Successor RFP Structural Options · District 6 · Prepared for Board Review
Three structural options are presented for the successor fiber maintenance contract on the US-33 Smart Mobility Corridor. Each reflects a different balance of cost, quality control, ODOT operational burden, and risk. Pricing has been intentionally omitted to preserve bid integrity. The board is asked to select a preferred contract structure, which will then shape the successor RFP specifications.
The following changes are recommended regardless of which structural option the board selects. Each item identifies what the current contract (Inv. 513-23) requires and what the successor RFP should propose instead.
The current contract assesses damages at $1,000/hour over the 4-hour restoration window and $200/day over the 14-day permanent repair window, with no ceiling on total liability per event. These uncapped amounts create significant open-ended financial exposure that contractors price into their monthly fee as a risk buffer. A per-event cap preserves accountability while producing more competitive bid pricing. Note: the current contract does contain two limited exceptions — ODOT-caused delays (§25B) and force majeure conditions (§28) — but both require ODOT approval and provide no dollar limit.
$1,000/hour over 4-hour restoration window; $200/day over 14-day permanent repair window. No per-event cap. Waiver requires written request and ODOT approval — evaluated after the fact.
Hard cap per discrete outage event (suggested: $5,000/event total). Preserves the performance incentive without unlimited financial exposure. Pairs with tiered response windows and excusable delay provisions below.
The current contract applies a single response standard to all outage events regardless of severity, damage scope, or site conditions. Replacing uniform windows with severity-based tiers more accurately reflects real-world conditions while maintaining accountability where it matters most.
Uniform standard for all events: 2-hour on-site response, 4-hour priority restoration, 14-day permanent repair. Single waiver process applied regardless of outage type or cause.
Three-tier response framework based on outage severity and complexity. Aggressive windows preserved for straightforward repairs; extended windows for complex damage scenarios. See proposed language below.
| Tier | Outage Type | On-Site Response | Temporary Restoration | Permanent Repair |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Standard | Single circuit or splice-point accessible without excavation | 2 hours | 4 hours | 14 days |
| 2 Complex | Multi-circuit outage or conduit damage requiring excavation, traffic control, or utility coordination | 2 hours | 8 hours | 21 days |
| 3 Catastrophic | Major physical damage (vehicle strike, significant excavation hit, or full conduit section loss) | 2 hours | 12 hours | 28 days |
"All response and restoration windows are contingent upon the Contractor having safe and unobstructed access to the damage site. Windows shall be tolled for any period during which site conditions, highway closures, active emergency operations, law enforcement restrictions, or other factors outside the Contractor's control prevent safe access or safe execution of work. The Contractor shall document and notify DriveOhio of any such condition within two (2) hours of identifying it."
"Upon arrival at the outage site, the Contractor shall assess the nature and scope of the disruption and notify DriveOhio in writing of the applicable tier classification within one (1) hour of on-site arrival. DriveOhio shall confirm or adjust the tier designation within two (2) hours of receipt. Liquidated damages, if assessed, shall be calculated based on the restoration window applicable to the confirmed tier."
Even with tiered response windows, some outage scenarios involve conditions genuinely outside the contractor's control. The current contract addresses this only through a cumbersome pre-approval waiver process. The successor RFP should define specific conditions that automatically pause the LD clock, with notification required but approval not required to stop accrual.
Waiver of disincentives requires a written email request to the contract contact explaining the situation and receiving approval before the clock is paused. No defined list of qualifying conditions.
Defined list of excusable delay conditions that automatically toll the restoration clock upon written notification to DriveOhio. Approval not required to pause accrual — only notification within a defined window.
"Liquidated damages shall not accrue, and restoration windows shall be tolled, during any period in which restoration progress is delayed due to conditions beyond the Contractor's reasonable control, including but not limited to: (a) active highway closure restrictions or traffic control requirements that prevent safe access to the damage site; (b) fault location complexity on routes requiring OTDR isolation across multiple segments where the precise damage location cannot be determined without exhaustive testing; (c) third-party utility conflicts requiring Ohio 811 coordination or emergency utility holds prior to excavation; (d) severe weather conditions rendering the work site unsafe per applicable OSHA standards; (e) material or equipment lead times for components not held in standard Contractor inventory when the required material is not available through normal local supply channels; (f) delays caused by ODOT, DriveOhio, or other approving authority response times when written approval is required prior to proceeding; or (g) active law enforcement, emergency response, or incident command operations restricting site access.
The Contractor shall provide written notice to DriveOhio of any excusable delay condition within two (2) hours of identifying the condition, describing the specific circumstance and its anticipated duration. The LD clock shall be tolled from the time the condition arose, as documented by the Contractor, provided notice is given within the required window. Upon resolution of the excusable delay condition, the Contractor shall notify DriveOhio in writing and restoration windows shall resume. Excusable delay conditions do not waive the Contractor's obligation to make all reasonable efforts to restore service as rapidly as conditions allow."
HVAC, generators, UPS systems, fire suppression, and grounds maintenance are standard facilities management functions — not fiber operations. Removing this scope simplifies the RFP, reduces cost, and places responsibility where the expertise already exists. Note: the current contract already establishes a 15% processing fee for propane costs, which serves as precedent for the cost-plus materials model proposed below.
Full TRC building and systems maintenance included in fiber contract at ~$4,750/month (~$57,000/year)
Remove from fiber contract entirely. Transfer to ODOT Facilities team. Estimated annual savings of ~$57,000 returned to ODOT.
Fixed unit prices for materials like fiber cable, conduit, and pull boxes expose both parties to market price risk over a multi-year contract. A pass-through model with a fixed markup ensures fair, market-accurate pricing regardless of when materials are purchased — protecting ODOT when prices fall and protecting the contractor when they rise. This approach is consistent with the 15% propane processing fee already established in the current contract (Section 2.3).
Materials (fiber cable, conduit, pull boxes) billed at fixed unit prices established at contract award. Pricing can become misaligned with market conditions over a multi-year term.
Materials billed at actual invoiced cost plus a fixed markup of 15%, with supporting invoice required. Consistent with the cost-plus processing fee structure already present in the current contract.
The current contract leaves significant gray area between what is included in the monthly fee and what is billable at T&M rates. Several services performed in practice — including third-party contractor coordination, fiber allocation management, customer outage notifications, and relocation coordination — are not explicitly defined in the current contract. This creates risk for both sides and an uneven playing field for prospective bidders.
Broad scope language with many maintenance activities performed in practice that are not explicitly defined as included or billable. Gray area creates bid risk and post-award disputes.
Two explicit categories defined in the RFP: services included in the monthly fee, and services billed at T&M or unit rates. See scope table in each option tab for the proposed breakdown.
Daily drive-outs along the full corridor represent a significant labor cost that may not be proportionate to actual risk levels on a 35-mile rural route. Weekly monitoring provides adequate coverage for most conditions, with a defined escalation trigger when construction activity is identified.
Daily monitoring of the full US-33 corridor and local routes for construction activity and potential fiber conflicts
Weekly corridor monitoring as the standard cadence, with escalation to daily monitoring for any corridor segment where active construction activity has been identified within 500 feet of the fiber asset
| Option 1 — Refined Partnership | Option 2 — Tiered Response | Option 3 — On-Demand | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Emergency Response | |||
| Dedicated 24/7/365 availability | ✓ Single contractor | ◑ Primary + backup pool | ✗ No guarantee |
| Consistent workmanship on repairs | ✓ Yes — one team | ◑ Primary only; backup variable | ✗ Variable by responder |
| Response time accountability | ✓ Tiered windows + LD cap | ◑ Primary tiered; backup TBD | ✗ Difficult to enforce |
| Routine Maintenance | |||
| Corridor monitoring | ✓ Contractor (weekly) | ✓ Primary contractor (weekly) | ✗ ODOT managed |
| Third-party contractor coordination | ✓ Contractor | ✓ Primary contractor | ✗ ODOT managed |
| Fiber allocation & records mgmt | ✓ Contractor | ✓ Primary contractor | ✗ ODOT managed |
| Customer outage notifications | ✓ Contractor | ✓ Primary contractor | ✗ ODOT managed |
| Contract Structure | |||
| TRC building maintenance | Transfers to ODOT Facilities | Transfers to ODOT Facilities | Transfers to ODOT Facilities |
| Liquidated damages | Tiered windows + per-event cap | Tiered for primary; TBD backup | Difficult to structure |
| Materials pricing | Cost + 15% markup | Cost + 15% markup | Cost + 15% markup |
| Scope definition | Fully explicit | Partially explicit | T&M only |
| ODOT staff burden | Low | Moderate | High |
| Asset quality risk | Low | Moderate | High |
A single primary contractor retains full responsibility for the fiber asset with a clearly defined scope of work, all proposed contract improvements applied, and TRC building maintenance transferred to ODOT facilities. This is the recommended path — meaningful cost reduction without compromising asset quality or service continuity.
A primary contractor handles all routine maintenance and serves as first responder for emergencies. A pre-qualified pool of 2–4 secondary contractors is established as backup overflow capacity. The primary retainer is reduced because the primary is no longer solely responsible for every possible emergency scenario.
The US-33 fiber system is a well-organized, carefully documented asset. Secondary contractors entering splice cases and pull boxes without full system knowledge introduce risk of incorrect splicing, documentation gaps, and latent damage that may not surface until a future outage. The long-term cost of remediation can significantly exceed any savings on the primary retainer over the life of the contract.
No dedicated primary contractor. ODOT maintains a vetted list of qualified fiber contractors and coordinates all outage response internally. The contract shifts from a retainer-based model to pure time-and-material billing. Lowest contract retainer, but significantly higher ODOT operational burden and risk exposure on a complex, critical infrastructure asset.
The apparent savings in retainer cost must be weighed against ODOT's internal staffing costs to absorb coordination responsibilities, uncontrolled T&M billing during emergencies, and long-term asset degradation from inconsistent workmanship. For a 35-mile, 432-strand fiber system with active public and private sector service obligations, this model introduces risk that is difficult to quantify but very costly to remediate.