GRTC Bus Rapid Transit Project Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

January 21, 2015 Version 1.0 | November 3, 2014

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Approval This document is approved by the following members of GRTC Transit System: Name/Title

Signature

David Green / Chief Executive Officer Charlie Mitchell / Chief Operating Officer Stephen McNally / Project Administrator/Construction Manager

Revision Record Revision

Issue Date

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

Pages Affected

Description of Revisions

i

Date

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Table of Contents 1.

2.

3.

Basis of Integration and Commissioning Plan ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1.

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2.

Project Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3.

Project Integration .................................................................................................................................................. 3

1.4.

Project Commissioning ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Integration Approach .................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.

Expected Project Interfaces and Integration .......................................................................................................... 4

2.2.

Construction Approach ........................................................................................................................................... 4

2.3.

Construction Phasing .............................................................................................................................................. 8

2.4.

Design Reviews ....................................................................................................................................................... 8

2.5.

Value Analysis / Engineering................................................................................................................................. 10

2.6.

Constructability Reviews ...................................................................................................................................... 11

2.7.

Utility Interface ..................................................................................................................................................... 12

2.8.

Change Control and Management ....................................................................................................................... 12

2.9.

Configuration Management ................................................................................................................................. 13

2.10.

Delay Management .............................................................................................................................................. 14

2.11.

Claims Avoidance and Management .................................................................................................................... 15

2.12.

Dispute Resolution................................................................................................................................................ 15

2.13.

Project Close-Out .................................................................................................................................................. 16

Commissioning Approach ........................................................................................................................................... 17 3.1.

Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 17

3.2.

Test Planning ........................................................................................................................................................ 17

3.2.1. 3.3.

Testing Requirements ................................................................................................................................... 18

Systems Integration Testing ................................................................................................................................. 19

3.3.1.

Operational Testing....................................................................................................................................... 19

3.4.

Organizational Procedural Changes...................................................................................................................... 19

3.5.

Manuals and Operational Procedures .................................................................................................................. 20

3.6.

Training ................................................................................................................................................................. 20

3.7.

Pre-Revenue Operations ...................................................................................................................................... 20

3.8.

Safety Consideration and Safety and Security Certification ................................................................................. 21

3.8.1. 3.9.

Emergency Preparedness.............................................................................................................................. 21

Initial Revenue Operations ................................................................................................................................... 22

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

ii

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Figures Figure 1 – Study Area .............................................................................................................................................................. 2 Figure 2 – Proposed GRTC BRT Project Corridor (Source: TIGER Grant Application) ............................................................. 2 Figure 3 – GRTC BRT Project Contractual Interrelationships .................................................................................................. 5

Tables Table 1 – Relationship, Risks, and Mitigation Measures for Various Construction Components .......................................... 6

Appendices Appendix A – List of Acronyms

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

iii

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

1. Basis of Integration and Commissioning Plan 1.1. Introduction The Integration and Commissioning Plan detailed in this document provides an overview of, and guidance on, the integration and commissioning issues related to the construction, testing, and acceptance of the GRTC Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project. This plan has been developed through discussions with the Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) and project stakeholders.

1.2. Project Overview The GRTC BRT Project emerged from a regional collaboration among GRTC, the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), Greater Richmond Chamber of Commerce, Greater Richmond Partnership, Richmond Regional Planning District Commission, Richmond Metropolitan Authority, Venture Richmond, Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), the City of Richmond and Henrico County. The primary goal of the system is to provide premium bus service to the region through improving travel times, schedule adherence, and passenger amenities. Other goals of the project are to improve livability, enhance economic opportunity, revitalize commercial properties, improve environmental sustainability and stimulate economic development in the City, County and greater Richmond region. GRTC initiated the GRTC BRT project in September 2009 with an Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Assessment (AA/EA) study. The AA/EA showed that the BRT project would result in significant user benefits including more reliable transportation and faster travel times at reasonable operating and capital costs. A decision to proceed into implementation was made in 2014 following the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approving the AA/EA study and granting the project a Class II documented Categorical Exclusion (CATEX). Because a CATEX designation describes a project that is unlikely to adversely impact the physical or social environment (40 CFR 1508.4), no further action was required to follow the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process. The purpose of the GRTC BRT project, as stated in the EA, is to develop a more efficient transit system, support transit-oriented land use, and provide an attractive alternative to the automobile for east-west travel. Of immediate use, though, would be the BRT’s improvement of travel times for both transit users and automobiles along the corridor as well as improvement of on-time bus performance. Based on the planning process begun in 2009, including community input and recommendations, GRTC intends to implement a BRT system on Broad and Main Streets. The proposed system would be 7.6 miles in length with 14 stations (4-center running, 4-consolidated, and 6-curbside). Dedicated BRT vehicles would travel in 10-minute intervals during the peak hours and 15-minute intervals in the off-peak. The project corridor extends from Willow Lawn Drive to 14th Street, south on 14th Street to Main Street, and east on Main Street to Rocketts Landing. Segments along the corridor from Willow Lawn Drive to Thompson Street, Adams Street to 3rd Street, and 14th Street to Rocketts Landing would operate with mixed traffic operations. Dedicated BRT lanes would be constructed in the Broad Street median from Thompson Street to Adams Street, and curb lanes from 3rd Street to 14th Street would serve as dedicated BRT lanes as well. Opening year hours of operation would be on weekdays from 5:30 AM to 11:30 PM and on weekends and holidays from 6:00 AM to 11:30 PM. Figure 1 shows the study area and Figure 2 shows the proposed BRT corridor in Downtown Richmond. A list of acronyms can be found in Appendix A.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

1

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Figure 1 – Study Area

Figure 2 – Proposed GRTC BRT Project Corridor (Source: TIGER Grant Application)

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

2

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

1.3. Project Integration The purpose of systems integration is to allow for compatibility among the various elements and phases of the project and between the project and the existing transit system. For this project, components to be integrated include the stations, traffic signal system, communication system, roadway elements, and various technology components such as passenger information systems and station monitoring systems. During the Final Design (FD) phase, the system integration function should consist of interdisciplinary reviews by management and staff utilizing the following steps to assure:  



