Technical Papers
Mar 27, 2024

Statistical Analysis and Representation Models of Calendar-Day Liquidated Damages

Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 150, Issue 6

Abstract

When projects suffer noncompletion, state highway agencies (SHAs) may trigger liquidated damage (LD) provisions, and at times, contractors may challenge their enforceability. Normally, to be compensated for the costs expected during the delay, states design the LD schedules by associating LD rates to specific contract sizes. A review of the literature found that states varied significantly in the LD schedule designs. However, no studies have explored the relationship between the LD rates and contract sizes (LDR-CS) across states. Exploring this relationship could lead to identifying the underlying model of the relationship, explaining how states vary the LD rates against contract sizes, running comparative analyses of the states’ LD schedules, and designing optimal LD schedules, among other potential benefits. To realize these benefits, the objectives of this work were to (1) statistically explore and characterize the LDR-CS relationship, and (2) develop a representative model of the relationship. To achieve these objectives, descriptive, box–whisker, and cluster analyses were performed to characterize the relationship, and regression analysis was utilized to search for the best-fit representation model. The relationship was found to be challenging; it had a unique L-shape, and was modeled successfully only using transformed nonlinear regression. The research results could facilitate performing LD comparative analysis among states, help SHAs assess and build confidence in their LD rates, and help update and optimize LD schedule designs. This work contributes to the body of knowledge with new statistical dimensions to comprehend the LDR-CS relationship, providing tables, charts, and transformed nonlinear models.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data, models, and code generated or used during the study appear in the published article.

