In Washington State, there are limits to the use of alternative project delivery methods such as design-build and CM at Risk (termed GC/CM in WA), but because of the hard work of DBIA members, things are changing. The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) is very prescriptive of who and when such alternatives can be used. The state first allowed the use of alternative delivery methods with selected pilot projects in the early '90s. Over the years, legislature has expanded the use of design-build with the input and guidance from DBIA Northwest Region's Legislative Subcommittee and several DBIA members actively involved in the Washington state legislative subcommittee. The process has been slow, and it takes educating legislators, the public and special interest groups.
In Washington State, design-build projects must be over $10 million and meet the criteria outlined in RCW 39.10.300, or for Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) projects RCW 47.20.785. WSDOT can also conduct up to five pilot projects that cost between $2 million and $10 million. Until 2007, design-build was limited only to large state agencies, cities and counties.
The RCW also limits what types of projects can use design-build. A project must meet one of the following criteria:
- The design and construction activities, technologies or schedule to be used are highly specialized and a design-build approach is critical in developing the construction methodology or implementing the proposed technology; or
- The project design is repetitive in nature and is an incidental part of the installation or construction; or
- Regular interaction with and feedback from facility users and operators during design is not critical to an effective facility design.
There are a few exceptions regardless of cost. Public bodies may use the design-build process for parking garages and pre-engineered metal buildings or prefabricated modular buildings. Also, the use of design-build operate and maintain (DBOM) is limited to utility projects, except the design-build process may be used on other projects as long as operations and maintenance services are for a period not longer than three years.
In 2005, the Washington Legislature created the Capital Projects Advisory Review Board (CPARB) to review alternative public works contracting procedures and provide guidance to state policymakers on ways to further enhance the quality, efficiency and accountability of public works contracting methods. Member of CPARB are appointed by the governor and include representatives from various stakeholders to include: public owners, contractors, subcontractors, labor organizations, insurance sureties, architects, engineers, women and minority enterprises. In addition the committee has four legislative members.
The 2007 Washington Legislative Session expanded the use of design-build contracting by opening it up to all public agencies and created the Project Review Committee (PRC) to work under the CPARB. The PRC is responsible for reviewing and approving public body certification and project approval applications for the utilization of GC/CM and design-build delivery methods of construction.
A Washington state public agency must seek the approval of the PRC to utilize design-build contracting on all non-WSDOT projects, or the agency must be certified by the PRC to utilize design-build. There are currently four Washington agencies that are design-build certified: the Department of General Administration, the University of Washington, the City of Seattle and the City of Tacoma.
The Washington state legislators recently approved the expansion of design-build legislation. House Bill 1197 expands the use of design-build by allowing certified and noncertified public agencies to utilize design-build contracting procedures on projects that have a total project cost between $2 million and $10 million dollars. Only 10 projects will be allowed and all the projects must be approved by the PRC and meet the criteria of RCW 39.10 whether the agency is certified or not. It also allows two DBOM pilot projects, regardless of the operations and maintenance services period.
These changes over time in Washington are a result of regional DBIA members' involvement in the legislative process and serving on state legislative subcommittees and task force groups. For other states where design-build legislation is limited or not allowed, change takes a commitment from the DBIA members in the region. Individuals and firms should become actively involved in their state legislative subcommittee or be proactive on a state level to help educate legislative representative and special interest groups about the advantages to the public in allowing design-build as a delivery method. Expanding state legislation by allowing the use of design-build project delivery is a way to fast track project starts, thus having more projects shovel-ready and stimulate the economy.
About the author: Darlene Septelka, DBIA, is the director of integrated services for Landon Construction Group and provides project management services to private and public owners. She assists owners in evaluating project delivery options, applying to the Washington state PRC for project approval and managing design-build and GC/CM projects. Septelka is a founding officer and past vice-president of DBIA's Northwest Region, a national instructor for DBIA and an appointed member to the Washington State PRC.