2005.08.26
Raytheon HTMS, which has
been successful in getting cutting edge toll systems
internationally but to date only picked up crumbs in
the US, has finally got a big one here - Texas. At
least it sounds big. The Raytheon proposal is not
public and TXdOT won't release more on the contract
until it is finalized - in about a month they hope.
Texas Transportation
Commission and TxDOT this week formally approved
selection of Raytheon as prime contractor to, they
said, develop, build, and maintain the state's new
open road toll systems statewide, once a detailed
contract is successfully negotiated.
Raytheon's strong
credentials
Raytheon built the
world's first open road tolling system on a
multi-interchange roadway on 407ETR tollroad in
Toronto Ontario and later installed a similar system
in Israel on the Trans Israel Highway (H6) tollroad.
Their only project of note in the US has been the
rather small system on I-394 HOT lanes in
Minneapolis.
407ETR had problems at
startup due to confusions over sizing of the central
processors and ongoing problems from the costs and
complexities of video tolling and collecting mailed
toll bills, but the current concessionaire operator
feels the system has the flexibility to work through
and around these, and their uncollectibles have been
steadily beaten down. They feel the basic system is
solid. There have been few complaints from Israel,
and none from Minneapolis that we've picked up. The
system there indeed is praised as having worked
flawlessly from the beginning.
The Texas contract is
open-ended in size. The scale of Texas open road
toll work is uncertain depending mostly on how the
toll versus anti-toll fights in that state unfold,
and also depending on how successful TxDOT is in
enforcing standardization.
TxDOT spokesman Gabby
Garcia actually calls it a "zero dollar" contract
because nothing is guaranteed. It has also been
called an "Indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity"
(IDIQ) contract.
The RFP we recall - we
read it but foolishly did not save it, and it is no
longer a public document - asked for pricing on a
set of nominal or illustrative tolling points
ranging from simple one lane ramps up through 4 or 5
lanes mainline along with some on surface arterial
tolling configurations. There are to be three pilot
systems testing the various configurations.
Raytheon say in a press
release they will subcontract work to two local
firms Arcadis and Zachary.
Standardization of new
systems the objective
The rationale for the
contract with Raytheon is to gain some
standardization in design of new open road toll
installations.
A presentation on the
procurement given at industry conferences calls it a
design, build, install and maintain project
suggesting operations may be conducted separately,
either by TxDOT or another contractor.
It involves:
Notably missing is all
the ORT gear - the readers, antennas, lane
controllers, cameras, vehicle detectors to fit out
the gantries and the cabinets. That presumably will
be contracted separately. Also there is no cash toll
systems or customer service center element to the
project. And there is no violations system. No
mention of vehicle classification either. And no
transponders.
Rather than a fully
outfitted ORT setup it only seems to provide for
general ORT system design and the bare-bones
infrastructure apparently with fit-out done
separately (see project description slide at left).
Perhaps the plan is to use Raytheon as merely a
consultant and project manager with the real
roadside electronics provided separately.
Raytheon 407ETR system
unlikely to be used
Raytheon's open road
toll system equipment is most unlikely to be
deployed in Texas. It is based on a high powered
longrange active transponder (ATSMv6). When 407ETR
opened a problem was that the system had such power
and range transponders at one ramp could
occasionally be read at other ramps, even by some
accounts at an adjacent interchange. It had to be
downpowered to avoid such cross reads.
Raytheon's proprietary
tracking system depends heavily on the range and
power that comes with an active system. (E-ZPass is
another active system, as will be the 5.9GHz WAVE.)
Texas only has
shortrange passive transponders, mostly 1990 vintage
Amtech ARA tags. TxDOT are looking at the eGo
sticker tags, another passive system from TransCore.
By all accounts the ARA tags have been made to work
very nicely in an ORT environment on NTTA and HCTRA
tollroads in Dallas and Houston, but not by Raytheon
- by Electronic Transactions Consultants (ETC).
Similarly, the sticker tags are being developed for
the ORT environment by TransCore.
102 tollroads worth
$10.7b
One part of the TxDOT
presentation suggests a massive quantity of work by
citing 102 potential projects involving $10.7b. On
the basis that ORT systems will cost 3% or 4% of the
total cost - that's $320m to $430m worth of toll
systems work. Trouble is the present contract is
limited to 5 years of procurement, and it is
stretching credulity to think anything like $10.7b
of tollroads will be built in five years. Toll
systems come at the end of construction of a road,
too.
