|
Question 1:
If a Designer
uses a Contractor to perform constructability reviews on a
design contract, does this preclude the Contractor from pursuing
the construction project?
Guidance:
This would be considered a conflict of
interest. That contractor would have had previous access
to the project plans and could have provided input to help alter
the plans to their own advantage.
|
|
Question 2:
The Department hires
an inspector to perform verification inspections, and the
same inspector will also be performing plant certification
inspections for another company. If a Plant Certification
Agency uses the other company to perform their plant
certification inspections, is it a conflict of interest if
the same inspector performs the plant
verification
inspection for the Department?
Guidance:
Section 8.5 (8) of the Materials Manual requires the inspectors
of the plant certification agency should not be employed by or
involved in any business related functions of the plant. In
this case the inspector should not be an employee of the Plant
Certification Agency, perform their quality control inspections,
or be involved in any business related functions of that agency.
This
would not be considered to be a conflict of interest.
The certification inspection is a systems based
inspection and not an actual project inspection so the inspector
would not be working on the same project for both the Plant Certification Agency
and the Department.
|
|
Question 3:
Are consultants that perform Value Engineering (VE)
on projects excluded from further work on the project? Guidance:
This should not be considered a conflict. Although the
firm may propose recommendations for VE savings, it is up to the
Department to decide to incorporate.
Since we are
generally performing VE early in project development, sometimes
in a planning phase or early PD&E, a participating firm may be
worried that if they perform the VE that they would preclude
themselves from further work on the contract.
See Also
Design-Build FAQ # 5 (RFP Review) |
|
Question 4:
Can a Geotechnical Consultant who provides geotech design
services be permitted to later provide unrelated CEI services on
the same project? Guidance:
The Geotechnical Consultants can be permitted to provide
unrelated CEI services on projects which they provided different
design services. For instance, they can be allowed to work as a
sub to the CEI and provide asphalt testing services or concrete
testing services when they were also a sub to the Engineer of
Record for completely unrelated (may have provided specific
geotechnical borings, lab tests or foundation analyses)
services. This is not a conflict of interest. The
existing language in the Consultant Eligibility Procedure will
be edited in the next revision to reflect these types of
relationships. |
|
Question 5:
Is it a conflict for a firm to perform preliminary pavement
coring and then later perform Contractor Quality Control (CQC),
Geotechnical, or engineering services? Guidance:
Generally, once the
preliminary pavement coring
activities are complete, there is no more work on the cores nor
will the firm make any additional recommendations. These
services are also performed very early in the design process so
that the Districts can provide milling thickness to the
designers. Since the firm is providing raw data on cores early
in the production process and the raw data is not included in
the plans, the firm is also not seen to be making design
decisions. The
CQC services consist of performing earthwork, concrete, and
asphalt sampling/testing/reporting. In some instances, they may
also provide Quality Control Manager services which also
includes ensuring that the elements of the QC Plan are
administered properly;
the QC Plan does not include milling. The preliminary pavement
coring data is not used in any way to make CQC decisions.
In summary, the preliminary pavement coring data is completely
separate from CQC and never enters into a CQC decision during
construction. In this type of scenario, this is not
considered to be a conflict of interest.
If
the the engineering services included evaluation of shy pavement
thickness as part of claim against the EOR, it could be
considered a conflict of interest to which the firm would have
to recuse itself.
|
|
Question 6:
On a
Design/Bid/Build project, can a sub to the Engineer of Record (EOR)
for survey work also become a sub to the CEI for survey work?
Guidance:
Since survey services will generally be considered very
minor (les than 2 - 3% of the project fees) on the CEI contract
(and likely to be utilized on only 1 of 3 projects) and survey
services may not even be necessary at all, this would (by
procedure) be the District Secretary's decision.
Additionally, if a firm wants to
provide survey services as a sub to both the EOR and the
CEI, this should be permitted by the Districts. Since the
survey work is such a minor portion of the contract fees (on a
relative scale) for both Design and CEI services.
|
|
Question 7:
Can a consultant firm, or its affiliate, that is the Engineer of
Record (EOR) on a project be considered eligible to compete as a
prime consultant for CEI services on that same project. Guidance:
No.
A consultant firm, or its
affiliate, that is the Engineer of Record (EOR) on a project
shall not be considered eligible to compete as a prime
consultant for CEI services on that same project.
A consultant firm, or its
affiliate, that is the EOR on a project may only be considered
eligible to compete as a subconsultant for CEI services upon
approval of the District Secretary.
A consultant firm, or its
affiliate, that was a subconsultant to the EOR on a project may
only be considered as a prime for CEI services on the same
project, with the approval of the District Secretary.
A consultant firm, or its
affiliate, that was a subconsultant to the EOR on a project may
only be considered as subconsultant for CEI services with the
approval of the District Secretary.
The District Secretary's
approval shall be based on the extent of the firm's involvement
in the design of the project or CEI services, as the case may
be, and the potential of
hindrance of any objective decision making.
|
|
Question 7a:
The same
consultant firm is prohibited from performing both the design
and the CEI on the same project. Does this also apply to a
Local Agency Program? Guidance:
Yes.
This is a conflict of interest.
The FHWA consultant regulation makes no distinction for
application of our consultant procedures between a state or a
local agency, so the same criteria applies whether a state or
local agency utilizes fed-aid for consultant work. When
developing and endorsing a state policy/procedure for consultant
use FHWA has always expected it to equally apply to the local
agencies. |
|
Question
8:
On a CEI contract, a proposed
Project Administrator (PA) is related (by marriage) to the
contractor on that job. Is this a conflict of interest?
Guidance:
Yes. The correct approach is to avoid creating situations
where objective decision making could be hindered by a existing
relationship.
Even a scenario of proposing a PA who is well known to the
specific district could promote a negative perception that we
need to avoid whenever possible. |
|
Question
9:
Would a design firm pursuing a CEI Hybrid
contract have a conflict of interest if the firm performed all
(or part) of the design of a project on which the inspectors
would be assigned?
Guidance:
No. This would not be a conflict of interest because the
administration of the construction contract would be done by the
FDOT and the CEI would only be providing inspectors. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|