTA Police
Superior Officers' Association membership. Copy of said
Memorandum of Understanding in the form submitted is hereby
ordered tiled with the records of the meeting.
On motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously;
VOTED: To adjourn the 1062nd Open Meeting.
DOCUMENTS RELIED ON AT THE MEETING
General Manager’s Report
Minutes for the May 22, and June 6, 2012 Board Meetings
Staff Summaries for items 3-12
PowerPoint presentation on Naming Rights
Comments submitted by Public comment period