PACT Issue Log by o262mlx9

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 35

									   Item Number                  Fix
                              Maintain
                            Development

                 Priority
                            Management
                              Support

2038              3         Development

2224              3         Development
2232              3         Development
2236              3         Development
2238              3         Development
2239              3         Development

2240              3         Development

2241              3         Development
2252              3         Development


2254              3         Development




2258              2         development




2265              2         Development


2272              3         Development
2273              3         Development
2275              3         Development
2284              3         Development
2299              3         Development

2302              2         Development
2313              2         development
2319              3         Development
2326              2         development
2330   2   development
2332   3   maintenance

2348   3   Management


2354   3   development

2369   2      WIKI
2385   2   development




2388   2   development




2393   3   development


2394   2   development


2396   2      PMT


2400   2    maintain

2402   3   development

2404   2   Management




2405   2   development
2406   2      WIKI



2408   2     Maintain
2409   3     Maintain
2410   2   Development

2411   2   Development



2412   2       Fix



2413   2       Fix


2414   2       Fix




2415   2       Fix




2416   2       Fix




2418   3     Support




2419   1       Fix

2420   3   Development
2421   3   Development
2422   1   Development
2423       1      Fix




2424       1      Fix




2425   1          Fix




2426       1      Fix

2429       1      Fix

2430       1      Fix




2431       3   Investigate




2432       3   Investigate




2433       x    Support
59     Number of Active Issues
Status Summary
    1     PMT
   16     Consider
    5     Done
    1     Needs Testing
   16     Pending
   11     Task Order
    1     Watch
    3     Working
   54     TOTAL

Updated 10-20-10

          Priority
   3                      6%
             1
          Priority
   23                     45%
             2
          Priority
   25                     49%
             3
   51     TOTAL

   2       WIKI


Issues for the PACT Management Team
 Item #   priority        type

2396         2            PMT




2417         2            PMT
           PMT
2427   2
           PMT
2428   2




           PMT




2434   2




           PMT



2435   2
                                              Comments, issues, etc.


Per Federal Stewardship Agreement CT does IQA outside State R/W Perhaps there are articles that need to be
reposive to Federal funds on the project. This issue will be discussed until the DOD and FHWA determine
what is IQA?
do not need on IQA only agreements
Do not show this article when LA is the IA for all components.
Please do not show auditing articles on IQA agreements when no federal funds are involved
Please do not show this article on IQA only since LA is Sponsor, IA and Sole funding partner
Please do not show this agreement on IQA only agreements
Please do not show this article for IQA only agreements and the LA is implementing the environmental
commitments. Where does it say who is implementing the environmental commitments other than the Permits?
Please do no show this article for IQA only agreement
modify C.b.31 and 38 by not showing 2nd sentence if LA is Sole FP and IA.
delineate what activites are considered IQA, and those that are not IQA but CT will not be billing for Also give a
list of activities that need to be performed but are not on the WBS, ie environmental permit compliance in
Construction.
Regarding the Article # 67:
"PARTNERS will implement changes to the construction contract through contract change orders (CCOs).
PARTNERS will review and concur on all CCOs over $50,000. All CCOs affecting public safety or the
preservation of property, all design and specification changes, and all major changes as defined in the
CALTRANS Construction Manual will be approved by CALTRANS in advance of the CCO work to be
performed."

VTA did not like the wording " approved". I discussed it with Rick Gifford this morning, and Rick agreed to
change the word from "approved" to "concurred". If you have questions regarding this issue, please check it with
Rick. Thank you very much. I have reviewed the Construction manual regarding this matter and all CCO's that
affect public safety, the preservation of property, change design specifications, or cause a "major" change
require that Caltrans Division of Construction "Authorize" the change and if the project involves federal funds
that the FHWA engineer also ok these cco's. GFG
Please delete the following articles when Caltrans is the implementing agency for construction activities: S.g.2,
S.i.13, S.i.17, S.i.15, S.i.16, S.i.18, S.a.15, C.b.4, C.i.10

Revisit the description of type of agencies
Header - add local agency agreement number if wanted
Remove the term "Resident Engineer" from co-ops
Development of Amendment template
Do the PARTNERS doing work need a title?
EFIS - revisions/protections needed for the initial invoice request. It needs to recognize what is actually avaiable
for invoicing and not be able to exceed that amount.
Article for Structural Rep should be added Construction Scope
Does PACT need a definition for PROJECT LIMITS?
EFIS - add ARRA TE funds
D-11 specific definition of IQA
Test NEPA articles for interaction with Scope Summary and specificity
PARTNER database updates:
- Format Partner aka to ALL CAPS
- table of Partners is titled wrong "abreviation" column lists "name" instead of "abreviation".
proposal to remove articles S.h.4, S.h.10, and S.h.11 when Local Agency is doing all RW work/CALTRANS is
doing RW IQA only
Explain why there is no signature block on PACT agreements
The funding summary should give you a choice of others in the match funds for Federal.
The following article (C.x.7):
After PARTNERS agree that all WORK is complete, COUNTY will submit a final accounting for all
OBLIGATIONS COSTs. Based on the final accounting, PARTNERS will refund or invoice as necessary in order
to satisfy the financial commitments of this agreement.
When we have multiple Proeject Components, this article does not sufficiently say if completion of Work for the
Project Component or for the entire project (Agreement)...the issue becomes amplified when dealing with
savings...
Recommend either specifying "completion of Work for agreement" or "completion of Work for each Project
Component"...


Add TMA interview and ability to PACT.


Upgrade to HotDocs Server 10
Consider the following at the next PMT Meeting: Eliminate the total funding amounts shown in Responsibilities
and say instead...PARTNERS agree to define the funding commitments for this agreement in the FUNDING
SUMMARY.
I have noticed that the last two pages (SCOPE SUMMARY and FUNDING SUMMARY) of the PACT version
10.1 still named as "PACT Version 9.1" in the bottom of the page.
Develop IQA template and rules...particularly no Funding Summary and no billing articles;

Add to Project Management Directive that PM is responsible for keeping track of latest Funding Summary;


We need to modify the Scope Summary for the PA&ED component, so that when ever NEPA is NOT part of the
Agreement, the following automatically select "N/A". (I would like to point out that all the NEPA Delegation
activities currently, and appropriately cite N/A...but we need to expand that list to include the following activities):
2.165.25.10
2.180.10.05.40
2.180.10.05.45
2.180.10.05.50
2.180.10.05.55
2.180.10.05.60
2.180.10.05.65
When you bill for actual costs, why does the following question come up? "Fifteen (15) working days prior to the
construction contract bid advertisement date CALTRANS will invoice SANBAG for an initial deposit of:_____
(This deposit represents two (2) months' estimated support costs)."




PACT contact database not displaying properly
PACT contact database should be linked to Funding Summary signature person.
PACT 10.1E must allow update option for existing files

S.i.15 remove "CALTRANS as an additional obligee…."

There is a discrepancy between the Language Library and the rtl file that PACT uses. Article (S.a.33) in the
Language Library referres to "documents" while the rtl file referres to "records" at one location and then uses the
term "documents" at the other locations. Please make the rtl consistant with the Language Library...i.e. use the
term "document"
There is ANOTHER discrepancy with Article (S.a.33) between the Language Library and the rtl file that PACT
uses. Language Library correctly states "If a PARTNER...", while the rtl file incorrectly states "If any
PARTNER...", please update the rtl file to match the Language Library.
(C.b.43) the Language Library was never updated properly to show that the "intercept" article (second
paragraph) has been removed. The rtl file is correct. Make the Language Library the same for this article.
Currently PACT has a table that lists all permits that are required for the project. However, if there are no
permits, there is no alternative...PACT simply puts an empty table in the Coop. Instead, if there are no permits,
the PACT needs to remove the table and replace it with an article that reads PARTNERS agree that there are
no permits, agreements and/or approvals necessary for PROJECT. Likewise, the article (no assigned
nomenclature) that reads "The cost of coordinating, obtaining, complying with, implementing adn if necessary
renewing and amending resource agency permits, agreements, and/or approvals is an OBLICATION cost"
needs to be removed also.
create an article identifyer...perhaps (C.f.1) for the cost article that reads: "The cost of coordinating, obtaining,
complying with, implementing adn if necessary renewing and amending resource agency permits, agreements,
and/or approvals is an OBLICATION cost".


I did an agreement in PACT this week and rec'd the article below, rather than the article described in the 9/26
PACT alert.

CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits to PARTNERS, their contractors, consultants and agents at no
cost. CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits at no cost.

Which version is correct?


In my attempt to produce a Caltrans oversight only, 100% Measure I funded PAED,PSE, R/W coop, the scope
summary automatically checked the wrong boxes, which could not be undone, and some boxes that needed to
be checked, could not be checked. PACT also required unnecssary billing information.
District Manager Role can not change ownership/edit rights for district cooperative agreements
PACT Menu, File > Exit PACT, should be Log Out on main toolbar
PACT File Management should allow import and export of answer files
User can not change status of files placed "on hold" as the selection checkbox is disabled. Selection of
checkbox should be allowed so that Edit > File Status actions can be applied to "hold" files. Also View > my
locked files - this view does not seem to change the current listing of files for users.
PACT_Suggestion: I have confirmed that selecting the Capital Funding button in the Project Development
Information page is necessary for the SFM language to be pulled into the Billing Articles...we will need to
develop some type of message in the PACT interview so that if SFM is selected (which is done in the
Construciton interview) and the Capital Funding box has not been selected, PACT instructs the user to go back
and select that box.

PACT_Suggestion: ALSO, there is a conflict in the language...when the Locals are AAA and it is selected that
Caltrans is paying for the SFM, the following language is pulled:

84. CALTRANS will make SFM available at a CALTRANS-designated location after TESTER requests SFM
and pays CALTRANS’ invoice for estimated SFM costs. (S.i.18)

This language is correct when locals are AAA and are paying for SFM, but is not correct when they are AAA and
we are paying for SFM...we need two separate articles, one when the locals are paying (as stated above) and
one when Caltran is paying..so that it reads something like this:
84. CALTRANS will make SFM available at a CALTRANS-designated location after TESTER requests SFM
and CALTRANS’ receives the SFM from the suppliers.

PACT_Suggestion: Funding Summary crashes when Partner Funding Dialog information is incomplete .

PACT_Suggestion: HQ office of R/W Local Programs requests that WBS activity 225.35 be added to the scope
summary.
PACT_Suggestion: I am doing agreements under the 10.1 PACT version but the scope summary and funding
summary read 9.1. Please fix it so it won't confuse the people who review the coops.
PACT_Suggestion: Standard "Recital" articles are as follows:

(Traditional Agmts)
The terms of this Agreement shall supersede any inconsistent terms of any prior Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) or agreement relating to WORK.

(PACT Agmts)
This agreement is separate from and does not modify or replace any other cooperative agreement or
memorandum of understanding between PARTNERS regarding PROJECT.(R.7)

Suggestion >>> Revise standard PACT language to account for any inconsistencies with prior Agreements or
MOU's?


At the beginning of each agreement we refer our self as the State of California Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) but when it comes to the definition we reefer Caltrans as The California Department of Transportation
only and we do not mention State like we do at the beginning of each agreement.


PACT_Suggestion: L.1.41 is not hidden after the articles.
of Active Issues




T Management Team
         Topic
         Consider the following at the next PMT Meeting: Eliminate the total funding amounts shown in Responsibilities
         and say instead...PARTNERS agree to define the funding commitments for this agreement in the FUNDING
         SUMMARY.
         Standard "Recital" articles are as follows:
         (Traditional Agmts)
         The terms of this Agreement shall supersede any inconsistent terms of any prior Memorandum of
         Understanding (MOU) or agreement relating to WORK.
         (PACT Agmts)
         This agreement is separate from and does not modify or replace any other cooperative agreement or
         memorandum of understanding between PARTNERS regarding PROJECT.(R.7)

         Suggestion >>> Revise standard PACT language to account for any inconsistencies with prior Agreements or
         MOU's?
PACT_Suggestion: Consitantly use figures/words for numbers. Proposal - always use numbers for ease and
consistancy.
PACT_Suggestion: Some of the websites in the agreement are in blue while otheres are not. Is there a reason
for the inconsistency?
Suggested Article to be included in all agreements with JPA(s)

In the event [LOCAL AGENCY] fail to meet all OBLIGATIONS identified against their name in the cooperative
agreement, its constituent member agencies will jointly and severally assume [LOCAL AGENCY]’s
OBLIGATIONS, rights and responsibilities and shall complete all of the remaining OBLIGATIONS, unless
[LOCAL AGENCY] joint powers agreement has assigned such duties and responsibilities to one or more
constituent members, in which case those constituent members shall succeed to the [LOCAL AGENCY]’s
OBLIGATIONS, rights and responsibilities under the agreement.


 Per Gary G. - We no longer require that base line agreements be attached to Coops. PARTNERS
acknowledge that they are responsible to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 8879.20 et al.
(Proposition 1 legislation); the governor’s Executive Order 2007-S-02-07; the California Transportation
Commission (CTC) program guidelines for the applicable program (CMIA, 99, etc.); and PROJECT scope, cost,
schedule, and benefit baseline data agreement (BASELINE AGREEMENT). BASELINE AGREEMENT is
attached and made a part of this agreement. PROJECT bond funds as identified in this agreement will not
exceed funding stated in BASELINE AGREEMENT. Changes to PROJECT funding commitments will require an
amendment to BASELINE AGREEMENT and this cooperative agreement.
              Assigned      Date                         Action                       Date
     Status
                 to       Assigned                       Result                     resolved



Watch         Mark       9/1/2009

Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)
Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)
Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)
Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)
Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)

Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)

Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)
Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)


Task Order    Mark       9/1/2009    Task Order 18 (in part)




                                     checking with D-4 on nature of this request.
pending       Mark       5/11/2009
                                     6-21-10




Task Order    Mark       4/20/2009   Task order 26


Consider      Mark       9/1/2009    investigate
Consider      Mark       9/1/2009
Consider      Mark       5/21/2009   Task Order 30
Task Order    Martin     6/25/2009   Martin working on template
Consider      Mark       2/25/2010   investigate

Consider      Mark       2/24/2010   need check process
consider      Mark       3/3/2010    dig up old article and put it back in
consider      Mark       3/24/2010   investigate
Consider      Mark       5/3/2010    add to fund type list
Consider        Gary      5/4/2010    investigate for global change
Consider        Gary      5/4/2010    investigate

working         HotDocs   5/11/2010   revise


pending         Mark      5/11/2010   investigate with RW

consider        Mark      6/21/2010   investigate
                                      check ability to add funds in the FUNDING
Needs Testing   Mark      8/12/2010
                                      PARTNER info dialog



                                      investigate the need/practice of balancing
consider        Mark      8/17/2010   the books at the end of the a component or
                                      at the end of the agreement period.




                                      Work with HQ Planning/IGR to develop a
consider        TBD       8/18/2010   template for a Traffic Mitigation Agreement
                                      template.

consider        HotDocs   8/18/2010   Software upgrade with MicroSoft Silverlight


PMT             Gary      8/25/2010   Take to October 2010 PMT meeting


pending         HotDocs   8/25/2010   check and fix if necessary
                                      this includes many issues currently on this
Consider        TBD
                                      list
working         Gary      8/25/2010   revise PM directive




working         HotDocs   9/21/2010   modify the Scope Summary
consider   Mark      9/21/2010    Provide explaination on WIKI



pending    HotDocs   9/27/2010    fix
pending    HotDocs   9/27/2010    connect
pending    HotDocs   9/6/2010     develop user choice

pending    Mark      9/14/2010    investigate


                                  Fixed on training server. Pending 10.1E
Done       Carl      10/18/2010                                             10/21/2010
                                  rollout


                                  Fixed on training server. Pending 10.1E
Done       Carl      10/18/2010                                             10/21/2010
                                  rollout

                                  Check with Gary. Can't find in language
Pending    Carl      10/18/2010
                                  library.



                                  Fixed on training server. Pending 10.1E
Done       Carl      10/18/2010                                             10/26/2010
                                  rollout




Pending    Carl      10/18/2010   Clause is C.b.25. Pending 10.1E rollout   10/28/2010




Done       Carl      10/20/2010   Confirmed w/ M.Robinson                   10/21/2010




Done       HotDocs   11/11/2010   Bug Fix assigned to HotDocs

Pending    Carl      11/18/2010   Pending Discussion with HotDocs
Pending    Carl      11/18/2010   Pending Discussion with HotDocs
Pending    HotDocs   11/11/2010   Assigned to HotDocs for Implementation
                                 Verify intended behavior with M. Robinson
Pending   Carl      11/22/2010
                                 then Discuss/Assign to HotDocs.


                                 10.1E Template modified on training server.
Pending   Carl      12/3/2010    Need to modify 10.1 template on production
                                 server and then copy to training server.




Pending   Carl      12/3/2010




Pending   HotDocs   Pending

Pending   Carl      10/14/2010   225.35 is not in the current WBS

Pending   Carl      10/14/2010   Need to Investigate




                                 Discuss w/ G. Gutierrez. Should we make
                                 this optional? Choose whether coop
Pending   Carl
                                 Supercedes or does not modify previous
                                 agreements.




Pending   Carl      12/6/2010    Discuss w/ G. Gutierrez.


                                 Can't Replicate Error. Possibly an issue with
Done      Carl      12/6/2010    users MS Word app or the problem is now
                                 corrected?
54
          Assignment Summary
             11   Carl
             10   HotDocs
             33   other




PMT       gary    8/25/2010    Take to October 2010 PMT meeting




Pending   Carl    10/28/2010   Check w/ Gary G.
Pending   Carl      11/10/2010

          Carl      11/10/2010



                                 Language is from M. Dandy. Per GG this
                                 language needs to be vetted through the
                                 Self Help Counties Coalition - which should
                                 take a couple months.


Pending   PMT        12/8/2010




Pending   Gary G.   12/10/2010
                                   Date
  Date                                                              Article
                     Initiator   Resolution     Source document                     Dialog
Received                                                            Code
                                  Needed




                                                                  C.x.6
                                                07-4811           S.a.40
                                                07-4811           S.a.31
                                                07-4811           S.a.1
                                                07-4811           C.b.31

                                                07-4811           C.b.38

                                                07-4811           C.x.6
                                                                  C.b.1,
                                                07-4843
                                                                  C.b.38

                                                07-4843




                                                04-2241           S.i.2




4/15/2009   Martin                              email 4/15/09     various     N/A


5/11/2009   Mark                                N/A               R.11.b      Partner
5/11/2009   Mark                                OCTA agreement    new         partner??
5/11/2009   Mark                                N/A               D.8, S.i.13 construction
6/25/2009   Martin               PACT 10.0      examples          template    N/A
2/24/2010   MFeenstra RCTC           ??         email 2-24-10     TBD         SCOPE SUMMARY
                                                                  various
2/24/2010   d-8                  next version                                 B&P
                                                                  B&P
3/3/2010    PACT users             7/1/10                                     Construction
3/24/2010   District                                                          co-op
5/3/2010    Gary                 next version   email                         FUNING PARTNER
5/4/2010    d-11                next version   none yet
5/4/2010    Gary                               none yet          various
                                               Gary's notes
4/23/2010   Gary                                                 n/a       Partner information
                                               4/23/10
                                                                 S.h.4
                                               Gary's notes
4/23/2010   Gary                   TBD                           S.h.10    SCOPE SUMMARY
                                               4/23/10
                                                                 S.h.11
6/1/2010    Elaine Haydu, D-4
8/12/2010   District 8          next version   suggestion form   fund type Funding Partner info




8/16/2010   Gary                next version   suggestion form   c.x.7     n/a




8/18/2010   Gary                   TBD         suggestion form   various   various


8/18/2010   Mark                  10/1/10      N/A               n/a       N/A

                                                                           Funding
8/25/2010   Gary/Martin            TBD         suggestion form   various
                                                                           Partner/summary

8/23/2010   D4                  next version   suggestion form   n/a       n/a

8/25/2010   districts              TBD         suggestion form   n/a       n/a

8/25/2010   districts           next version   suggestion form   n/a       n/a




                                                                 Scope
9/21/2010   Gary                   TBD         suggestion form           SCOPE SUMMARY
                                                                 summary
9/21/2010   District 8              TBD         suggestion form   B&P      B&P



8/23/2010   Mark                    TBD         n/a               n/a      partner information
8/23/2010   Mark                 next version   n/a               new      Partner information
9/6/2010    Mark                 next version   n/a               n/a      n/a
            district 8
9/14/2010   1484,                next version   email 9/14/10     S.i.15   n/a
            1485


10/18/2010 Gary G.               next version   suggestion form   S.a.33   n/a



10/18/2010 Gary G.               next version   suggestion form   S.a.33   n/a


10/18/2010 Gary G.               next version   suggestion form   C.b.43   n/a




10/18/2010 Gary G.               next version   suggestion form




10/18/2010 Gary G.               next version   suggestion form




10/20/2010 Trichelle Suntrapak




10/18/2010 Judy Dusenberry          asap        suggestion form   n/a      Scope Summary

11/18/2010 Carl Anderson
11/18/2010 Carl Anderson
11/11/2010 Carl Anderson          11/18/10
                                                       View > My Locked
11/22/2010 Luz Hermosillo            suggestion form
                                                       Files




12/3/2010   G. Gutierrez




12/3/2010   G. Gutierrez




12/1/2010   Judy Dusenberry   asap

10/14/2010 Paul Pham

10/14/2010 Luz Hermosillo




            Robert Lynski




12/6/2010   Luz Hermosillo




12/1/2010   Luz Hermosillo
                                                            Funding
8/25/2010   Gary/Martin   TBD   suggestion form   various
                                                            Partner/summary




10/19/2010 Bob Lynski
           Judy Dusenberry

           Judy Dusenberry




 12/7/2010 Meera Dandy       email 12/7/2010




12/10/2010 Luz Hermosillo
                 Functional unit   Completed on
                                                   Completed on     Completed on
 Field/Topic      that owns the     Production
                                                  Training Server      WIKI
                      issue           Server




12/18/2008




constrction
Scope and      Const
Cost
Intro          ?? Legal ??
Intro          OCA
construction   construction
               OCA
SCOPE
               ?? OCA ??
SUMMARY
B&P            Accounting
Construction   Construction
               OCA/Legal
               OCA
              OCA/Design
              ENV

              OCA


              RW

                               investigate
n/a           OCA/Accounting




Billing and   Accounting and
payment       OCA




template      Planning -IGR


n/a           OCA

funding
              Accounting
Partner

format        OCA

n/a           various

n/a           OCA




              OCA/DEA
               OCA Accounting



n/a            OCA
n/a            OCA
n/a            OCA

Construction   Const, Legal


                                Pending 10.1E
               OCA                              yes   yes
                                upgrade


                                Pending 10.1E
               OCA                              yes   ?
                                upgrade

                                Pending 10.1E
               OCA
                                upgrade




R/W 200.xx     OCA              no              no    no
OCA   no   no   no
funding
          Accounting
Partner
                                                       Notes




Should incude other VTA specific articles.
Waiting on District to provide specific articles.
Mark will pull up some examples and confirm. 5-3-10
D-4 called 7-1-10 to say they were looking into the issue.




This is a summary of a number of issues.

Started 3/10 per request from ENV HM.
7/26/10, need to consider using RTPA and MPO in the description.
Some local agencies would like their own agreement number printed on the agreement.
D-8/RCTC suggested that a different language be used to reflect the reality of how work is actually done on
projects.
Growing need for amendment template
Marlin has asked if this is necessary to better destinguish from Implementing agency.

example is the $300,000 limit on intial deposits.
I believe there is already an article avaiable. We need to find it and re-implement it again.
Wait until this brought up again by someone.
this will be done as part of the fine tuning for EFIS. We will use Accounting's fund codes.
Gary will provide additional information from discussion with D-11
Gary has concerns. He will provide more specific information. 5-5-10.

8/3/10, Issue given to HotDocs for correction or to provide ability for OCA to manage.


9/30/10. final version provided to RW for consideration.


I believe that PACT already allows the entry of a fund type, but it might not apply to the matching funds. I can
also add funds a District or Partner would like to see in the draw down list.




Involves some restructuring of the program code.
8/17/10 sent Gary a proposed resolution.




Per Terri Pencovic: We are very excited to have an opportunity to work with Mark to update our process for
creating statewide consistency in accepting Fair Share Funds and Capital Deferment Obligations from the
development community. Our intention is to use the PACT to draft future Traffic Mitigation Agreements with both
public and private, and even tribal, parties.
Upgrade will involve brining the SCOPE SUMMARY and the FUNDING SUMMARY into the interview and many
other improvements.




This issue came up in the conversations with the districts about PACT 10.1 EFIS

This issue came up in the conversations with the districts about PACT 10.1 EFIS




Gary reports that this is vetted with DEA already.
9/30/10. PACT WBS already has a Special Action code for CHECK NEPA PARTY. It is currently not assigned to
any WBS element. Checked with HotDocs to see if it could be used for CALTRANS or N/A.
The way it is written is how Caltrans bills our local partner when we are doing work...because we bill in
advance...so it is an estimate. However, after everything is said and done, we will reimburse our local partners
any funds we charged them but didn't actually expend (in other words, we ultimately bill according to actual
costs). By law, Caltrans is not allowed to go into debt, therefore we ask for a deposit prior to doing work and then
bill according to estimated expenditures.
But the locals bill us after the actual expenses have occurred...so the language is less precise when the Locals
are billing Caltrans.




Legal added this specific language in the 3/2010 PACT update. Legal is reviewing request to remove.




Per the PACT Alert:Article C.b.41 has been removed from use per directions from HQ Traffic Operations, Office
of Encroachment Permits.

CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits to [Party A / LOCAL AGENCIES] at no cost. CALTRANS will
charge contractors, consultants, and agents the standard encroachment permit fees. (C.b.41)

The only article that will show in PACT now is:
CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits at no cost.

BUT the Language Library and Templates include the language "CALTRANS will provide encroachment permits
to PARTNERS, their contractors, consultants and agents, at no cost. (C.b.40)".

								
To top