Utilizing Turnkey Project Delivery

By: Jim Corkery and Scott Hoselton

Why utilize Turnkey project delivery? Today, lab facility owners and managers are constantly searching for more accurate, efficient, and economical means to produce, collect, and analyze data.

Critical to determining the roadblocks in effective data collection is an understanding of the influencing factors. While it is easy to identify outdated facilities and systems, a major factor to consider is the fragmentation of facility systems, or quite simply, the lack of a properly integrated facility.

Integration of research equipment with the facility is fundamental to successfully addressing a fragmented facility. While integration is a term of many connotations, and there are equally as many levels of fulfillment, facility integration identifies critical systems that affect data collection, marries facility and process, and delivers a functioning facility.

Achieving a functional facility is dependent on utilizing qualified design and construction professionals in a contractual manner that promotes quality, responsibility, and performance. The increasing usage of alternative project delivery methods is in part driven by the increasing awareness of how the process affects overall project success.

In addition to facility functionality, there are several factors to consider when reviewing integrated project delivery benefits and challenges. Owners most commonly identify the following items as having the greatest impact on the selection of an integrated delivery model: 

Single Source Project Responsibility

The most effective delivery process to manage risk and provide the ability of a single entity to hold all design, construction, equipment, and commissioning contracts requires an undivided responsibility for the project scope, budget, schedule, and quality. The owner is not required during design and construction to coordinate between separate contracts or resolve schedule and budget conflicts. The legal entanglements of adversarial relationships, most common in traditional project delivery processes, are avoided and the owner enjoys the added benefits of a true cooperative effort.

Early Project Cost Identification

An integrated approach allows for early and accurate conceptualization of the project, establishing timely definition of the project scope and budget. This allows the decision to proceed with a project to be made with firm knowledge of the scope and cost. The process allows construction cost estimates to be continually reviewed and reconciled throughout the design process. 

Overall Cost Reduction

This is driven by two main components; the shortening of the project duration and the introduction of construction knowledge into the design by working as a singular team.  The result is the ability to evaluate alternative designs, materials, and methods early on, with value engineering and constructability reviews utilized continuously.

Accelerated Delivery Schedule

A major component of schedule growth is the communication requirements between the Architecture and Engineer (A/E) and the contractor. Communication between the owner and the contractor is greatly improved when utilizing a single entity for design and construction. Executing design and construction efforts in parallel versus series also has significant impact on reducing the project schedule. Additionally, the early procurement of materials, long lead equipment, and the elimination of redesign contribute to reducing the overall project schedule.

Project Complexity

Dealing with a single source significantly reduces owner administrative burden. With the continued reduction of internal facilities staff, the opportunity to have a single entity for complete project management lessens managerial tasks, especially when dealing with the complexities of research laboratory projects.

Constructability Review/Innovation

The early involvement of the constructing entity is inherent to integrated project delivery. Interjection of construction knowledge into the design process fosters creativity and innovative construction solutions. This process serves as a continual value engineering effort.

Reduction in Claims

The single source responsibility provides the owner a shelter from added liability as the A/E is not performing as an agent of the owner. Design quality is the complete responsibility of the single source and the process promotes a non-adversarial relationship as a function of the contract. The end result is a reduction in change orders and subsequently, in litigation.

Quality

Singularized responsibility is a powerful quality motivator, and with this undivided accountability, responsibility for performance and quality does not shift to another party. Traditional design/bid/build often relies upon restrictive contract language, adversarial audit, inspection, and the legal systems for quality assurance.

The Process

Turnkey Lab Facility Integration is a seamless delivery model that provides a single source for complete facility design and construction, equipment specification, selection, and procurement, and complete systems integration and commissioning. The result is a fully functional research facility that delivers reliable data in a competitive manner.

The process allows for the development of project costs early in the design process. This minimizes internal resource commitment, while still maintaining owner participation in all aspects of design, cost, and schedule development. This is accomplished by early assembly of the project team, which consists of the owner and mutually selected consultants, contractors, and suppliers.  

The first phase in the process is Preliminary Design In this phase, a defined scope is delivered to the owner, establishing a project execution plan and providing detailed project costs. Preliminary Design specifically tailors the cost documents to define the scope at a confirming level. This early recognition of project budget allows the owner to make strategic decisions in the planning phase, minimizing changes and reducing overall costs.

Phase two of the process is the Final Design.  During this phase, the construction documents and long lead facility equipment packages are completed. Equipment specification, selection, and procurement require the owner to work with a team that has specific research facility expertise.  Assembling equipment specifications and requesting submittals from qualified suppliers for each component are the critical activities of this phase. The responses are then reviewed jointly, allowing the owner to make a matrix-based selection. Selected equipment can then procured by the facility integration team or the owner. Construction packages are developed so that facility construction can start shortly after the Preliminary Design document approval. This allows overlap of the construction documents’ development with construction activities and accelerates the schedule dramatically by beginning construction efforts in parallel with final design documents.

