Value, Benefits, and Limitations of Qualifications-Based Selection for Airport Project Delivery (2019)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Value, Benefits, and Limitations of Qualifications-Based Selection for Airport Project Delivery A Synthesis of Airport Practice Douglas D. Gransberg GransberG & associates, inc. Norman, OK Ali Touran northeastern University Boston, MA 2019 Research sponsored by the Federal Aviation Administration Subscriber Categories Aviation A I R P O R T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M ACRP SYNTHESIS 102

ACRP SYNTHESIS 102 Project 11-03, Topic S01-18 ISSN 1935-9187 ISBN 978-0-309-48082-6 Library of Congress Control Number 2019951398 © 2019 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. Cover photo description: Qualifications-based selection components. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Airport Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Published reports of the AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Airports are vital national resources. They serve a key role in trans- portation of people and goods and in regional, national, and interna- tional commerce. They are where the nation’s aviation system connects with other modes of transportation and where federal responsibility for managing and regulating air traffic operations intersects with the role of state and local governments that own and operate most airports. Research is necessary to solve common operating problems, to adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and to introduce innovations into the airport industry. The Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the airport industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for ACRP was identified in TRB Special Report 272: Airport Research Needs: Cooperative Solutions in 2003, based on a study spon- sored by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ACRP carries out applied research on problems that are shared by airport operating agen- cies and not being adequately addressed by existing federal research programs. ACRP is modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). ACRP undertakes research and other technical activi- ties in various airport subject areas, including design, construction, legal, maintenance, operations, safety, policy, planning, human resources, and administration. ACRP provides a forum where airport operators can cooperatively address common operational problems. ACRP was authorized in December 2003 as part of the Vision 100— Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. The primary participants in the ACRP are (1) an independent governing board, the ACRP Oversight Committee (AOC), appointed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation with representation from airport operating agencies, other stakeholders, and relevant industry organizations such as the Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA), the American Associa- tion of Airport Executives (AAAE), the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), Airlines for America (A4A), and the Airport Consultants Council (ACC) as vital links to the airport community; (2) TRB as program manager and secretariat for the governing board; and (3) the FAA as program sponsor. In October 2005, the FAA executed a contract with the National Academy of Sciences formally initiating the program. ACRP benefits from the cooperation and participation of airport professionals, air carriers, shippers, state and local government officials, equipment and service suppliers, other airport users, and research organi- zations. Each of these participants has different interests and responsibili- ties, and each is an integral part of this cooperative research effort. Research problem statements for ACRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the AOC to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each ACRP project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. Panels include experienced practitioners and research specialists; heavy emphasis is placed on including airport professionals, the intended users of the research products. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing coop- erative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, ACRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Primary emphasis is placed on disseminating ACRP results to the intended users of the research: airport operating agencies, service pro- viders, and academic institutions. ACRP produces a series of research reports for use by airport operators, local agencies, the FAA, and other interested parties; industry associations may arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, webinars, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by airport industry practitioners.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR ACRP SYNTHESIS 102 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Marci A. Greenberger, Manager, Airport Cooperative Research Program Gail R. Staba, Senior Program Officer Demisha Williams, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications ACRP PROJECT 11-03 PANEL Joshua D. Abramson, Easterwood Airport Management, College Station, TX (Chair) Debbie K. Alke, Montana DOT, Helena, MT (retired) Gloria G. Bender, TransSolutions, LLC, Fort Worth, TX David A. Byers, Quadrex Aviation, LLC, Melbourne, FL Traci Clark, Allegheny County Airport Authority, West Mifflin, PA David N. Edwards, Jr., Greenville–Spartanburg Airport District, Greer, SC Brenda L. Enos, Burns & McDonnell, Kansas City, MO Patrick W. Magnotta, FAA Liaison Matthew J. Griffin, Airports Consultants Council Liaison Liying Gu, Airports Council International–North America Liaison Adam Williams, Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Liaison Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison TOPIC S01-18 PANEL Lawrence C. Bowron, City of Battle Creek/W.K. Kellogg Airport, Battle Creek, MI Jon Faucher, Mead & Hunt, Windsor, CA Michael Kenig, Holder Construction Company, Atlanta, GA Tamera L. McCuen, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Susan Winslow, Tela Vuota, PLLC, Richmond, VA Michael Witiw, HDR Inc., Omaha, NE Susan J. H. Zellers, Hanson Professional Services Inc., Indianapolis, IN Mike Rottinghaus, FAA Liaison T. J. Schulz, Airport Consultants Council Liaison

ABOUT THE ACRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM Airport administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This infor- mation may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the airport industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire airport community, the Airport Cooperative Research Program authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing project. This project, ACRP Project 11-03, “Synthesis of Information Related to Airport Practices,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowl- edge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an ACRP report series, Synthesis of Airport Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. FOREWORD By Gail R. Staba Staff Officer Transportation Research Board The objective of the synthesis was to describe practice with respect to the use of qualifications- based selection (QBS) to award construction projects at airports. The use of QBS for professional services contracts for engineering and design is well understood within the aviation industry, so this work focused on construction. The research identified a few instances of construction-only contracts awarded with QBS at airports, but these instances were associated with small projects and emergency work. Thus, the first conclusion reached is that QBS award of construction contracts by public air- port agencies is limited and does not represent a well-established practice. Data on the use of alternative contracting methods such as design–build (DB), construction manager-at-risk (CMR), and public–private partnerships (PPP) all include the evaluation of quali- fications and past performance as part of the procurement process that leads to the final award decision. In fact, progressive DB (PDB) and CMR are routinely awarded on a QBS-only basis with the airport negotiating the final construction price, schedule, and risk allocation after the contract is executed. Additionally, indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts (also called job order contracts, on-call contracts, or master contracts), in which contractor qualifications and past performance constitute the major decision criteria, are regularly awarded. The conclusion can be reached that data collection verified that there is experience at airports in awarding CMR, PDB, and IDIQ contracts that contain some qualifications-based selection of construction contractors. It can also be concluded that the use of QBS selection that does not consider pricing information that may have been submitted during procurement is a well-accepted practice within the aviation industry. Information used in this study was acquired through a comprehensive review of the literature, a content analysis of solicitation documents that included a QBS component, survey responses from 26 airports, and interviews with knowledgeable practitioners at six airports.

Douglas D. Gransberg of Gransberg & Associates, Inc., in Norman, Oklahoma, and Ali Touran at Northeastern University, in Boston, Massachusetts, synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an immedi- ately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.

Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions. 1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Introduction to Qualifications-Based Selection 6 Synthesis Objective 6 Definitions of Key Terms 9 Methodological Approach 11 Organization of the Report 12 Chapter 2 Overview of Qualifications-Based Selection 12 Procurement Methods in Federally Funded Airport Projects 15 Qualifications-Based Selection Factors 18 Overview Summary 22 Chapter 3 Current Qualifications-Based Selection Practices in Airport Project Delivery 22 Airport Survey Results 32 State-of-the-Practice Summary 34 Chapter 4 Case Examples of Qualifications-Based Selection Projects 34 Airport Project Delivery Policies 37 Why Is QBS Used? 37 Summary of Consensus 39 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Gaps in the Body of Knowledge 39 Conclusions 40 QBS Evaluation Criteria 40 Knowledge Gaps 41 References 44 Glossary 47 Acronyms and Abbreviations 49 Appendix A Project Delivery Method Primer 56 Appendix B Overview of Airport Funding 58 Appendix C Survey Questionnaire and Results 70 Appendix D Examples of QBS Documents C O N T E N T S