Journal of Construction Engineering and Project Management

Korea Institute of Construction Engineering and Management (한국건설관리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Framework for Guaranteed Maximum Price and Contingency Development for Integrated Delivery of Transportation Projects

  • Gransberg, Douglas D. (Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University) ;
  • Shane, Jennifer S. (Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University) ;
  • Ahn, Jun-Yong (Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, Iowa State University)
  • Published : 2011.05.27
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper discusses the components of a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) and proposes a framework for the development of GMPs as contract payment provisions for construction manager-at-risk (CMR) and design-build (DB) contracts for transportation projects. The framework is the synthesis of a comprehensive literature review, a content analysis of CMR and DB solicitation documents and contracts, and case study project output from twelve projects in nine states worth $3.1 billion. The research also discusses the development of three common types of contingencies that are often utilized in projects with GMPs. The study concludes that owners should specify the structure of the GMP and its components to enhance clarity and understanding of the GMP's composition. It recommends that this structure be included in the CMR and DB solicitation documents so that pricing proposals can be formulated in a manner that is consistent with the contract payment provisions that will be useful to practitioners that need to implement GMP-based contracts.

Keywords

References

  1. Alder, R. "UDOT Construction Manager General Contract (CMGC) Annual Report," Utah Department of Transportation Project Development Group, Engineering Services and Bridge Design Section, Salt Lake City Utah, 2007, pp.4-39.
  2. Bearup, W, Kenig, M., and O'Donnell, J. "Alternative Delivery Methods, a Primer", Proceedings, Airport Board Members and Commissioners Annual Conference, Airports Council International - North America, Chicago, IL.2007, pp. 78-82
  3. Construction Management Association of America (CMAA), "Construction Delivery Approaches," 2007, http://www2.mvr.usace.army.mil/WaterControl/Districts/MVR/ SAME/construction/ConstructionDeliveryApproaches.pdf [May 21, 2009]
  4. Department of Energy (DOE), Cost Estimating Guide DOE G 430.1-1, Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1997, p.11.1.
  5. Doren, D., M. Bridgers, and M. Napier, " FMI/CMAA Sixth Annual Survey of Owners," Construction Management Association of America, 2005, http://cmaanet.org/user_images/owners_survey_6.pdf 2005 [ November 16, 2008]
  6. General Accounting Office (GAO) Using Structured Interviewing Techniques, GAO/PEMD-10.1.5, General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., 1991, 191pp.
  7. Grand County, Colorado, "CM/GC Fee Structure Sample", Grand County, Colorado, 2007, pp. 1-3. http://co.grand.co.us/GM-GC/Fees_&_Agreements_Updated_ 4-6- 07/CMGC_Sample_Fee_Structure_Grand_County.pdf [May 19 2009].
  8. Gransberg, D.D., and J.S. Shane. Construction Manager-at-Risk Project Delivery for Highway Programs, National Cooperative Highway Research Programs (NCHRP) Synthesis Report 402, Washington, D.C, 2009, 139pp.
  9. Harbuck, R.H. "Using Models in Parametric Estimating for Transportation Projects" 2002 AACE International Transactions, Portland, Oregon, 2002, pp. EST 05.1-05.9.
  10. Kwak,Y.H. and R. Bushey, "Construction Management at Risk: An Innovative Project Delivery Method at Stormwater Treatment Area in the Everglades, Florida," Proceedings, Construction Congress VI Orlando, Florida, 2000, pp. 477-482.
  11. Ladino, M.J., K.A. Reedy, and J.E. Carlson, "Alternate Project Delivery in Horizontal Construction," Presentation, Annual Meeting Associated General Contractors of America, Las Vegas, Nevada, 2008, 25pp.
  12. Martinez, P.H., Y Rashida. And V. MacMurray. "Construction Manager's Responsibilities: Pre-Design, Design and Pre-Construction Phase" American Bar Association, 2007, 58pp.
  13. Minchin, E., K. Thakkar, K., and R.Ellis, "Miami Intermodal Center-Introducing CM-At-Risk to Transportation Construction", in Innovative Project Delivery Systems, ASCE Press, 2007, pp 46-59.
  14. Neuendorf, K.A. The Content Analysis Guidebook, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, 2002 300 pp.
  15. Ripley, P.W. "Contingency! Who Owns and Manages It?" 2004 AACE International Transactions, Washington, DC, 2004, pp.CSC.08.1-CSC.08.4.
  16. Spata, S. and Kutilek, F.A. "Solutions to Managing Construction Cost Escalation Tools, Strategies, and "Selective Scoping" Help Manage Risk," Tradeline, Inc., 2006, http://www.tradelineinc.com/reports/B045DC52-2B3B-B525- 8F91436EBCDCEA9B [May 20, 2009].
  17. Storm, G. "New Contracting Experience Guides Fairbanks Airport Project," Pacific Builder and Engineer 2007, http://www.acppubs.com/article/CA6480230.html?industryid=4 8546 [September 22, 2008]
  18. Strang, W., "The Risk in CM at-Risk," CM eJournal, Construction Management Association of America, 2002, p. 1-9.
  19. Touran, A. "Owners Risk Reduction Techniques Using a CM," CMAA Research Report, Construction Management Association of America, Washington, DC, 2006, 55pp.
  20. Touran, A., D.D. Gransberg, K.R. Molenaar, K. Ghavamifar, D.J. Mason, and L.A. Fithian. A Guidebook for the Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods, TCRP Report 131, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, 240pp.
  21. Trauner Consulting Services,"Innovative Procurement Practices Alternative Procurement and Contracting Methods," California Department of Transportation Report No. 53A0104, Sacramento, California, 2007, p. 10-12
  22. US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Engineering Instructions Construction Cost Estimates, CEMP-E/CECW-EEI 01D010, US ACE, Washington, D.C., 1997, p.121.
  23. Van Winkle, H. "Alternate Project Delivery Systems," Proceedings, 2007 ACI Annual Conference, Airports Council International, Kansas City, Missouri, 2007, p. 7-41.
  24. Whitten, M. "Cardinal Change," Construction Law Section Seminar Workbook, The Commercial Bar Association, April 22, 2004, http://new.vicbar.com.au/pdf/CLE_Seminar22042004.pdf, [May 21, 2009], pp. 1-14.
  25. Yin, R. K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications Beverly Hills, California, 1994, 289pp.

Cited by

  1. Stochastic Conceptual Cost Estimating of Highway Projects to Communicate Uncertainty Using Bootstrap Sampling vol.3, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1061/AJRUA6.0000895
  2. Critical Comparison of Progressive Design-Build and Construction Manager/General Contractor Project Delivery Methods pp.2169-4052, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118822315