References

Abdel Aziz, A. M. 2007. Cost prediction of highway projects using regression. Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates.
Abdel Aziz, A. M. 2008. “Minimum performance bounds for evaluating contractors performance during construction of highway pavement projects.” J. Constr. Manage. Econ. 26 (5): 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190801918748.
Abdel Aziz, A. M. 2009. “Time prediction for highway pavement projects using regression analysis.” In Construction Research Congress 2009: Building a sustainable future. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Abdel Aziz, A. M. 2023. “Statistical analysis and representation models of working-days liquidated damages.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 149 (7): 04023054. https://doi.org/10.1061/JCEMD4.COENG-13330.
Abdel Aziz, A. M., and K. Muiruri. 2023. “The articulation and current practices of liquidated damages in highways standard specifications.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolut. Eng. Constr. 15 (4): 04523029. https://doi.org/10.1061/JLADAH.LADR-959.
AKDOT (Alaska DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for highway construction. Juneau, AK: AKDOT.
ALDOT (Alabama DOT). 2018. Standard specifications for highway construction. Juneau, AK: AKDOT.
ARDOT (Arkansas DOT). 2014. Standard specifications for highway construction. Juneau, AK: AKDOT.
Assaad, R., and M.-A. Abdul-Malak. 2020a. “Legal perspective on treatment of delay liquidated damages and penalty clauses by different jurisdictions: Comparative analysis.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolute. Eng. Constr. 12 (2): 04520013. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000387.
Assaad, R., and M.-A. Abdul-Malak. 2020b. “Timing of liquidated damages recovery and related liability issues.” J. Leg. Aff. Dispute Resolute. Eng. Constr. 12 (2): 04520015. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000390.
AZDOT (Arizona DOT). 2021. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Phoenix, AZ: AZDOT.
Box, G. E. P., and D. R. Cox. 1964. “An analysis of transformations.” J. R. Stat. Soc. 26: 211–253.
Brizzee, D. 1991. “Liquidated damages and the penalty rule: A reassessment.” BYU L. Rev. 1991 (4): 1613.
CALTRANS (California DOT). 2018. Standard specifications. Sacramento, CA: CALTRANS.
Carney, J. 2020. “Understanding the purpose, limitations and benefits of a liquidated damages clause.” Construction Executive. Accessed November 4, 2023. https://www.constructionexec.com/article/understanding-the-purpose-limitations-and-benefits-of-a-liquidated-damages-clause.
CODOT (Colorado DOT). 2019. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Denver: CODOT.
Crowley, L. G., W. C. Zech, C. Bailey, and P. Gujar. 2008. “Liquidated damages: Review of current state of the practice.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 134 (4): 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2008)134:4(383).
Daniels, G., W. Stockton, and R. Hundley. 2000. “Estimating road user costs associated with highway construction projects: Simplified method.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1732 (Mar): 70–79. https://doi.org/10.3141/1732-09.
DCDOT (District of Columbia DOT). 2013. Standard specifications for highways and structures. Washington, DC: DCDOT.
DEDOT (Delaware DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Dover, DE: DEDOT.
Dielman, T. E. 2005. Applied regression analysis–A second course in business and economic statistics. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole, Thomson Learning.
FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulations). 2022. “Federal acquisition regulations–Subpart 11.5 –Liquidated damages.” Accessed April 10, 2022. https://www.acquisition.gov/far/subpart-11.5#FAR_11_502.
FLDOT (Florida DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Tallahassee, FL: FLDOT.
GADOT (Georgia DOT). 2021. Standard specifications for transportation systems. Atlanta: GADOT.
Green, S. B. 1991. “How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis?” Multivar. Behav. Res. 26 (Mar): 499–510. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2603_7.
Harris, R. J. 1985. A primer of multivariate statistics. 2nd ed. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
ILDOT (Illinois DOT). 2022. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Springfield, IL: ILDOT.
INDOT (Indiana DOT). 2022. Standard specifications. Springfield, IN: INDOT.
Jensen, D. 2000. “Liquidated damages: Testing when in time the intent test is applied.” J. Constr. Educ. 5 (2): 162–176.
KSDOT (Kansas Department of Transportation). 2015. Standard specifications. Topeka, KS: KSDOT.
Kuhn, M., and K. Johnson. 2013. Applied predictive modeling. New York: Springer.
Kutner, M., C. Nachtsheim, J. Neter, and W. Li. 2005. Applied linear statistical models. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
KYDOT (Kentucky DOT). 2019. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Frankfort, KY: KYDOT.
LADOT (Louisiana DOT). 2016. Standard specifications for roads and bridges. Baton Rouge, LA: LADOT.
Levenberg, K. 1944. “A method for the solution of certain non-linear problems in least squares.” Q. J. Appl. Math. 2 (2) 164–168. https://doi.org/10.1090/qam/10666.
Long, R. J. 2017. “Analysis of concurrent delay on construction claims.” Long International, Inc. Accessed April 9, 2022. https://www.long-intl.com/articles/concurrent-delay/.
Loulakis, M. C., and L. P. McLaughlin. 2011. “Federal court OKs government calculation of liquidated damages.” Civ. Eng. Mag. Arch. 81 (11): 92. https://doi.org/10.1061/ciegag.0000704.
MADOT (Massachusetts DOT). 2021. Standard specifications for highways and bridges. Boston: MADOT.
Makridakis, S., S. Wheelwright, and R. Hyndman. 1998. Forecasting methods and applications. New York: Wiley.
Marquardt, D. W. 1963. “An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters.” J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 11 (2): 431–441. https://doi.org/10.1137/0111030.
MEDOT (Maine DOT). 2020. Standard specifications. Augusta, ME: MEDOT.
MIDOT (Michigan DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for construction. Lansing, MI: MIDOT.
MNDOT (Minnesota DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for construction. Saint Paul, MN: MNDOT.
MSDOT (Mississippi DOT). 2017. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Jackson, MS: MSDOT.
MTDOT (Montana DOT). 2020. Standard and supplemental specifications for road and bridge construction. Helena, MT: MTDOT.
Myers, R., D. Montgomery, G. Vining, and T. Robinson. 2010. Generalized linear models: With applications in engineering and the sciences. New York: Wiley.
NDDOT (North Dakota DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Dickinson, ND: NDDOT.
NHDOT (New Hampshire DOT). 2016. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Concord, NH: NHDOT.
NIST. 2022. “Engineering statistics handbook.” E-Handbook of Statistical Methods, NIST. Accessed August, 31 2022. http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/.
NMDOT (New Mexico DOT). 2019. Standard specifications for highway and bridge construction. Santa Fe, NM: NMDOT.
NYDOT (New York DOT). 2022. Standard specifications. Albany, NY: NYDOT.
OHDOT (Ohio DOT). 2019. Construction and material specifications. Columbus, OH: OHDOT.
OKDOT (Oklahoma DOT). 2019. Standard specifications for highway construction. Oklahoma City, OK: OKDOT.
PADOT (Pennsylvania DOT). 2020. Specifications. Harrisburg, PA: PADOT.
RIDOT (Rhode Island DOT). 2010. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Providence, RI: RIDOT.
Ritz, C., and J. C. Streibig. 2008. Nonlinear regression with R. New York: Springer.
Rogers, T. M., W. C. Zech, J. O. Shambley, W. N. Donald, and J. A. Rueda-Benavides. 2019. “State-of-the-practice for liquidated damages, incentive/disincentive, and road user cost provisions on high-value transportation projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 11 (2): 04519001. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000286.
SCDOT (South Carolina DOT). 2007. Standard specifications for highway construction. Pierre, SD: SCDOT.
SDDOT (South Dakota DOT). 2015. Standard specifications for roads and bridges. Pierre, SD: SDDOT.
Statistica. 2022. “TIBCO statistica enterprise.” Accessed February 1, 2022. https://docs.tibco.com/products/tibco-statistica-14-1-0.
Sun, C., P. Edara, and A. Mackley. 2013. “Refocusing on liquidated damages in incentive/disincentive contracts.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 134 (4): 383390. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000122.
TNDOT (Tennessee DOT). 2020. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Nashville, TN: TNDOT.
Twyford, J. 2007. “Liquidated damages: A comparative study of the law in England, Australia, New Zealand, and Singapore.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 133 (3): 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2007)133:3(210).
USBEA (US Bureau of Economic Analysis). 2023. “Gross domestic product by state and personal income by state, 4th Quarter 2022 and Year 2022.” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.bea.gov/news/2023/gross-domestic-product-state-and-personal-income-state-4th-quarter-2022-and-year-2022.
USBLS (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2022. “Employment cost index news release—December 2021.” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/eci_01282022.htm.
USBLS (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2023a. “Economy at a glance: Regions, states & areas at a glance.” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.bls.gov/eag/.
USBLS (US Bureau of Labor Statistics). 2023b. “Employment cost index news release–December 2022.” Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/eci_01312023.pdf.
UTDOT (Utah DOT). 2022. Standard specifications for road and bridge construction. Taylorsville, UT: UTDOT.
VADOT (Virginia DOT). 2020. Road and bridge specifications. Richmond, VA: VADOT.
WIDOT (Wisconsin DOT). 2021. Standard specifications for highway and structure construction. Madison, WI: WIDOT.
WVDOT (West Virginia DOT). 2020. Supplemental specifications to accompany the 2017 edition of the standard specifications for roads and bridges. Charleston, WV: WVDOT.
Zech, W. C., C. B. Bailey, and L. G. Crowley. 2008. “Robust determination of liquidated damage rates for state highway agencies.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2081 (1): 65–73. https://doi.org/10.3141/2081-07.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 150Issue 6June 2024

History

Received: Sep 8, 2023
Accepted: Jan 5, 2024
Published online: Mar 27, 2024
Published in print: Jun 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Aug 27, 2024

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

ASCE Technical Topics:

Authors

Affiliations

Associate Professor, Dept. of Construction Management, The Univ. of Washington, 120F Architecture Hall, Box 351610, Seattle, WA 98195. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3487-8992. Email: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share