Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2016

Empirical Study of the State of the Practice in Alternative Technical Concepts in Highway Construction Projects

Abstract

State departments of transportation (DOTs) are encouraging early involvement of contractors in highway design and construction through the solicitation of alternative technical concepts (ATCs) during procurement. This approach provides DOTs with the opportunity to tap industry experience and expertise for design alternatives. ATCs can improve constructability, enhance innovation, shorten schedules, reduce risk, and ultimately save costs. DOTs have documented significant cost savings from ATCs on a project-by-project basis. This paper provides an up-to-date perspective on the types of projects in which ATCs are used in U.S. highway construction, according to empirical data from a national study of 250 projects completed by DOTs and the Office of Federal Lands Highway. These projects were completed through design–build, construction manager–general contractor, and design–bid–build project delivery methods, and only 40 of the projects solicited ATCs during procurement. The quantitative findings presented in this paper were facilitated by the use of the project information from the national study and complimented by an extensive literature review on the use of ATCs in the U.S. highway construction sector. It was found that DOTs used ATCs on 51% of the 70 design–build projects procured by best-value selection in the study. Given that only 2% of the 116 design–bid–build projects and 5% of the 38 low-bid design–build projects in this study used ATCs and that no construction manager–general contractor projects used ATCs, there appears to be an opportunity to capitalize on the benefits of ATCs in projects using those delivery methods.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Cox D. O., Molenaar K. R., Ernzen J. J., Henk G., Matthews T. C., Smith N., Williams R. C., Gee F., Kolb J., Sanderson L., Whited G. C., Wight J. W., and Yakowenko G. Contract Administration: Technology and Practice in Europe. Report FHWA-PL-03-002. Office of International Programs, Office of Policy, FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2002.
2. FHWA. Webinar 2. Alternative Technical Concepts: Use with Traditional Design-Bid-Build Contracting. (Originally aired June 5, 2014.) https://connectdot.connectsolutions.com/p50gpneevzv/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal. Accessed June 15, 2015.
3. Gransberg D. D., Loulakis M. C., and Gad G. M. NCHRP Synthesis 455: Alternative Technical Concepts for Contract Delivery Methods. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2014.
4. Project Management Oversight Program FTA. Lessons Learned Report: The T-REX Mega-Project Experience. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/project_delivery/lessons_learned/trex_lessons.aspx. Accessed July 27, 2015.
5. FHWA. Webinar 3. Alternative Technical Concepts: Use with Design-Build Contracting. (Originally aired July 10, 2014.) https://connectdot.connectsolutions.com/p3y6j8rw00a/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal. Accessed June 15, 2015.
6. Washington State Department of Transportation. Memorandum of Understanding: Alternate Technical Concept: Programmatic Waiver. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/27A54B86-9825-4E81-9DEE-138823B4ED86/74991/DesignBuildATCMOU.pdf. Accessed June 11, 2015.
7. Missouri Department of Transportation. Section 4: Submittal Process. In Alternate Technical Concepts: Innovative Contracting Process, Jefferson City, n.d., pp. 5–6. http://epg.modot.org/files/4/40/147.3.1_white_paper.pdf. Accessed June 11, 2015.
8. Utah Department of Transportation Design-Build Program. Alternative Technical Concept, Salt Lake City, 2011. http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=3001623058945871. Accessed June 11, 2015.
9. Ohio Department of Transportation. ODOT Design-Build Value-Based Selection Policy. Policy Number: 27-022(P). Columbus, Ohio, 2015.
10. FHWA. Webinar 4. Alternative Technical Concepts: Use with Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) and Public-Private Partnership (P3) Contracting. (Originally aired August 21, 2014). https://connectdot.connectsolutions.com/p6xl3no9s6n/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal. Accessed June 15, 2015.
11. FHWA U.S. Department of Transportation. Every Day Counts: Building a Culture of Innovation for the 21st Century. EDC-2 Final Report. 2015. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts/reports/edc-2-finalreport/. Accessed June 10, 2015.
12. FHWA U.S. Department of Transportation. Alternative Technical Concepts. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/contracts/acm/atc.cfm. Accessed June 15, 2015.
13. Gransberg D. D. Applying Alternative Technical Concepts to Construction Manager–General Contractor Project Delivery. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2408, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2014, pp. 10–16.
14. Jolley N. P., and Garvin M. J. Alternative Technical Concepts in Transportation Public Private Partnerships: Assessment of and Recommendations for the Process. Presented at 93rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 2014.
15. Quantification of Cost, Benefits and Risk Associated with Alternative Contracting Methods and Accelerated Performance Specifications. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2013–2016.
16. Rahm E., and Do H. H. Data Cleaning: Problems and Current Approaches. Bulletin of the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Data Engineering, Vol. 23, No. 4, 2000, pp. 3–13.
17. Gransberg D. D., Badillo-Kwiatkowski G. M., and Molenaar K. R. Project Delivery Comparison Using Performance Metrics. AACE International Transactions, 2003, pp. CS21–CS25.
18. Molenaar K. R., Won S., and Smith R. Expectations for Accuracy in Highway Design–Build Cost Estimates. In ASCE/CIB Construction Research Congress 2007, Vol. 1, May 6–8, 2007, Grand Bahama Island, Bahamas.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published online: January 1, 2016
Issue published: January 2016

Rights and permissions

© 2016 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Arthur L. C. Antoine
Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado at Boulder, UCB 428, Boulder, CO 80309-0428
Keith R. Molenaar
Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado at Boulder, UCB 428, Boulder, CO 80309-0428

Notes

A. L. C. Antoine, [email protected].

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 56

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 6

  1. Investigating the Impact of Alternative Technical Concepts for Project...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Critical Constructability Review Indicators for Construction of Transp...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  3. Challenges in Engineering Estimates for Best Value Design–Build Highwa...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  4. Critical Review of the Evolution of Project Delivery Methods in the Co...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  5. Schedule Estimates for Preconstruction Activities of Highway Projects-...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  6. Current Practices of Construction Manager/General Contractor Delivery ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub