Project Delivery Method Performance Evaluation for Water and Wastewater Capital Projects

Document
Description

The water and wastewater industry in the United States is in dire need of renovation due to dwindling infrastructure and requires substantial reinvestment. Design-bid-build (DBB) is the traditional method of project delivery most widely applied in this industry. However, alternative

The water and wastewater industry in the United States is in dire need of renovation due to dwindling infrastructure and requires substantial reinvestment. Design-bid-build (DBB) is the traditional method of project delivery most widely applied in this industry. However, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) are on the rise and touting the benefits of reduced project schedule and cost. The main purpose of this study is to conduct a qualitative and quantitative performance evaluation to assess the current impact of APDM in the water and wastewater industry. A national survey was conducted targeting completed water and wastewater treatment plant projects. Responses were obtained from 75 utilities and constructors that either completed their projects using DBB, construction manager at risk (CMAR), or design-build (DB). Data analysis revealed that CMAR and DB statistically outperformed DBB in terms of project speed and intensity. Performance metrics such as cost growth, schedule growth, unit cost, factors influencing project delivery method selection, scope changes, warranty and latent defects, and several others are also evaluated. The main contribution of this study was that it was able to show that for the same project cost, water and wastewater treatment plants could be delivered under a faster schedule and with higher quality through the utilization of APDM.