RFP No. P3010 New l.i ght Rail Vehicles

Transcription

1 rr Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority RFP No. P3010 New l.i ght Rail Vehicles Source Selection Committee Award Recommendation

2 Light Rail Transit Project Requirements end P30i 0 Delivery Schedule Date Activity P3010 cars Cumulative P3010 Cars Comment Needed Cars Needed Delivered April 2012 Conttract Award N/A June Pilot Cars Shipped N/A September Line Openings: 5~ 5] 2g 28 of 78 Base Order P3010 cars ExK~o Phase II (42 cars) delivered. 57th car will be delivered in - Foothill 2A (15 cars) May June 2018 Line Openings: All of Base, Option 1 and Option 2 cars - Crenshaw, South Bay, LAX delivered. (2Et cars) 15 of the 21 Option 3 cars delivered. Cap~~city Adjustment (10 cars) June 2019 Line Openings: Q$ All of the Base, Option 1, Option 2, - Regional Connector (24 cars) and Option 3 cars delivered. Cap~~city Adjustment (11 cars) 42 of the 69 Option 4 cars delivered. December Line Openings: All of the Base, Option 1, Option 2, Eastside Extension (21 cars) and Option 3 cars delivered. - Foc thill 2 (15 cars) 66 of the 69 Option 4 cars delivered. February Replacement of Blue Line Fleet All of the Base and Options Delivered 2020 Mete"o

3 RFP P3010 Light Rail Vehicle ~~RV) Fleet Distribution Light Rail Line P3010 LRV Quantity Contract Source -Base or Option Foothill Phase 2A LRVs from Base Order Expo II LRVs from Base Order Crenshaw/S. B./LAX LRVs from Base Order; 7 LRVs from Option 1 Capacity Adjustment LRVs from Option 1 Regional Connector LRVs from Option 1; 13 LRVs from Option 2 Capacity Adjustment LRVs from Option 2 Eastside Extension LRVs from Option 2; 6 LRVs from Option 3 Foothill LRVs from Option 3 Replacement of Blue Line Cars from Option 4 Metro

4 RFP P3fl10 Evaluation Criteria Developed Using Lessons The goal of the P3010 evaluation criteria was to identify a vehicle manufacturer that has a sound track record of performance in: 1. Delivering Light Rail Vehicles (LRV) on schedule 2. Delivering reliable, high quality RVs that meet all specified performance requirements, including weight. Best i/alue RFP Evaluation Criteria Past Performance and Experience Prices Technical Compliance Project Management 40% 30% 20% 10% Metro

5 RFP P301 d Source Sele~tian Committee Actions Three Proposals received April 11, 2011: 1. Siemens Industry, Inc. Sacramento CA 2. Kinkisharyo International, LLC, Westwood MA 3. CAF USA, Inc., Elmira, NY Preliminary technical evaluations completed June 2011 Proposer interviews conducted June 2011 Manufacturing site surveys conducted August 2011 Negotiations completed October 2011 BAFO due December 22, 2011 Final Price and Technical Evaluation completed February 9, 2012 M~etr+a 5

6 RFP P3010 Scoring Result Summary Siemens Kinkisharyo CAF Past Performance &Experience (possible 400 Points) PI'iCe (possible 300 points) Technical Compliance ~poss~ble 200 Points) Project Management (possible ~o0 Points) Total Scores (possible 1000 Points) "~n~ Metre 0

7 RFP P3U1U -- Award Recommendation Summary Kinkisharyo presents the lowest risk to P3010 delivery schedule Kinkisharyo has the best past performance in reliability, quality and weight compliance Kinkisharyo offers the best technical proposal for all rail car systems, overall car design and integration Kinkisharyo has the best program management team by experience and resource capability in the U.S. Kinkisharyo will create a high value of new U.S. jobs, and will move manufacturing of option vehicle car shells to the U.S. Matra

8 RFP P3010 Proposal Strengths &Weaknesses CAF Lowest Cost Offer Strengths Deep and experienced engineering resources in Spain Multiple programs and platforms world wide Kinkisharyo Strong past performance, never been late High Value of new U.S. Jobs Experienced U.S. engineering and integration on multiple platforms CAF Weaknesses Past Performance issues on schedule, system integration and quality assurance Lowest new U.S. job creation Project management proposed was deemed not as accomplished as Kinkisharyo. Kinkisharyo Price is 11.9% higher than lowest price offer ($105.7M) Siemens Producer of the largest quantity of LRVs in the U.S. Highest value of new U.S. Jobs Recent success in schedule adherence Siemens Price is 16.5 % higher than lowest price offer ($155M) Relatively inexperienced engineering resources in comparison to Kinkisharyo Metro 8

9 RFP P3010 Price Summary with U.S. Jobs Program Siemens Kinkisharyo CAF Independent Cost Estimate A Base Price $333,189,041 $300,290,824 $278,959,163 $326,041,895 B Option 1 $109,662,155 $104,428,419 $89,827,697 $116,363,499 ~ Option 2 $149,891,149 $143,232,394 $122,544,680 $162,301,435 D Option 3 $84,943,014 $81,526,410 $70,018,806 $90,397,964 E Option 4 $262,950,755 $261,893,225 $224,281,904 $281,633,406 F Total Price $940,636,114 $891,371,272 $785,632,250 $976,737,929 G New U.S. Jobs Value $99,155,651 $97,889,293 $62,402,503 H U.S. Jobs Value w/ Economic Multiplier $140,632,460 $138,836,384 $88,505,470 ~ Evaluation Price $800,003,654 $752,534,888 $697,126,780 M~tt'O

10 RFP P Pr+~curement Schedule Task RFP Release Date Proposal Due Date Initial Tech &Price Evaluation U.S. Employment Plans Due Interviews Manufacturing Site Surveys Revised U.S. Jobs Plan Due Negotiations Request Best and Final Offers BAFO Due Date Final Technical Evaluation Best Value Trade Off Analysis SSC Award Recommendation Board Award Consideration Buy America Pre-Award Audit Award Contract &Issue NTP Shipment of Two Pilot Cars to Metro Completion Date Status November 1, 2010 Complete April 11, 2011 Complete June 10, 2011 Complete June 20, 2011 Complete June 21-30, 2011 Complete July 14 Aug. 5, 2011 Complete September 30, 2011 Complete Sept. 26 Oct. 28, 2011 Complete November 11, 2011 Complete December 22, 2011 Complete January 20, 2012 Complete January 24, 2012 Complete February 1, 2012 Complete March 22, 2012 March 5 March 30, 2012 April 2012 June 2014 Metro 10