PROCUREMENT MODEL AND THE INDEPENDENT QUALITY ASSURANCE FIRM

Procurement model discussions and the Independent Quality Assurance Firm

In addressing the changing landscape of alternative delivery and emerging delivery models by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) and Infrastructure Ontario (IO) such as Design-BuildFinance (DBF), Alliance, and progressive public-private partnerships (P3s), it is imperative that there are appropriate contract regimes to account for the difference in risk transfer.

For recent DBF highway projects, the introduction of the Independent Quality Assurance Firm (IQAF) to be the primary party providing quality acceptance is one of the changes. The implementation of the DBF-IQAF regime on recent projects has been reviewed and discussed by a select committee in recent months.

In the new DBF-IQAF regime, the Project Company, the firm that has direct responsibility to build the infrastructure and commonly ORBA members, is responsible for including a RAQS-qualified contract administrator firm to provide quality assurance-related activities during the project’s construction phase. This additional layer of a quality team replaces those responsibilities of a traditional MTO contract administrator on a conventional Design-Bid-Build (DBB) or Design-Build (DB) project, thus ensuring the separation between quality control and quality assurance.

In creating the IQAF role, MTO wants to ensure that the Quality Assurance (QA) activity performance has been carried out separately from the Quality Control (QC) performance. This provides a higher level of confidence that quality infrastructure is handed back to MTO at the end of construction. This check and balance conducted by two separate teams, the IQAF and the Contracting Authority (MTO/IO), reinforces the regulatory rigor in quality management, achieves a higher level of performance, and mandates a quality infrastructure at the end of the DBF construction contract. Ultimately, the public’s interest is protected by constructing safe and durable infrastructure for the travelling public.

In the new model, the IQAF is considered an integrated part of the Quality Management System and will be implemented based on adherence to the Construction Administration and Inspection Task Manual (CAITM) for the full system of QC/QA. The most effective way to make sure that the Project Company has fulfilled its obligations is to conduct an independent QA activity which will reassure MTO that the execution of the project is done according to the QMS, Regulatory and Project Agreement requirements.

The use of the IQAF encourages transparent communications and sharing of inspection records/data between the Contracting Authority and the Project Company, promoting collaboration and open dialogue relating to day-to-day construction activities and quality oversight throughout construction. Another benefit is the third-party nature of the IQAF when parties need to meet on reconciling a deficiency. In traditional DBF project delivery models, ››

discussion may become positional, but having the IQAF there focuses on the quality assurance and acceptance.

While the DBF-IQAF regime has been tried only on a few recent projects such as the Highway 401 Expansion Project in Mississauga/Milton and the QEW Credit River Bridge in Mississauga, MTO and IO are both encouraged by the lessons learned to-date. It’s early on, but the intent is to keep reviewing and trying to enable further improvements into future projects when the IQAF is used. One opportunity to improve the regime is to empower the IQAF to take more decisions on quality issues. For example, in attempts to enhance the review process of material, the material engineer (who reports to the IQAF manager) may be included in the Contracting Authority’s Key Individual List to ensure their qualifications.

Additionally, the IQAF could also benefit by having a stronger voice when it comes to the decisions that require Contracting Authority or Technical Advisor inputs. That can be rectified with a detailed scope of work for the IQAF, which in addition to the construction activities, may include environmental and traffic aspects, and also, if prescribed, in the Project Agreement. Adding roles and responsibilities in the Project Agreements, as well as better defining the working relationships between IQAF, Project Company, MTO and IO, would enhance the spirit of the “public-private partnership.” Another potential improvement to the newly adopted regime is to increase the regularity of IQAF meetings and communications with the MTO, IO and the Technical Advisor so that all work collaboratively to deliver the project.

The Contracting Authorities, MTO and IO are satisfied that there have been improvements already realized with the adoption of an IQAF to successful construction of highway infrastructure projects. All contractual parties look forward to continuing the focus on improving quality, especially now as a new wave of highway infrastructure building is ahead of us in Ontario. Please feel free to reach out to any of the contributors listed below for further details.

With contributions by Habib Galian (Amico, West Corridor Constructors), Kelvin Chiu (Infrastructure Ontario), Jeremy Landry (Ontario Ministry of Transportation), Sammy Lee (Altus), Loui Pappas/Allan Fraser (Morrison Hershfield Limited).