The documents fulfill the functional requirements of the design criteria and are consistent with the proposed operating plans, procedures, and rules All system elements (e.g., vehicle, communications, transit signal priority, fare collection, surveillance, etc.) are compatible. At the same time, the facility elements (e.g., right-of-way, stations, maintenance, vehicle storage, and other permanent facilities) accommodate the system elements All work that is allocated in association with design is consistent with the design documents

1.4. Project Commissioning Project Commissioning refers to the final testing, start up, and acceptance of the project. The testing and start-up phase provides the link between the procurement, construction, and revenue service phases of the project. The purpose of this phase is to determine acceptability of the newly-constructed transit system in preparation for revenue operations. Acceptance follows verification that the project meets the contractual specifications by conducting system, performance, and acceptance tests. After construction has been certified complete, the testing and start-Up phase begins with qualification, acceptance, and performance testing as well as integrated testing. In addition, a period of pre-revenue service is required to familiarize GRTC with the management and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) of the new system prior to beginning revenue service. Issues of safety and security certification, procedures development, training, emergency preparedness, and customer interface will be addressed during this phase.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

3

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

2. Integration Approach As previously stated, the purpose of systems integration is to allow for compatibility among the various elements and phases of the project and between the project and the existing transit system. This section describes some of the issues that need to be addressed with the design and construction of the project in order to achieve integration of the project components and to minimize any incompatibilities and conflicts. This document is not intended to provide a comprehensive discussion on these issues, but to review major issues that should be considered by GRTC during design and construction phases of the project.

2.1. Expected Project Interfaces and Integration Prior to beginning construction, GRTC should decide on a project management organization that will be responsible for moving the project from design to completion. The following concepts should be explored:        

Designating one lead manager within the group as the single point of contact for critical interfaces and directions Becoming empowered to make decisions and take action Being responsive to emergency or rapidly changing conditions Performing progress reviews, quality assurance, and related actions Tracking and being responsible for deliverables Interfacing with external agencies Functioning as a single point-of-contact with FTA Being responsible for project accomplishment

A Project Management Plan (PMP) has established the organization for this project. The PMP organizational structure provides guidance for these issues.

2.2. Construction Approach During the project development, it was determined that a Construction Manager-at-Risk (CMAR) method will be utilized for project delivery. The CMAR method will allow construction to commence as soon as possible while the more complex components continue to be finalized. Dividing the project into smaller specialty components will have the added benefit of attracting more specialty contractors and providing more opportunity for smaller and local firms to compete for the project, thereby increasing competition and potentially reducing the construction cost and schedule. While the CMAR method includes those benefits listed above, the method also divides the project into multiple phases, which introduces more risks to integration and coordination. Therefore, advanced planning will be required to minimize the risks and improve coordination. Having a single contact point for construction coordination through the CMAR firm will improve coordination and mitigate some of these risks. The CMAR firm will be selected by GRTC during the Preliminary Engineering (PE) phase and begin working with the Architectural and Engineering (A&E) design team during the FD phase of the project. During the FD phase, the CMAR firm will review the PE phase plans, undertake value engineering, and provide recommendations for construction of the project. The CMAR, together with the A&E design team and GRTC, will then select, refine, and finalize the final construction phasing, integration, and commissioning steps.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

4

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Based on this construction approach, it is expected that GRTC’s selected CMAR firm will sub-contract project construction. The CMAR firm is expected to perform construction management services over the sub-contractor, unless GRTC decides to award this task to a different firm. Five contracts are expected to be awarded: 1) Utility relocation/construction; 2) equipment and materials procurement; 3) systems; 4) stations; and 5) roadway construction. GRTC is expected to procure the BRT vehicles separately. Figure 3 shows the intended relationships between each of the parties for the proposed GRTC BRT project, and Table 1 is a summary of relationships between each of the five construction components, including potential risks and mitigation measures. Figure 3 – GRTC BRT Project Contractual Interrelationships

Utility Companies City of Richmond Henrico County VDOT

GRTC

LEGEND Coordination Requirement

CMAR CM

A&E Firm

Utility Relocation and Utility Construction

Equipment and Materials

Vehicles

Roadway Construction

Stations Construction

Systems Construction

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

5

Direct Contractual Control or Supervision

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Table 1 – Relationship, Risks, and Mitigation Measures for Various Construction Components Procurement/Construction Component

Utility Relocation and Construction

Equipment and Materials Procurement

Coordination

Risks  Multiple contractors working in the same area  Delays with schedule coordination

 Roadway Contractor  Stations Contractor  Systems Contractor

Mitigation  Require coordination in both contract documents  Require partnering among contractors  CMAR to coordinate activities  Require factory testing, plus on-site testing with the installation contractor  Require factory testing, plus on-site testing with the installation contractor  Require factory testing, plus on-site testing with the installation contractor  Require factory testing, plus on-site testing with the installation contractor

Off-Board Fare Collection

 Stations Contractor

Compatibility with existing system.

Transit Signal Priority System

 Systems Contractor

Compatibility with existing system.

Real-Time Transit Signs

 Stations Contractor

Communications Equipment

 Systems Contactor

Compatibility with existing system.

Wayfinding Signs

 Stations Contractor

Compatibility with existing system.

 Stations & Systems Contractor

On-time delivery

 Require factory testing, plus on-site testing with bus manufacturer

 Transit Signal Priority Vendor  Communications Vendor  Vehicles

 Delays in completion of utilities that would impact systems construction  Delays in materials delivery that would impact systems construction  Integration issues with materials supplied by others  Multiple contractors working in the same area

 Require coordination in both contract documents  Require partnering among contractors  CMAR to coordinate activities

Vehicles

Systems Construction

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

6

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Procurement/Construction Component

Station Construction

Roadway Construction

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

Coordination

Risks

Mitigation

 Off-Board Fare Collection Vendor  Real-time Bus Arrival Vendor  Stations Amenities Vendor

 Delays in completion of utilities that would impact stations construction  Delays in materials delivery that would impact systems construction  Integration issues with materials supplied by others  Multiple contractors working in the same area  Department of Historic Resources approval

 Require coordination in both contract documents  Require partnering among contractors  Order materials early to avoid delays  CMAR to coordinate activities

 Utilities Contractor  Stations Contractor

 Delays in completion of utilities that would impact roadway construction

 Require coordination in both contract documents  Require partnering among contractors  CMAR to coordinate activities

7

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

2.3. Construction Phasing Currently, five project components have been identified for the construction phase, which will be finalized during the FD phase in association with the CMAR firm and GRTC. 











Utility Relocations and Construction — It is anticipated that utility relocation and construction will be the first finalized package and the first available for bid. These items will be constructed by existing utility companies or by specialty contractors. Equipment and Materials Procurement — Items include, but are not limited to, off-board fare collection, transit signal priority (TSP), real-time bus arrival system, communications equipment, and surveillance system. It is recommended that the items be procured separately through a “Best Value” approach. However, in the case of off-board fare collection and real-time bus arrival system, system components should be compatible with existing GRTC systems and equipment. Therefore, sole-source justification letters are anticipated to be developed and approved by GRTC for procurement of these technology items only. For other technology items, such as TSP and communication equipment, a “Best Value Procurement” is recommended to allow GRTC to use a combination of pricing and functionality for the final selection. These items can be procured early in the procurement process to allow the equipment to be ordered and delivered to the installation contractor for final installation, testing, and commissioning; this would reduce ordering and delivery time. Since these items will be a separate procurement, the requirements for integration, testing, and commissioning will be critical for system acceptance. Vehicles — BRT vehicle procurement was performed separately from the construction phase components. After review of the fleet size, vehicle size, and vehicle options necessary for implementation of the GRTC BRT Project, GRTC decided to procure 40-foot GILLIG BRT Plus vehicles. Systems Construction – These items include construction and installation of the TSP system, the communications system, signal modifications, and the installation of new signals. Some items may be considered specialty construction, for which an electrical contractor’s license would be required, but most components require only a general contractor’s license. Station Construction —Station elements include the station platform and architecture, physical sidewalk modifications, curb, gutter and access ramps, lighting, and other station amenities. It also includes installation of the specialty procured items, such as benches, real-time bus arrival information, ticket vending machines, closed circuit television (CCTV), and wayfinding signs. Roadway Construction — Roadway improvements will include median and drainage reconstruction, pavement construction, milling and overlay, roadway signing and striping, and installation of the wearing course for the transit lanes.

2.4. Design Reviews Integration approach for the project will begin during the design phase of the project. Design reviews are critical elements of the design management process that help to achieve compatibility between various system components. The purpose of the design reviews is to obtain or perform:      

Quality and efficiency of the design Identification and correction of errors and omissions Compliance with building, fire, ADA, and other relevant codes and regulations Meeting of operational and functional objectives Coordination among engineering disciplines Adherence to project budget

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

8

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

    

Design constructability and cost-effectiveness as well as the ability for bidding Compatibility with existing transit system and adjacent infrastructure Interface with various construction components and phases Compliance of the final construction contract documents with the design criteria, codes, and regulations FTA determination relative to NEPA compliance and TIGER grant requirement

The reviewing agencies anticipated with this project include the following:     

GRTC City of Richmond Henrico County DRPT (constructability reviews only) Department of General Services (code compliance reviews only)

Design reviews should involve a formalized, structured approach to so that the reviews are comprehensive, objective, and properly documented. Aside from those agencies listed above, reviews should also include the CMAR firm and other agencies as appropriate. Maintenance of design review schedules is suggested in order to meet established construction start dates and other program milestones. The basic recommended steps to guide these reviews are shown below: 









Pre-submission Review — Before detailed reviews of design submissions are conducted, a pre-submission or review of the FD documents is recommended to determine if the submission is likely to meet the terms of the design scope of work and to bring closure on comments from any prior review. If the documentation for the submission is incomplete or does not represent what is requested for the upcoming submission, the A&E consultant project manager should advise GRTC of the schedule impact and recommend appropriate action. The A&E project manager should then advise the internal design team of the submission discrepancies and indicate that corrective action be taken to maintain the design schedule. Review Process — A distribution list should be prepared and used for providing copies of drawings and specifications for GRTC and consultant reviews at the 30, 60, and 100 percent levels of completion per this project’s scope of work. The GRTC Project Manager should conduct an audit against the contract scope(s) of work. The scope of work for a design project should specify, at a minimum, design analysis documents, estimates, schedule issues, drawings, and specifications that are to be submitted at each design review level and the extent to which each is complete. Review of Drawings — Design reviews should confirm that project concepts and criteria are followed and should evaluate the adequacy of the design and drafting for the expected level of completion, clarity, economy, and format. Reviews should also determine whether the interfaces with adjacent and overlapping projects have been resolved and whether the design is complete, constructible, cost-effective, and compliant with established standards and variances granted to the design consultant. Review of Specifications and Estimates of Probable Costs —Copies of the technical specifications and estimates of probable costs appropriate for the level should be transmitted to the reviewers for technical review and comment. Review Comments —Comments developed during review of drawings, specifications, cost estimates, calculations, survey notes, and related items should be transmitted to the A&E project manager for consolidation, verification, review, and action. A standard form should be developed for the use of all reviewers.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

9

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan





Review Meeting – This meeting is to examine the pertinent review comments with the A&E consultant so that there are no misunderstandings, that GRTC inputs are provided, and that the contract documents can be satisfactorily revised and advanced to the next milestone and through to completion. The meeting(s) should be chaired by the GRTC project manager and attended by the CMAR representative and representatives of the agencies that provided review comments. Comments should be summarized by GRTC project manager into one set of non-conflicting comments and submitted to the A&E consultant thereafter. Some agencies, such as DGS may not be able to attend the review meetings. Comments from these agencies should be incorporated in the master comment list. Resolution Matrix and Disposition of Review Comments — The A&E Consultant should prepare a resolution matrix to summarize how they have incorporated the comments and resolved the issues presented by GRTC and the reviewing agencies. The resolution matrix is a method which documents all actions taken by the design consultant in response to review comments. Record of those actions is provided to the original reviewer in order to bring satisfactory closure to all comments.