There is provision for
maintenance for the life of the system put at 5 to
10 years.
Does statewide exclude
the two biggest metro areas?
The project is termed a
"TxDOT Statewide Open Road Toll Collection System."
There is some sensitivity about the statewide
moniker. Does it cover the existing two big metro
area toll systems on established tollroad networks
in Dallas (North Texas Tollway Authority) and
Houston (Harris County Toll Road Authority)? They
already operate open road tolling down the center of
their 20 or so toll mainline plazas. Houston also
has the distinction of operating America's first
no-cash ORT on the Westpark Tollway. If the TXDOT
project doesn't propose encroaching on NTTA and
HCTRA then it is far from being a statewide system.
It's just TxDOT hype. However if it does propose to
eventually encompass the state's two largest metro
areas' pikes toll systems in order to truly be
statewide, then a large turf battle looms.
Not much enthusiasm for
this job
Raytheon was selected in
a strange contest. Two other companies were
shortlisted and asked to submit proposals:
Jacobs are a substantial
engineering firm with offices all over America and
some internationally, but they have never to our
knowledge bid for any toll systems work to date.
They brought in TransCore as a sub for the Texas
bid, an odd situation because TransCore when they
are serious about getting work bid as a prime.
In any case the Jacobs
proposal with TransCore tagging along was deemed
"Incomplete" by TxDOT and was never evaluated by the
TXDOT rating team.
As for Traffic Control
Devices, they are a small group that does ITS work
highway communications lines and switching and
variable message signs - mostly in Florida with an
office in Houston. They have never made a bid to do
a complete toll system, or even been accepted as
qualified to bid to our knowledge, and although they
were qualified by TxDOT, they decided not to submit
a proposal.
So Raytheon was the only
serious bidder.
TxDOT spokesman Gabby
Garcia insists it was nevertheless a competitive
process and that Raytheon did not know when
submitting its bid that it was the only bidder that
would be eligible to be rated.
The other heavies that
might have been expected to bid are:
None of these will speak
on the record about why they wouldn't bid but there
appear to be a mixture of reasons. UTS is very
heavily committed on the TX130 project. ACS seem to
be concentrating most heavily on the back end - the
customer service center - and CSC work is excluded
from the Texas statewide ORT contract. ETC, a
homegrown Texas group which produced the latest
Houston and Dallas area toll systems might have been
expected to bid though they are heavily committed to
the Illinois Tollway upgrade they won from TransCore.
Tricky TxDOT
Another factor in the
lack of serious competition with Raytheon involves
TxDOT's highly unquantified and non-commital style
of contracting. The rule in reading TxDOT documents
or presentations is that there is invariably far
less substance than meets the eye, and that titles
and general descriptive terms should be treated as
hype! Despite the grand terminology of
'comprehensive development agreement' TxDOT
contracts often seem to guarantee very little real
work, rather merely express a commitment to work
toward developing future contracts which may or may
not have substance, and which may or may not be
recompeted. With so little tangible work guaranteed,
the regulars, apart from Raytheon, apparently saw
little point in making the effort to compete in this
one. It sounds like a big deal but the more you look
at it the more you think: well maybe it could be
big, but then again it could be just a trivial
consulting job. With tricky TxDOT you just can't
tell.
An honest title for this
project would be "Open Road Toll Design Consulting
with Possible Follow-on Work".
SUMMARY: Raytheon should
be able to do a perfectly good job of ORT design for
TxDOT based on their good ORT record in Canada and
Israel, and the resources that great Boston MA
company can mobilize. But there is something deeply
flawed in a contracting process for a supposedly big
deal statewide design project that doesn't attract
serious competing bids from one or two of the other
companies that have successfully implemented ORT
many places in the US - TransCore, ETC, InTranS, and
UTS - or from Autostrade or Kapsch who have done
beautiful work too in Austria, Chile and Australia.
It's like shopping for cars and finding only one
dealer out of six in town will do business with you.
TOLLROADSnews 2005-08-26
ADDITION: We've learned
another factor in the failure of any 'heavy' other
than Raytheon to bid was the $50m minimum
performance bond required by TxDOT for this project.
Performance bonds of this size become a substantial
cost of doing business. That can be justified if the
scope of the work is reasonably clear - if there
really is followup work to the consulting exercise -
but here with TxDOT so unwilling to make a
commitment on that score the performance bond killed
several potential bids.
TOLLROADSnews 2005-08-30
