1. business and industrial
2. business operations
3. management
4. project management

Rail Corridor IV: SOP-T Projects
Rebuilding for 160 km/h
Brief Overview of JASPERS Technical Assistance
to PMUs of CFR
JASPERS Framework Consultant ‘Arup’
Richard H Brown CEng FICE (UK)
Team Leader, Practical Consultations and
On-the Spot Support to PMUs of CFR, Romania
Oradea, 15 November 2013
2
JASPERS Technical Assistance (TA) to CFR
Our Role: Practical Consultations and On-the-Spot Support to PMUs of CFR.
JASPERS Project Team: Team Leader and Site Engineer (+ Backup).
Team Leader is embedded within HQ CFR. Site Engineer is embedded on Site.
We are: Advisors, Mentors, Influencers, Catalysts and sometimes Change Agents.
The main objective of our Technical Assistance:
To assist CFR (particularly the PMUs of CFR) in structuring efficient internal
working procedures thus contributing to improved implementation of SOP-T
projects and strengthening institutional capacities of CFR.
Envisaged Duration: April 2013 – April 2014.
3
Team Focus
Working Alongside:

CFR FIDIC Engineer and Supervision Teams - training &
mentoring (pending award of external supervision
contracts).

PMUs & DDGEP - reviewing & mentoring within project
implementation (feasibility through design & programme to
construction) - especially identification of
gaps/deficiencies, need for PMU restructuring and
improvement & standardisation of PMU services.
Key Output:

Development of ‘Practical Guidelines for Project
Implementation’ (Design through Construction), for general
use on SOP-T Projects throughout CFR.
4
Corridor IV, Sighisoara - Simeria:
The Main Focus of TA
Almost a total rebuild of rail infrastructure (171 route km)
Five Works Contracts - four awarded, one contested
One Signalling/ERTMS Contract - contested (Alstom v Thales)
One Supervision Contract (FIDIC) - contested
Works and Signalling:
Linked Physically
Unlinked Contractually
Total Value of Contracts: €1.00 billion (works) + €0.12 billion (signalling)
Works Contracts: 2.5 - 3.0 year programmes
FIDIC ‘Red Book’ for Works Contracts
FIDIC ‘Yellow Book’ for Signalling Contract
5
Current Statistics
Contract
Contractor JV
Amount
Contracted
Contract
Period
Elapsed
Physical
Progress
Planned as at
31.10.13
Physical
Progress
Actual as
at 31.10.13
Time
Overruns
(estimates)
Current
Eligible
VOs
(unpaid)
Cost
Overruns
Sighisoara - Atel
FCC1
RON 873M
57%
67%
21%
1.5 years
€6M
Very likely
Atel - Micasasa
FCC2
RON 747M
46%
25%*
14%
1.0 years
€3M
Very likely
Micasasa Coslariu
Coslariu - Vintu
de Jos
AKTOR
RON 722M
50%
53%
27%
1.0 years
€4M
Very likely
PIZZAROTTI
RON 767M
75%
49%*
21%
1.5 years
€2M
Very likely
Vintu de Jos Simeria
Contested /
Retendered
0%
Very late
Signalling /
ERTMS
Contested
0%
Very late
Works
Supervision
Contested /
Retendered
0%
Very late
RON 500M
(estimate)
6
Main Issues











Lack of Equitable Commitment between MT and CFR at Project Initiation (a major inter-institutional
failure)
Failure to Consider Implementation Options and Associated Risks & Contingencies
Failure to Acquire Land Ahead of Commencement of Contracts
Failure to Conduct Adequate Geotechnical Site Investigations
Failure to Identify Major Elements of Work
Failed Procurement of One Works Contract
Failed Procurement of Signalling/ERTMS Contract
Failed Procurement of Works Supervision Contract
Main Designer Unpaid
Eligible VOs / Additional Works Blocked
Capacity Deficits within CFR:
Reactive Corporate Leadership
Departmental Entrenchment
‘Boxed’ thinking throughout EPS
‘Lite’ PMUs: Staffing Ratios, Profiles (qualifications & experiences), Motivation (salaries)
Inexperience in FIDIC Supervision
Potentially, No Signalling for the Foreseeable Future after Tracks are Switched**
7
The Response
What Are We (TA) Doing?
Monitoring
Activities and Procedures on Site and at CFR HQ
Training & Mentoring of CFR FIDIC Supervision Staff
Advising on Proposed Restructuring of Corridor IV PMUs
Developing the ‘Core Team’ Concept (through RWG)
Facilitating Topical Workshops
Preparing ‘Practical Guidelines’
Short-Term Expert Advice on Key Ad-Hoc Issues (FIDIC & Tunnel Design)
Reviewing Implementation Plans for Simeria – Km614
What Can MA and CFR Do?
proactively together to address all the issues - See through the ‘Barriers’, not hide
behind them. Form a joint creative (‘no blame’) Working Group. Ask JASPERS to help!
Assign appropriate staff to PMUs (numbers of positions)
Make use of ‘financial stimulation’ SOP-T funds already allocated under each project
budget to enhance the conditions for attracting, maintaining and motivating good quality
staff
Work
8
Transferring Key Lessons Learned to ‘Simeria - Km614’
Item
Sighisoara - Simeria
Simeria – Km614
1.
Track Capacity
Overprovision of recess loops and crossovers:
Too late to re-specify.
Overprovision of recess loops and
crossovers: These could be re-specified but
might compound delays in project
commencement.
2.
Project ‘Commitment’
Absent. Pressure from MT to curtail project
preparation was intense with adverse
consequences for Implementation. No agreed
arrangements for adequate project staffing. MT
and CFR only interested in ‘outputs’ not
‘outcomes’.
Appears to be absent. No guarantees that all
aspects of project preparation will be
complete prior to award of construction
contracts. No agreed arrangements for
adequate project staffing. MT and CFR only
interested in ‘outputs’ not ‘outcomes’.
3.
Project Risks
Either not assessed or inadequately assessed.
Options and contingencies not identified. Huge
downstream consequences.
Some improvements but in covering for
previous inadequacies rather than analysing
key options and making optimal selections.
4.
Project Procurement
Separate contracts for civil works and signalling
works and then subsequent delays in awarding the
signalling contract have led to an almost
unworkable train timetable.
Each contractor on each section of route will
take full responsibility for civil works and
signalling works – this should insure against
misalignment in completion. It will however,
require superior project management by CFR
to oversee highly complex technical
interfaces.
9
Conclusion
Parting Thoughts:
Upgrading an existing railway is more complex and carries heavier risks
than building anew.
Attempting to do this on a large scale without an alternative operational
plan is asking for trouble.
Upgrading Simeria – Km614 the same way (and now potentially at the
same time) will just compound problems – a snowballing effect may
eventuate.
Recommendations:
Actions are urgently needed to build/strengthen CFR’s institutional
capacities to manage SOP-T projects, with motivation through eligible
funds - leverage from the EC could be very helpful.
MA and CFR should undertake a proper assessment of options on all
future projects (including Simeria – Km614) with the aim of developing
plans that mitigate principal risks both to the projects and to CFR.
10
END
DISCUSSION
11