2.5. Value Analysis / Engineering FTA encourages the use of Value Analysis on all transit related construction projects. Value Analysis or Value Engineering (VE) is a systematic, multi-disciplinary approach designed to optimize the value of the project. To accomplish this goal, an independent team of architects, engineers and relevant professionals identifies, analyzes, and establishes a value for a function of an item or system. The objective of VE is to satisfy the required function at the lowest total cost (capital, operating, and maintenance) over the life of a project consistent with the requirements of performance, reliability, maintainability, safety, and aesthetics. The highest return on the VE effort can be expected when a VE workshop is performed early in the design process before major decisions have been completely incorporated into the design. VE should be performed at or near the end of PE. For this project, it is recommended that the VE be accomplished at the beginning of the FD or at the end of the PE phase. VE should be performed during a week-long workshop by a multi-disciplinary team of professionals who are not part of the design team and are specifically assembled for that purpose. Personnel might include architectural, systems, civil, transit planners and construction engineers, as well as specialists in cost estimation and O&M. The participants should have a minimum of 40 hours of VE experience. To the extent possible and as warranted by the complexity of the project, and/or the experience of GRTC on similar projects, the VE team should report to GRTC. The team should include a Certified Value Specialist (CVS) if possible. It is recommended that the team also includes a member of the CMAR team. The VE workshop typically consists of six phases: 1) Information Phase – Information is obtained about the project including design drawings, specifications, cost estimates, design criteria, constraints, site conditions, utilities, and O&M practices. A presentation is provided by the designers on current status and a site visit is conducted. The VE team reviews and validates cost information and calculates life cycle costs. 2) Function Analysis Phase – The functions of the project are defined and the VE team identifies the cost and worth of each function and determines areas of high cost and low worth. The VE team analyzes the project to understand and clarify the required functions. 3) Speculation/Creative Phase – The VE team generates a list of alternative methods of performing the functions involved in the targeted areas of the design.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

10

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

4) Evaluation/Analysis Phase – The VE team evaluates each of the generated ideas against functional requirements and cost-reduction objectives. Feasibility and potential for acceptance by GRTC is reviewed as well. Less promising alternatives are screened out, leaving the remainder to develop further. 5) Development/Recommendation Phase – A sketch for each proposed change is developed. After a sketch is drawn, estimates are made of the initial capital and life cycle costs for both the original and proposed design and advantages/disadvantages of the proposed change are listed. The VE team holds consultations with GRTC and the A&E consultant in order to propose changes that are based on the best information available. 6) Reporting/Presentation Phase – At the end of the workshop, the VE team should meet with GRTC staff members and the A&E consultant to present the design, cost details, and advantages/disadvantages of the recommended alternatives. The team furnishes written copies of all proposals for preliminary review by GRTC and the A&E consultant. GRTC will then decide which VE recommendations to implement. During the value analysis, project schedule, phasing, and integration issues should be carefully examined. Other options for construction phasing/splits should be examined and if a preferred option is identified, it should be presented in the report. Within one week of the workshop, the VE team submits a draft VE Workshop Report to GRTC that should include the project background and description, the scope and methodology of the analyses, a summary of the VE Workshop recommendations, and details of each proposal with estimated costs, expected savings, and back-up documentation. After the final report review, GRTC makes final decisions on adoptions or rejections of the various proposals. The Final Report would include a summary of accepted proposals with revised capital and implementation costs, as well as a list of rejected proposals and the reasons for their rejection. GRTC will direct the A&E consultant to incorporate the recommendations in the FD.

2.6. Constructability Reviews Constructability reviews are highly recommended during the design process. Constructability reviews are a process whereby plans are reviewed by construction technique and materials experts to assess whether the design can be safely and effectively built. These reviews should be conducted in tandem and as part of the FD 60 and 90-percent design reviews. Upon completion of the constructability reviews, the following benefits should be provided:  

        

Elimination of construction requirements that are impossible or impractical to build Maximization of constructability, recognizing the availability and suitability of materials and specialized equipment, the capability and availability of labor resources by trades, and the standards of practice of the construction resources Accurate depictions of site conditions with regard to access, utilities, and general configuration Designed structures and features that are adapted to site conditions and constraints Adequacy of work and storage space including contractor access to the site Appropriate construction durations and milestones Appropriate safety and security requirements for the particular construction site(s) Clearly defined procedures for scheduling outages and mitigating utility interruptions and awareness of the feasibility of those interruptions Established requirements for GRTC-provided materials, equipment, services, and utility connections Designs that can be constructed using methods, materials, and equipment common to the construction industry Minimized project delays due to analysis of overlaps and coordination among various project phases

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

11

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan





Familiarity with local community restrictions and accommodations and the requirements of the public, including existing transit patrons and persons with disabilities. The review should also assure that the project accounts for adjacent land uses and impacts Coordination with operating elements of the existing transit system

It is recommended that the constructability reviews be provided by DRPT, as part of their review process, and by the CMAR firm.

2.7. Utility Interface It is recommended that GRTC establish master agreements with all affected utilities during the PE phase and develop specific agreements with those utilities during the FD phase. During construction, contractors are responsible for coordinating utility relocation and project service requirements with their overall schedule and manage the interfaces to avoid delay of the overall project. All real property interests and obstacles necessary for the project will have been acquired, controlled, and cleared by the time construction begins on the project. If that is not the case, construction contract specifications should address the availability of such areas in the context of:    

Release dates for certain real estate parcels as acquisition or relocation is incomplete “Workarounds” or “hold-off areas” as specified Demolition or clearing of existing site improvements Remediation of any existing contamination

GRTC should monitor project milestones, including real estate procurement and clearance, in order to meet the project schedule. Thus, every effort should be made to provide a controlled and cleared right-of-way for the construction of the project in accordance with the approved scope in order to adhere to the cost and schedule parameters that have been established. In this situation, relocation of a utility is recommended to be accomplished before any other construction work begins. The impact of utility coordination with other project construction phases, delays with utility relocation completion, and underground utility construction delay should be analyzed to reduce the integration and conflicts with other elements of construction.

2.8. Change Control and Management Changes during the construction phase could result from, but not be limited to, the following causes: 

Differing site conditions including:  Subsurface conditions different from contract representations  Unknown or unusual conditions not reasonably anticipated  Conditions created by previous contractors



Value Engineering – In addition to design phase VE studies, construction contract language should permit contractors to recommend changes that could reduce capital or life cycle costs for GRTC. Such a clause is typically referred to as a Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) clause. Costs associated with acceptable changes due to a VECP recommendation are typically shared between the client and the contractor to encourage VE where complex and/or relatively new design is being implemented. This split would be negotiated between GRTC and the contractor prior to construction commencement. While the contractor is responsible for engineering changes associated with the VE study, the contract documents should establish a minimum value of savings that GRTC is expected to accrue. This will compensate for the costs of processing and evaluation and discourage unnecessary VE change proposals.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

12

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan



Project Stakeholders Actions including:  Changing portions of the plans and specifications  Altering the time allowed to perform the work  Changing the contractor’s method of work  Stop orders  Regulatory changes, such as environmental, security, and safety

Diligence during the planning and design phases of a project can reduce the risk of changes during construction. When changes do occur, GRTC should have a change control process and applicable form wherein the source of the change is identified in order to permit a cost-effective decision to be made. The contractor should be given official notice either through a change order or by direction of CMAR or GRTC. Documentation should provide back up to the directed change. No matter the size of the change is, its impact should be assessed in terms of time and cost (estimated or actual). The construction contract should address the process of pricing changes consistent with FTA requirements regarding issues such as equipment rates, overhead, and profit. This matter is one that emphasizes the need for inspectors to maintain detailed diaries which identify environmental conditions, manpower, equipment, materials, activities, and durations at the site each work day. These diaries will be critical during assessment and negotiation of change orders or GRTC-directed changes. At the same time, diaries should provide assessments of the execution of work each day so as to forewarn of potential contractor claims that may surface, as well as aid in preparing contract estimates at project completion.

2.9. Configuration Management During the procurement and construction phases, the objective is to implement the project in accordance with the plans and specifications of the contract documents. Specific considerations during construction should include:   

Protection or relocation, as required, of existing utilities based on identification and design conducted earlier Requirement that construction contractors should verify existing site conditions and dimensions Sensitivity during construction to potential impacts from air, noise and water pollution, drainage issues (surface and sewers), archeological concerns, and habitat destruction as identified in the EA document.

The project definition baseline established during FD will be used to monitor construction processes. The baseline should be closely followed to attain quality, safety, security, performance, and cost compliance. There may be occasions, however, when changes are required. All changes to the project definition baseline should be reviewed and assessed by technical experts, inclusive of schedule and estimating expertise, and then by the responsible individuals as set forth in the PMP for the procurement and construction phases. During the procurement and construction phases, special emphasis should be placed on recording and documenting any changes that are approved and completed. Changes become a matter of official record and should be requested in writing in accordance with the project change control procedures before being considered for approval. GRTC should establish in writing those individuals authorized to approve equipment procurement and/or construction changes and the dollar thresholds of their authority. At the completion of equipment procurement (and installation) and construction, detailed equipment drawings, operating manuals, warranties, etc., should be submitted, and “asbuilt” drawings for constructed facilities should be prepared by the contractor.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

13

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Designer services during construction consist of design reviews of contractor submissions, where submission requirements are detailed in the contract documents. These submissions include shop and working drawings, materials and equipment cut sheets, submittals required by Contract Data Requirements Lists, and testing for systems contracts. Where designer review and approvals are required, change control procedures should be adhered to, detailed records should be maintained, and levels of authority should be established (cost, functionality and schedule impact) for approvals, especially for any changes to the baseline. The configuration of the existing system is considered to be the project definition baseline. Any modifications should be designed to maintain or achieve the desired functionality, and the proposed changes should be approved by the appropriate GRTC managers including engineering, operations, maintenance, and system safety. In addition, implemented changes should be carefully and completely documented to aid in future training, inspection, and maintenance activities.

2.10. Delay Management A delay is defined as a measure of the lack of progress against how the work was scheduled to progress to completion. According to the report Better Management of Major Underground Construction Projects, the most frequent cause of project disruption for any major transit project is "delayed decisive action." This conclusion is the same regardless of where the delays occur, and may be the major contributing factor in disputes, claims, cost overruns, and construction delays. Project delays can only occur if critical path activities are delayed. Delays on other paths consume float and do not result in a project delay until they consume all float, at which point they become critical. Delays to the critical path provide float to other, non-critical paths. Typical causes of delays include additional work, disrupted work, suspended work, or slow progress. Delays are categorized as excusable or non-excusable. An excusable delay is unforeseeable and not within the contractor’s control (e.g., a natural disaster). It can be either non-compensable (the contractor receives a time extension but no compensation for the delay) or compensable (the contractor receives both a time extension and compensation for the delay). A non-excusable delay is one that is considered to be either foreseeable by the contractor or within the contractor’s control. For a non-excusable delay, the contractor receives no time and no compensation, and could be liable for actual or liquidated damages. The contract should define appropriate examples of all these terms. There could also be concurrent delays due to the actions of both GRTC/CMAR and the contractor, or by one contractor that affects another contractor. A critical path schedule for each construction and equipment/materials contract is essential and invaluable in evaluating the impact of an actual delay or a potential change. GRTC/CMAR may take the position that there should be no damages for delay. This means that GRTC/CMAR is willing to give a time extension, but no financial compensation. The disadvantage with a no-damage-for-delay clause in a contract is that it causes contractors to add their estimated cost for the potential loss of compensation in their bid prices. Delay mitigation should be carefully examined with the contract if the proposed phasing of the project is finalized. Since there will be delay impacts to various project elements and coordination, these issues should be carefully mitigated. Potential delay impacts could include the following issues:    

Delays in completion of one element of the project that is dependent on a subsequent contractor work, such as completion of utility work, prior to the roadway construction; Delays in equipment delivery that can affect another project construction, such as TSP equipment that is required for the Systems Contractor to install; Delays in testing that would impact a sub-sequent construction element or testing, such as testing of communication equipment before the final connections can be accomplished; and Delays in testing acceptance for “agency-furnished” items.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

14

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

2.11. Claims Avoidance and Management Claims avoidance involves the process necessary to reduce the incidence of claims on construction projects. Both GRTC and CMAR will share the risks for this project. The most important factors are clear and concise contract documents (with complete and accurate drawings, specifications and Terms & Conditions or General Requirements) and maintenance of regular communications between GRTC/CMAR and the contractor to address problems as they arise. The goal should always be to close-out each and every contract with no outstanding claims that would remain to face litigation and uncertain the final project cost.

2.12. Dispute Resolution A dispute occurs when the parties to a contract cannot agree on the interpretation of contractual conditions. A claim may be submitted by either party when the dispute cannot be resolved. The goal of the project organization should be to avoid disputes and claims through a process of planning and development that results in effective contract documents and procedures. The responsibility for understanding and instituting procedures for minimizing disputes rests at all levels within the project management hierarchy. Examples of actions by GRTC/CMAR that may lead to disputes include:       

Lack of full disclosure of geotechnical information Changing plans or specifications during construction Inadequacy of bidding information Inadequate time in procurement process for bid preparation Vague or misleading requirements Conflicting or missing requirements between various contracts that require coordination Improper denial of a change request that includes a request for a time extension

Construction contracts should include procedures for responding to disputes that arise between contractors and the GRTC/CMAR. There should also be procedures that permit construction operations to proceed, if prudent, while disputes are reviewed and settled. GRTC’s legal counsel should verify that contractual documents have been well written and include specific provisions for resolving disputes in a timely manner and at the lowest administrative level possible. Procedures for dispute resolution should be clearly defined in the contract. The selection of formal dispute resolution procedures should be a function of project size and GRTC’s practices. Disputes can be avoided if anticipated problems are dealt with in the framework of contract documents. The recognition and elimination of contract elements that are vulnerable to change and misinterpretation can help stem disagreements. Clauses dealing clearly with changed conditions and quantity variations should be included in the contract document. In general, disclaimers and language that avoids responsibility should be omitted. The PMP should stress that the sections on inspections, scheduling, quality assurance and others are intended as preventive procedures for early identification of potential disputes. The PMP should also define actions to be taken to document contractor performance. In addition to contract language to mitigate disputes, other mechanisms exist to avoid disputes. One example is the requirement for Escrowed Bid Documents (e.g., Schedule of Values) from construction bidders, which allows GRTC/CMAR to have detailed pricing backup by contractors should a dispute arise. This can provide the grantee with the presumptions and calculations supporting the contractor’s bid that could be used to negotiate a change order or claim if there is disagreement. It can often work to the advantage of a contractor if there is an error or discrepancy in the bid calculations.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

15

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

2.13. Project Close-Out The process for project closeout needs to be established in the construction contract documents. It should mandate that all contractor requirements are accomplished in compliance with contract specifications and include items such as, but not limited to:     

Operating and maintenance documentation (manuals) and training Completion of punch list items Final inspection by GRTC/CMAR and A&E Consultant Warrantees and guarantees Record plans or as-built drawings; an interim step is “beneficial occupancy” where GRTC/CMAR accepts only part of the total contracted facilities, systems, or equipment.

This often occurs prior to project completion to give GRTC/CMAR the opportunity to do force account work and to initiate pre-revenue service. It is important to clearly define who has responsibility for O&M, safety, and security at this stage. “Substantial completion” refers to the entire contracted work product being accepted for use. This term is also used when GRTC/CMAR accepts a portion of the work where only minor punch list work remains. The terms guaranty (guarantee) and warranty are commonly used interchangeably to describe the responsibility of a manufacturer after delivery of a product and to describe the responsibility of a contractor after completion of construction. Though frequently misused in business, the law has assigned slightly different meanings to the terms. Legally, a guaranty is a separate contract by a third party (analogous to a surety bond), that assumes responsibility in case the principal fails to perform. A warranty is assurance by the principal that it will assume stipulated responsibilities for completed portions of the project. Thus, a manufacturer warrants its material, while the construction contractor provides a third party guaranty for those materials and a warranty for its own workmanship in installing them.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

16

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

3. Commissioning Approach 3.1. Introduction Project Commissioning refers to the final testing, start up, and acceptance of the project. This section describes some of the issues that need to be addressed with the design and construction of the project so that commissioning, testing, and acceptance of the project is accomplished properly to minimize delays, incompatibilities, and conflicts. This document is not intended to provide a comprehensive discussion on these issues, but to review major topics that should be considered by GRTC during design and construction phases of the project. Although testing and start-up is the bridge between construction and revenue service, planning for each should begin during design. The requirements for system, performance, and integration testing, as-built drawings, O&M manuals, training, rules and procedures, acceptance, and warranty requirements should be specified in the contracts. The contractor’s responsibilities and participation requirements during testing and start-up need to be clearly described in the contract. This phase may overlap with the procurement and construction phases that are designed to open in segments; since component, subsystem, and installation verification tests are performed while construction continues on other segments.

3.2. Test Planning An element of the PMP is test program planning. Planning should:  Assure that all contractually required tests are fully specified in the contract documents, including identification of those that should be witnessed by the agency  Clearly identify any contractor role in developing the System Integration Test Plan (SITP) and test procedures  Establish the management of and process for conducting, monitoring, and coordinating the test program  Define the test prerequisites and test objectives  Define the System Integration Test (SIT) organization and specify its authority and responsibilities  Describe the administrative requirements of the test program The SITP should be developed so that management and technical resources are applied in a coherent and organized manner to achieve the testing objectives. If there is overlap between the construction and testing phases and if it is intended that contractor personnel, under both include language supervision of agency test managers (such as City of Richmond or Henrico County), are to perform any SIT activities, the SITP and the contract specifications should define the contractor’s support role in SIT. The test plan should include the following elements: 





Identification and definition of contractual test requirements – Contract specifications should define those tests needed to prove that equipment and constructed elements meet design and performance requirements. These are contractual tests done during the construction phase that should be successfully completed prior to safety and security certification of construction or system acceptance. These are prerequisite to SITs done during the testing and start-up phase. Identification of system integration tests – SITs should be performed after contractually required tests are completed on all elements requiring integration for safe and secure operation. The SITP should identify all planned SITs to be performed so that necessary compatibility can be achieved among all elements of the new system and the existing system. Establishment of a test program administration system – The SITP should identify the organization that will identify the required SITs, establish pre-requisite requirements, develop the test procedures, schedule and conduct the SITs, complete the test reports, establish documentation requirements, and maintain the test documentation. A test numbering system should be established to assist in the administration and retrieval of testing documents.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

17

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan



Development of testing sequence and schedules – A test schedule should be included in the SITP and coordinated with the overall project schedule. The initial test schedule, developed when planning SIT during design, should be updated regularly during the construction/procurement and testing and start-up phases of the project. A System Integration Test Committee (SITC), or similar test management team, should be initially identified in the project’s Safety and Security Management Plan (SSMP), and then detailed in the SITP. The SITC, or similar group, should manage the test program. A designated GRTC manager should chair the SITC. Each SIT should be performed by a test engineer (either the SITC Chair or reporting to the Chair), assisted as appropriate by CMAR, contractor, A&E consultant and GRTC/stakeholder staff.

Since the project will include some “agency-furnished” items, such as fare collection equipment and real-time bus arrival information, these systems components should undergo a number of testing requirements, such as Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), as well as unit testing and systems testing. Redundant number of testing, by each responsible party, will minimize failures during the final acceptance phase. In addition, it is suggested that representatives of the furnishing equipment be present during installation and testing to observe all issues and make the necessary adjustment for systems acceptance. 3.2.1. TESTING REQUIREMENTS Contractually required testing should begin during the construction and procurement phases and continue through the end of construction. On projects that are completed in segments, the testing and start-up phase may be active in a segment that has completed construction and all contractually required tests, while construction and contractually required testing is ongoing in other segments. All contractually required testing should be completed in a segment before that segment can enter the testing and start-up phase. Contractually required tests are in the following categories: 

 

Qualification Tests – The contractor at the component and subsystem levels should conduct qualification tests and analysis in the factory design during contractor engineering to demonstrate compliance to the specifications. Production Verification Tests – The contractor at the component and subsystem levels conducts production verification tests during production in the shop to enable products to perform in accordance with design. Construction Inspection Tests – The contractor at the component and subsystem levels conducts construction inspection tests in the field to verify that products are installed and performed in accordance with design.   

Installation and Verification Tests – The contractor at the subsystem level conducts installation and verification tests to verify proper installation. Acceptance Tests – GRTC or A&E consultant representative’s conduct acceptance tests at the system level to verify that all delivered and installed equipment performs as specified. Demonstration Tests (Post Construction) – GRTC, the A&E Consultant, or the contractor conduct demonstration tests to demonstrate the performance and reliability of the system equipment in the testing and start-up and revenue service phases. An Incident Evaluation Committee, or similar identified group, chaired by the test engineer, evaluates the relevance of all failures during the demonstration test program (which may extend months into operations) and identifies corrective action to be taken where and when necessary.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

18

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Contractors should be required to prepare plans and procedures for tests they are contractually responsible for performing. The contractor should be required to submit the test plans and procedures for review and approval. A GRTC/CMAR representative should perform a thorough review of the test plans and indicate whether they are acceptable before authorizing the contractor to proceed with testing. The contractor should be required to prepare test results and reports for review by GRTC representatives. The GRTC representative’s review should result in providing the contractor with written approval or rejection of the tested component or subsystem. GRTC representatives should develop plans, procedures, and reports for acceptance and demonstration tests. Tests should be scheduled, conducted, and documented in accordance with the approved schedules, plans, and procedures and should be monitored by grantee representatives. Formal reports on the status of the test program should be issued not less than monthly to project management. Requirements for testing of materials should be defined in the construction contract for both construction materials and materials used in the fabrication of equipment. In addition, testing of products for which fabricators submit material certificates or certificates of compliance should be conducted on a random basis or when the validity of the materials, products, or documentation is questionable. Contract-specific inspection and test plans should identify the products or materials that require testing.

3.3. Systems Integration Testing SIT immediately follows “substantial completion” of construction and should be conducted upon completion of the contractually required acceptance tests to demonstrate the ability of various subsystems and facilities to work together as a system and for the new system to function with an existing system. GRTC's staff should perform the SIT with support, as required, from consultants. Each SIT should be documented in a formal report prepared by the GRTC test engineer(s) who conducted the test. The Safety and Security Certification Committee (SSCC) should review and sign acceptance of all SIT procedures for elements that affect system safety or security so that identified hazards and vulnerabilities have been controlled or eliminated. Contract and procurement documents should contain language to require equipment suppliers to participate in tests of their equipment so that problems can be expeditiously identified and corrected. Equipment changes resulting from systems testing should be subjected to the configuration management procedures defined for the project. 3.3.1. OPERATIONAL TESTING Many SITs are required to interface bus operation with constructed and installed systems. These SITs are performed after the individual constructed elements and systems are tested for safety purposes.  



Transit Signal Priority tests – verification that signals operate as expected in every possible situation and that sight distance for operators is adequate Fare collection system test – verification that devices operate as expected and collect and record fares properly; device placement should be conducive to safety and security for patrons and for staff or others who service the equipment Tests of emergency equipment and systems – verification that specified emergency telephone service, surveillance system, fire detection, and lighting are installed and properly operating

3.4. Organizational Procedural Changes GRTC should establish an organization to perform or oversee the management, operations, maintenance, and supporting functions required for the operation of the BRT project. If housed in the same organization responsible for implementing the project, a transition will be required from the organization used to direct and oversee the project development to a more operations-oriented organization. Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

19

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

3.5. Manuals and Operational Procedures GRTC should develop or modify O&M procedures and rulebooks to address all areas affected by the BRT project. These O&M manuals, procedures, and rulebooks should be developed under management and be approved by appropriate O&M managers. These documents should then be safety and security certified by the SSCC before being turned over to the operating organization at completion of the testing and start-up phase. All procedures, rulebooks, and manuals should be living documents that will be revised to incorporate all lessons learned from startup, as well as those learned during continuing operation.

3.6. Training Plans for a comprehensive training program for all O&M personnel should be integrated with the personnel recruitment plan. Training may be supplied by contractors, the agency, or by both. Training should begin in the late construction phase and be completed during the start-up period. A major aspect of pre-revenue operations is the hands-on training of all O&M personnel. Maintenance training should be provided for the following areas:     

Vehicle maintenance Fare collection systems Real-time bus arrival system Normal and emergency communications systems, including emergency telephone system used by operators and other employees Security systems, including surveillance, recording, patron emergency telephones, parking control, and similar electronic systems

The proficiency of all employees receiving training should be tested and verified, and all training should be fully documented in each employee’s file. Employees subject to operation of new buses should receive driver training. In addition, there may be a requirement for local certification for certain categories of employees.

3.7. Pre-Revenue Operations Pre-Revenue Operations (PRO) immediately follow SIT. PRO should be designed to mimic revenue operations and maintenance activities, except that passengers will not be aboard the vehicle. It should be noted that while emergency drills are performed during SIT, many transit agencies find it valuable to repeat some drills, either fully or in reduced scope, during PRO as additional training for both agency and responder personnel. The following items may be considered in the evaluation of pre-revenue operations:           

Notification procedures (internally and to external emergency agencies such as police, fire, and emergency medical providers) Control center response Transportation supervisory response Maintenance response Emergency responder response Loss of signal and/or communications Accident investigation procedures Evacuation (in stations and along the right-of-way) Assumption of authority Command post protocols (internally and with external responders) Simulated public notification

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

20

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

3.8. Safety Consideration and Safety and Security Certification GRTC should develop programs similar to those outlined herein and in the SSMP. System Safety Program Standards (SSPS) that are governed by FTA requirements include: 

     

Transit agency preparation and implementation of a System Safety Program Plan (SSPP) and a System Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan (SEPP), which has replaced the document that was previously known as the System Security Plan Accident and incident investigation procedures Internal safety audit process Designation of an unacceptable hazardous condition, if warranted Developing and reporting on a corrective action program Safety monitoring Safety reporting

Safety and security certification of the project is required. DRPT may oversee the safety and security certification process from design through testing and start-up, and conduct a pre-revenue service assessment prior to the initiation of revenue service. DRPT may allow GRTC to self-certify the project as ready for revenue operations. In either case, a detailed Safety and Security Certification Plan should be developed and followed. Safety and security certification would be required for the following components:   

Systemwide Elements – May include the passenger vehicles, voice and data communications, CCTVs, fare collection systems, and transit signal priority system. Fixed Facilities – Include stations, yards and shops, and the control center. Equipment installed in stations or shelter is also considered part of the facility. Plans, Procedures, and Training – May include items such as emergency preparedness plans, emergency evacuation routes, security plans and procedures, training programs, rulebooks, and standard operating procedures.

During the testing and start-up phase, GRTC should oversee the management of integration tests for safety and security certification, the management of pre-revenue operations safety and security certification; verify operational readiness; conduct a final determination of project readiness; and issue the final Safety and Security Certification Verification Report. In order to influence design and to mitigate hazards, threats, and vulnerabilities, efforts towards final safety and security certification should begin early in the project development process. This effort will intensify during later phases of the project, especially during construction and testing and start-up phase. The safety and security certification process should be guided by the Safety and Security Certification Checklist and should be overseen by the Safety and Security Certification Review Committee (SSCRC). 3.8.1. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRTC should establish strong ties with emergency response agencies and develop resources to provide for mutual assistance in support of transit emergencies. This is a two-way process, just as the transit agency expects area emergency responders to be available when needed, the transit agency should be prepared to provide its resources to respond to community emergencies. Emergency preparedness requires collaboration with local emergency management groups to develop procedures and contingency plans. As part of the start-up of a new transit project, there should be specific plans developed to address the site-specific nature of the capital project.

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

21

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Prior to revenue operations, tabletop exercises and specific field drills should be performed depending on the nature and scope of the project. Especially if two drills are warranted, one should be a tabletop exercise and one an on-site drill to simulate an emergency situation. The goal of the drills is to validate the emergency coordination between emergency personnel and grantee emergency procedures. Examples of emergency readiness drills include the following simulations:  Explosive device found on the system, whether detonated or not  Fire, smoke, or other emergency condition in a station Important aspects related to an emergency drill include:  Defining the roles and responsibilities of the people involved  Having observers to critique the drill  Having a drill debriefing to obtain feedback As many employees as possible should be involved in the drill, including non-operating staff who may become involved in field situations if an actual emergency were to occur. Non-operating personnel should act the roles of injured patrons, bystanders, etc., to give them a realistic idea of what happens during a system emergency and how O&M, safety, and security personnel are expected to interact with outside agencies, patrons, bystanders, and the media. After the emergency drill is performed:  A drill summary should be produced based on a meeting attended by as many of the drill participants as possible;  The drill summary should serve as the basis for an after-action report;  Policies, procedures, training, etc., should be revised based on problems or inadequacies discovered as a result of the drill and changes should be properly recorded; and  The drill should be closed out as a certification item through safety and security certification documentation. GRTC may wish to videotape their drills to be used during after-action meetings and as a training aid, particularly for employees who did not attend the drill or were hired after the drill was conducted. Emergency drills and procedures should be contained in the SITP. They are performed during the SIT period to assure that agency and responder personnel are trained and capable of responding to an emergency should it occur during PRO. Emergency drills are certifiable items. As indicated above, they are often repeated to provide additional training during PRO.

3.9. Initial Revenue Operations Project management concerns typically end at the conclusion of the testing and start-up phase, except for the management of warrantee claims or the completion of “workarounds” and removal of restrictions that may have been put in place to allow safe and secure revenue service while some non-client elements are brought into compliance with requirements. GRTC should organize and pay close attention to the following during the revenue service phase to maintain a high level of system performance:  A continuous quality improvement or lessons learned program  A configuration management and change control process  A “state of good repair” program within the framework of the department(s) responsible for facilities and vehicle maintenance  A system capital replacement and modernization replacement fund – to obtain and install facilities, equipment, accessories, or appurtenances that are necessary to maintain the system’s capacity and performance for which each was designed and constructed/procured Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

22

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Appendix A – List of Acronyms

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

Project Integration and Commissioning Plan

Appendix A - List of Acronyms: A&E AA ADA BRT CATEX CCTV CMAR CVS DRPT EA FAT FD FTA GRTC NEPA O&M PE PMP PRO SIT SITC SITP SSCC SSCRC SSEPP SSMP SSPP SSPS TIGER TSP VA VCU VDOT VE VECP

Architectural and Engineering Alternative Analysis Americans with Disability Act Bus Rapid Transit Categorical Exclusion Closed Circuit Television Construction Manager at Risk Certified Value Specialist Department of Rail and Public Transportation Environmental Assessment Factory Acceptance Test Final Design Federal Transit Administration Greater Richmond Transit Company National Environmental Protection Act Operations and Management or Maintenance Preliminary Engineering Project Management Plan Pre-Revenue Operations Systems Integration Test Systems Integration Test Committee Systems Integration Test Plan Safety and Security Certification Committee Safety and Security Certification Review Committee System Security and Emergency Preparedness Plan Safety and Security Management Plan System Safety Program Plan System Safety Program Standards Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery Transit Signal Priority Value Analysis Virginia Commonwealth University Virginia Department of Transportation Value Engineering Value Engineering Change Proposal

Version 1.0 | January 21, 2015

A-1