Independent engineers have warned the JCCBI of a significant deterioration in bridge carriers. 4.7 This review focused on whether Infrastructure Canada was managing certain aspects of the new Champlain Bridge project to achieve the goal of creating a permanent bridge in a timely and cost-effective manner. Montreal, Canada Design, construction, operation and maintenance consortium signature on the Saint Lawrence Group: SNC-Lavalin; ACS; Hochtief New Champlain Bridge website: www.newchamplain.ca This was a major project change with major implications: 4.60 In addition, we found that the department did not verify whether the proposals showed that all important technical requirements were being met. The evaluation approach did not require this. In some cases, bidders have only had to demonstrate their understanding of certain technical requirements. For example, in order to avoid an extension of the acquisition period and to add costs to the bidders` proposals, the department decided to verify whether the projects met the expected 125-year lifespan requirement after the contract was awarded. No sustainability analysis was obtained prior to the selection of the successful candidate, i.e. an analysis to determine the likely lifespan of the structure or its individual components. Without obtaining sustainability results in advance, Infrastructure Canada could not know whether the proposed bridge constructions would achieve the expected lifespan before signing a contract with the successful bidder.

We found that this approach exposed the government to risks related to the successful bidder`s projects, compliance with the bridge`s sustainability requirements and its maintenance plan. 4.49 The new Champlain Bridge project was one of the few public-private partnership (P3) projects of this complexity and size ever managed by the federal government. Among other things, toll removal was expected to increase traffic by about 20%, which would increase the wear and tear of the bridge construction, resulting in increased operating and maintenance costs. [48] During the RFP phase, which lasted just 12 months, the three qualified proponents of the offer developed and presented mandatory technical proposals that contained well-defined technical plans and technical elements – including architectural requirements – and financial proposals showing recognized financial support. Numerous meetings were held with each supporter to answer their questions and two rounds of comments on draft project agreements were provided to ensure the best engagement of the industry. In October 2011, the federal government announced the construction of a new bridge to replace the Champlain Bridge, which connects the Island of Montreal to the south shore of the St. Lawrence River. [1] The existing bridge was commissioned in 1962 and rapidly deteriorated for a number of reasons. [2] According to the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG), investments “were needed to repair and maintain them.” In addition, the other four river crossings in the area would not be able to absorb the traffic that had been pushed back without major traffic jams if “a structural problem forced the closure of the bridge”. [3] Independent engineers have noted bridge degradation and structural problems. The department`s response. All right.

Infrastructure Canada entered into a business case in which it concluded that the appropriate procurement model for the new Champlain Bridge project was a design-build-finance-operate-maintain contract, a form of public-private partnership widely used in Canada and internationally for major investment projects. The conclusion was based on an analysis of the risks identified by the experts and the conduct of a noise sensitivity analysis using industry best practices.