Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway AdministrationSearch FHWAFeedback

Construction

<< Previous ContentsNext >>

Current Design-Build Practices for Transportation Projects

Appendix 2 Transportation Agencies with Design-Build Authority

State Transportation Agencies with Authority (1) Citation for Statutory Design-Build Authority (2) DOT Procurement Process
AK Authorization for all agencies for projects using state funds Alaska Stat. §36.30.200 Competitive sealed proposals if appropriate findings are made; otherwise, competitive sealed bids
AZ Authorization for: State Transportation Board; pilot projects by DOT Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§28-7361, 7363, 7364 and 7365 2 phase process: pre-qualification then proposal; award is to lowest score when price is divided by technical score; time valued adjustments may be made to score
CA Authorization for transit agencies, certain cities and counties Cal. Pub. Cont. Code §§20209.5 and 20133 N/A
CO Authorization for DOT Colo. Rev. Stat. §§43-1-1401 et seq. 2 phase process: pre-qualification then proposal; any appropriate basis for award if basis is described in RFP;; award is to proposal providing best value to department
DE Public-private initiative authorization allowing authorization for Secretary to solicit design-build proposals Del. code Ann. tit. 2, §2003 Proposals solicited through RFP; Department authorized to assess non-refundable proposal review fee not to exceed $50,000; each proposal weighed on its own merits and ranked according to selection criteria; only highest ranking proposal shall be selected.
FL Authorization for DOT for buildings, major bridges and rail corridor projects Fla. Stat. Ann. §337.11(7) Governed by rules adopted by Department (specifically allows short listing, request for proposals and award based on technical criteria)
HI Authorization for all governmental bodies to use competitive sealed proposal procurement process Haw. Rev. Stat. §103D-303 Allows discussions with offerers within competitive range, award to most advantageous offer
ID Legislation stating that State agencies are not prohibited from using design-build Idaho Code §67-2309 None itemized.
IL Specific authorization for Regional Transportation Authorities 70 Ill. Comp. Stat. 3615/4.06(b)(2) N/A
KS Authorization for turnpike authority Attorney General has opined that design-build may be possible for other agencies as well Kan. Stat. Ann. §§68-2001 et seq.

Op. Kan. Att'y Gen. 62 (1978)

N/A
LA Authorization for DOT to implement a design-build pilot program for the development of transportation facilities La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §48:250.2 et seq. Two phase selection process. Short-listing based upon Qualification Submittals Contract award based on a formula using the sum of proposer's price bid plus schedule value divided by its technical score.
ME Authorization for DOT Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, §753-A Low-bid award or best-value award. Best value award should be submitted to the department in two components - technical and sealed price proposal
MD Authorization for capital projects Has been used for light rail Md. Code Ann., State Fin. & Proc. §3-602(g)(1) N/A
MA Authorization for Department of Highways to enter into Development Agreement for Route 3 North Authorization for Mass Bay Transportation Authority 1999 Mass. Acts 53, 56

2000 Mass. Acts 125

Pre-qualification, request for proposals, possibly oral presentation; award to developer who best meets the selection criteria for the benefit of the Commonwealth; selection of other than lowest-overall-cost is allowed if a written explanation of the reasons is given
MN Authorization for streets, highways, bicycle paths, bicycle trails and pedestrian facilities, light rail transit facilities and DOT projects Minn. Stat. Ann. §473.3993

