Which Delivery Method Is Best for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Projects? An Analysis of Alternative Project Delivery Methods Performance

This paper analyzes the performance of project delivery methods for water and wastewater infrastructure projects. Aging infrastructure, population growth, and more stringent environmental regulations have been some of the main drivers highlighting the need to upgrade existing drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities, and build new ones. Industry leaders and decision-makers are looking at innovative technological and project delivery solutions to achieve this colossal but urgent challenge. Water and wastewater facilities have traditionally been constructed, retrofitted, and rehabilitated using the design-bid-build (DBB) process, which is adequate for projects where the work is well defined and has relatively low uncertainty and complexity. However, DBB might not be ideal for more complex facilities where the potential for integration between the different stakeholders may result in innovative solutions and improved efficiencies. Therefore, alternative project delivery methods (APDM) such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) have been on the rise recently, mostly due to improved project cost and schedule outcomes. In fact, the project performance impacts of APDM have been quantified for the transportation and building sectors; this paper’s objective is to quantify delivery methods’ performance for the water infrastructure sector. The paper discusses a national data collection effort and analysis focusing on water and wastewater projects. Early results show improved cost and schedule performance associated with APDM. These findings can assist stakeholders in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water and wastewater project.