Utilities now have a wider selection of project delivery methods to select from based on their project's unique characteristics and constraints. The objective of this paper is to study alternative project delivery methods (APDM) implementation practices for water infrastructure projects by assessing the state of practice during procurement and execution. Two of the most commonly used APDM, construction management at risk (CMAR) and design-build (DB), are evaluated alongside the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method. A survey was developed, based on an extensive literature review and support of an industry expert workshop, and collected information from 75 recently completed water and wastewater treatment plant projects. Key findings revealed in this study specific to APDM water infrastructure delivery include (1) guaranteed maximum price (GMP) is the preferred compensation type; (2) qualifications-based is the preferred procurement method; (3) expedited schedule is the highest selection factor; (4) water stakeholders statistically have the lowest comfort level using CMAR; (5) owner involvement in design is lowest for DB projects; and (6) DBB and APDM have similar procurement durations for water infrastructure projects. This paper contributes to the existing body of knowledge by presenting evidence-based APDM implementation practices that will support utilities with the delivery of their water infrastructure projects.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Journal||Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction|
|State||Published - Aug 1 2020|
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Civil and Structural Engineering
- Building and Construction
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)