Development of Guidance for Establishing Effective and Efficient Timelines and Incentives/Disincentives for Accelerated Bridge Construction Projects.
State DOTs operate under great expectations to
minimize impact to the traveling public and commerce that result from
construction activities. Given the
operational needs of DOTs, project timelines have become more compressed and prescriptive
in terms of when and how long they occur.
State DOT’s often use contractual provisions and
methods to achieve project schedule goals.
The use of incentives/disincentives (I/D), payment for acceleration, liquidated
damages (LQD), and cost-plus time (A+B) procurement have been used for
conventional construction projects to promote meeting project schedule targets.
In addition to contractual provisions and methods, a new generation of
construction techniques in the form of accelerated bridge construction (ABC)
has become more frequently used. ABC
provides new methods of bridge construction that can greatly compress the closure
time required during bridge construction.
Generally, ABC construction methods fall into two categories, 1) minimize
the overall construction window (from months to weeks), and 2) minimize the out
of service time of the facility (from weeks to hours). When project schedules are compressed, there
may be reduced impacts and improved safety for the traveling public, however,
the project staff and contractor may be subject to safety risks as a result of
the accelerated work schedule and nature of ABC technology.
Generally, the ABC techniques employed alleviate
significant user costs, however, these technologies may have significant
project costs that are difficult to accommodate within limited owner
construction budgets. For example, the use of self-propelled modular transports
(SPMT) could significantly increase the construction cost of a project.
Underlying questions that owners have to address when using both ABC techniques
and contractual provisions to achieve project goals are 1) what type of
contractual timeframes are appropriate when using ABC, 2) what are the risks
that contractors face in implementing specific ABC approaches, 3) what are appropriate
ranges of incentives and disincentives, and 4) what types of risks are
introduced to project staff, contractors, and the public as a result of
accelerated timelines – and how to address those risks.
The objective of this study is to develop guidelines that DOT’s &
other bridge owners may use in making ABC implementation decisions related to
Reduced cost as measured by comparison of actual
08-114 [Pending] - Systematic Approach
for Determining Construction Contract Time: A Guidebook The objective of this research is to
develop a guidebook that DOTs can use to establish and maintain a systematic
approach to determining credible and defensible contract times for projects
using conventional and alternative contracting methods (e.g., design-bid-build
without or with completion incentives and disincentives, design-build,
construction-manager/general-contractor (CMGC), and other variations).
Advisory 5080.15, FHWA Guide for Construction Contract Time Determination
Procedures, 10/15/2002 https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/contracts/t508015.cfm
Synthesis 502: Practices for Establishing Contract Completion Dates for Highway
Report 652: Time-Related Incentive and Disincentive Provisions in Highway
Construction Contracts (2010)
Solutions: Innovative Bridge Designs for Rapid Renewal (R04)
state and local departments of transportation with a design toolkit for
prefabricated bridge projects. Standardized approaches streamline the
activities required to get bridge replacement systems designed, fabricated, and
erected in less time, and installed in hours or days, rather than weeks or
Solutions: Managing Risk in Rapid Renewal Projects (R09)
and training materials provide agencies with a greater understanding of
potential risks associated with rapid renewal projects, and possible mitigation
Review and summarize
contemporary literature and guidance documents related to construction
scheduling, schedule risks, and I/D contract clauses.
Study the existing
inventory of State DOT ABC projects that utilize GRS, precast bridge elements,
SPMT’s, and bridge slides to document what the project time goals were and what
the actual construction times turned out to be.In addition, document which projects met the goals, by how much, and the
amount of incentive paid to the contractor, if any.
The FHWA National ABC Project Exchange and
other available sources should be utilized in developing and assessing the
current inventory of ABC projects.
Interview project staff
and contractors related to specific ABC projects to collect information.
Develop a guide document
that will help DOTs better understand ABC project implementation risks, better estimate
practical goals for project schedules using ABC methods, and what associated
contractual incentives should be coupled with the ABC technologies.
commentary on implications of tight project timeframes and risks that may be
introduced to contractors, project staff, traveling public, and DOT project owners.
Provide guidance on
construction oversight staffing needs as well as recommendations related to
safe contractor staffing levels.
Provide guidance to
project staff that will help identify project implementation risks related to
on which combinations of strategies are most effective.
Produce tools that
project staff can use to estimate appropriate levels of incentives/ disincentives
(I/D), payment for acceleration, and liquidated damages (LQD) for projects that
employ ABC techniques.
This research will give bridge designers,
project staff, and owners tools to assure that construction projects have
realistic and practical project goals for timelines and contractual costs. This will also help identify implementation
risks and methods to mitigate them.
DOTs, LPAs, FHWA, AASHTO, and private design consultants would use these guidelines in the development and implementation of projects.
|Sponsoring Committee:||AFH40, Construction of Bridges and Structures
|Research Period:||24 - 36 months|
|RNS Developer:||William L. Oliva|
|Source Info:||William L. Oliva|
Chief of Structures Development Section
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
|Index Terms:||Bridge construction, Construction management, Incentives, Disincentives, Construction scheduling, |
Administration and Management
Bridges and other structures