Minn. Stat. Ann. §160.262

Minn. Stat. Ann. §161.3410

DOT authorized to procure design-build contracts using either a two-step, best-value selection process or a low-bid process, not to exceed 10 percent of DOT contracts each year; light rail contracts may be awarded on the basis of the RFQ or RFP without bids
MO Authorization for DOT to use alternative procurement process Mont. Code Ann. §60-2-112 Award by means other than competitive bidding is allowed if special circumstances so require and are specified in writing
NV Authorization for public bodies and DOT for projects that exceed $30,000,000 may also be used for projects over $5,000,000.00 that meet certain criteria. Nev. Rev. Stat. §§338.1711-338.1727 and 408.3875-408.3887 (effective until Sept.30, 2003) Request for preliminary proposals followed by issuance of request for final proposals to "finalists"; award based on most cost effective and responsive proposal using criteria and weight assigned to each factor. Preference for local contractors if not federally funded
NH Projects authorized to use design-build by the State capital budget N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §228:4(I)(f) Selection to be based on objective standard, measurable criteria for evaluation
NM Authorization for Highway Department pilot program 1999 N.M. Laws ch. 97, §1; N.M. Stat. Ann. §§13-1-111 and 13-1-119.1 Two-phase process: shortlisting followed by evaluation of technical cost proposals schedule. Phase Two: proposals evaluated on technical concepts or solutions, costs and scheduling; awarded to highest ranking firm.
NC Authorization for DOT to enter into design-build-warrant contract for "CARAT" traffic management system Authorization for DOT pilot projects (1998, 3 projects per year; law changed in 2002 - 10 projects allowed in 2003, 25 projects annually from 2004 through 2009) Authorization for Turnpike Authority to use alternative procurement process N.C. Gen. Stat. §136-28.1(j); 1997 N.C. Sess. Laws 443, §32.11 H.B. 644, 2001 Gen. Assem., Reg. Sess. (N.C. 2001) None itemized
OH Authorization for DOT pilot program Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §5517.011 Allows value based selection process combining technical qualifications and competitive bidding elements; two phase process, pre-qualification then separate technical and price proposals; scored tech proposal weighed at 25% or less of value based criteria; technical scores used to adjust price, award to finalist with lowest adjusted price
OR Authorization for DOT tollway projects Or. Rev. Stat. §383.005 Department may award any (tollway) contract under a competitive process or by private negotiation or any combination of competition and negotiation; factors considered are: cost, design quality, structural integrity/maintenance, aesthetics, traffic, safety, small business participation, financial stability & experience
PA Authorization for Department of General Services 62 PA. Cons. Stat. §§103 and 322(2) N/A
SD General authorization for public corporations S.D. Codified Laws §5-18-26 Performance criteria on a project by project basis (assuming the DOT is a "public corporation")
TN Authorization for state agencies and authorities--specifically excludes DOT contracts Tenn. Code Ann. §§4-15-102 and 12-10-124 N/A
TX Development agreement authorization for Texas Turnpike Authority (a division of TxDOT) Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §361.302 None itemized
UT Authorization for transportation agencies including the DOT Utah Code Ann. §63-56-36.1; Utah Admin. Code R916-3 2 phase process, pre-qualification then proposals; after considering price and other identified factors, award is to proposal which is most advantageous to the state
VA General authorization for state agencies, specific authorization for VDOT Va. Code Ann. §§11-41 et seq. and 33.1-12 Award based on objective criteria adopted by Commonwealth Transportation Board
WA Authorization for DOT for projects over $10m; authorization for other public bodies for projects over $12m Wash. Rev. Code §§39.10.051 (effective until July 1, 2007) and 47.20.780 DOT to "develop a process for awarding competitively bid highway construction projects."
WI Special legislation is required for the use of D/B. 2 Bridge projects have been allowed to date since 2000. Wis. Stat. Ann. §§84.11(5n) et seq. 2 phase competitive selection process; pre-qualification then proposals; evaluation criteria must include qualifications, quality, completion time and cost.

(1) This survey should not be construed as legal advice regarding design-build authorization in any state. Please contact nsmith@nossaman.com with any additions or corrections.

(2) This survey identifies legislation specifically permitting agencies to enter into design-build contracts and exclusive development agreements, and also identifies legislation specifically permitting agencies to use a best value procurement process for construction contracts (thus allowing design-build procurements to proceed without concern about differing procurement requirements applicable to design and construction contracts). This survey does not necessarily address authorizing legislation for franchise agreements or similar public-private partnerships.

<< Previous ContentsNext >>

Contact

Jerry Yakowenko
Office of Program Administration
202-366-1562
E-mail Jerry

 
 
Updated: 04/04/2011
 

FHWA
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration