(a)  Prior to procuring construction manager at-risk services, the chief purchasing officer must sign a written determination documenting the following:

(1)  That in accordance with the factors set forth in subsection (c) below, the general contractor method of construction management as provided under §?37-2-18 is not practicable for the construction of the project or will not result in the best value for the state;

(2)  That the using agency has clearly identified in writing why the use of construction management at-risk method of construction management as defined under §?37-2-7(30) is appropriate for the building project;

(3)  That the building project has an estimated construction value of five million dollars ($5,000,000) or more;

(4)  That the using agency has in place written procedures to ensure fairness in competition, evaluation, and reporting of results at every stage in the procurement process;

(5)  That the using agency has the capacity, a detailed plan, and procedures in place to effectively procure and manage construction management at-risk services for the project and has procured the services of a qualified owner’s program manager for the project, as set forth in §?37-2-7(32); and

(6)  That the using agency has a detailed, written plan with clearly identified procedures to monitor and approve all reimbursable costs for the project.

The chief purchasing officer shall file copies of the written determination with the president of the senate, the speaker of the house, the senate fiscal advisor and the house fiscal advisor no later than three (3) business days after executing the written determination.

Ask a legal question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a lawyer about your rights.

(b)  Except for subsection (d) of this section, notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, including any provision exempting any entity from the requirements of this chapter, the chief executive officer of a public corporation as defined in §?35-20-5(4), or the chief executive officer of a public agency as defined in §?37-2-7(16), prior to procuring construction manager at-risk services, shall sign a written determination documenting the following:

(1)  That in accordance with the factors set forth in subsection (c) below, the general contractor method of construction management is not practicable for the construction of the project or will not result in the best value for the public corporation or the public agency;

(2)  Why the use of construction management at-risk method of construction management is appropriate for the building project;

(3)  That the building project has an estimated construction value of five million dollars ($5,000,000) or more;

(4)  That the public corporation or public agency has in place written procedures to ensure fairness in competition, evaluation, and reporting of results at every stage in the procurement process;

(5)  That the public corporation or public agency has the capacity, a detailed plan, and procedures in place to effectively procure and manage construction management at-risk services for the project and has procured the services of a qualified owner’s program manager for the project as set forth in §?37-2-7(32); and

(6)  That there is a detailed, written plan with clearly identified procedures to monitor and approve all reimbursable costs for the project.

The chief executive officer shall file copies of the written determination with the president of the senate, the speaker of the house, the senate fiscal advisor, and the house fiscal advisor no later than three (3) business days after executing the written determination.

(c)  When evaluating the procurement of construction manager at-risk services, the factors that may be considered in determining whether the general contractor method of construction management is not practicable or will not result in the best value for the state, public corporation, or public agency shall include:

(1)  Whether specifications can be prepared that permit award on the basis of either the lowest bid or the lowest-evaluated bid price;

(2)  Whether the available sources, the time and place of performance, and other relevant circumstances exist as are appropriate for the use of competitive sealed bidding;

(3)  The complexity of the project, including the existing or proposed infrastructure or structures, required demolition or abatement, adjacency to other structures or abutters, site constraints, building systems, uniqueness of design elements, or environmental implications;

(4)  The size, scope, and estimated cost of the project;

(5)  The adequacy of available documentation regarding the existing site, buildings, or structures; abutter infrastructure, buildings, or structures; or other documentation of as-built conditions;

(6)  Phasing or logistical challenges arising out of the need to maintain existing occupancy, continue existing operations, provide phased occupancy, or achieve more favorable project financing terms;

(7)  The anticipated impact of fast-tracked design and construction on project cost or schedule;

(8)  Potential to achieve optimal minority or woman business enterprise or other subcontractor or vendor participation required in accordance with any applicable state or federal laws;

(9)  The amount and type of financing available for the project, including whether the budget is fixed and the source of funding, for example, general or special appropriation, federal assistance monies, general obligation bonds or revenue bonds;

(10)  The administration or implementation of procedures required to comply with applicable regulations or statutes; and

(11)  Mitigating the potential claims against the state arising from the inherent risks associated with factors noted in subdivisions (3) through (10) of this subsection.

(d)  The provisions of §§?37-2-27.1 through 37-2-27.5 shall not apply to highway or heavy construction projects that are procured by either the Rhode Island department of transportation, a public corporation, a public agency, or any city or town in Rhode Island.