The third phase is Construction, which spans from initial construction activities through start-up and commissioning.  Typically the integration team does not self-perform the construction, but competitively bids to multiple subcontractors in each category.  Utilizing local contractors allows the process to be competitive at locations around the world while the integration team coordinates the interface between all contractors and suppliers. The on-site project superintendent facilitates and supervises the daily construction activities. The responsibility of interfacing suppliers, purchasing critical equipment, and pre-testing system components allows the integration team to conduct streamlined commissioning processes for even the most complex facilities. The customer’s operation and maintenance personnel are included in the start-up and commissioning process.

Phase four is the Preventative Maintenance phase.  Developing and operating a preventative maintenance program keep all the systems operating in peak condition. This phase includes ongoing operations and maintenance training developed specifically for the owner’s internal staff and providing electronic operations and maintenance manuals.

The design-focused Facility Integration Process is structured to provide services as an extension of the owner’s staff. All cost information associated with the project can shared on a complete open book basis, allowing the owner to remain in control of all project cost issues. Competitive bidding of all subcontractors allows the owner to receive the greatest value on all trade packages. This value-based, team-focused approach allows the owner to receive: reduced project unit cost, accelerated project delivery schedule, and owner certainty of outcome.

The most qualified integration teams have staff vertically integrated specifically for the single source delivery of complex research facilities. With a fundamental knowledge of industry regulations, technology, and facility issues, teams have a differentiating expertise of both research and facility systems.

Most importantly, any project delivery methodology undertaken needs to be provided by an entity that understands the intent of the facility.

Understanding the science of research and how it affects facility use drives building decisions. This is very important to the success of laboratory facility projects as it relates to final functionality.

Case Study

In August of 2005, the integrated delivery team of ACS, Flad Architects, and Affiliated Engineers, Inc. met with Battelle to discuss the turnkey delivery of an Inhalation Laboratory in Richland, Washington. The business analysis to support the project identified key project drivers as the need for fast occupancy and facility functionality.

Initial meetings focused on critical path elements and recognized the importance of team building and consensus building to facilitate timely decision making. This created an atmosphere of success for all project stakeholders. The team articulated the important role of the integrator as the responsible entity to bridge gaps with systems and equipment integration needs.

The project was a greenfield location with full site development and primary utilities extension into a new 17,500 sq. ft. building, including holding and procedure rooms. Mechanical and electrical systems include boilers, chillers, air handing units, exhaust fans, air compressors, vacuum pumps, and a standby generator. 

ACS held a single source contract with complete responsibility for design and construction, including 25 direct construction subcontracts and 30 direct purchase orders to equipment suppliers, including rack washers, autoclave, hoods, refrigerators, and lab specialty equipment.

The project was executed in 10 months, from the date of the first programming meeting to owner occupancy, meeting schedule, budget, and functionality requirements.

In assessing the key elements of project success, ACS, Inc. and Battelle identified the following items:

Integrated Design and Construction Experience

The ACS team has extensive experience delivering complex research facilities utilizing sole source integrated design and construction. This allowed opportunities to apply engineering expertise in the office and the field, during design and construction. The experience of working together, combined with team continuity from beginning to end, facilitated timely and proactive communication.

Key Conceptual Efforts

Integrated delivery allowed the planning for future phases while not affecting the current project schedule. Critical elements such as equipment sizing, redundancy, and design modifications that allowed for improved construction and maintenance efficiencies were examined. All modifications and future expansion questions were addressed with focus on the appropriate level of investment needed for success.

Aligning Design and Construction

The team expertise and the delivery process facilitated better decision-making processes, created seamless phased design and construction packages, and utilized specialized permitting expertise to expedite the process. Items such as changes in site location, changes in infrastructure designs to meet local code requirements, research program definition, and penthouse enlargement to enclose mechanical equipment for long-term, improved operational efficiencies were all issues directly impacted by this process.

Direct Purchasing of Building and Laboratory Equipment

Improved the ability to make detailed decisions, allowed for better integration with the building design, provided opportunity to apply knowledge of how standard equipment is used and the affect on building design, and utilized the use of approved submittal booklets for contractor pricing to drive the schedule.

Direct Purchasing of Subcontracts

The utilization of multiple, self-performing subcontracts provides the team the ability to make detailed decisions that greatly affect project schedule and cost. A value engineering process is utilized to refine the scope versus the cost. To do this, the design documents are reviewed to develop a listing of potential items, the items are priced and then reviewed to receive direction from project management. The ability to directly coordinate and communicate greatly assists with the ability to incorporate change during construction as needed.

Involvement of Commissioning and Controls Engineers Upfront

The fundamental nature of the integrated delivery process involves inclusion of the entire project team early on. The commissioning plan was integrated with the entire project schedule and detailed the role of the team in completing and documenting the process. The end result was ensuring all systems were fully functional at occupancy.

The Integrated Delivery Process provides owners with increased opportunities for project success. The nature of the integrated design and construct contract combined with the experience of the team drives the process. Taking a strategic vision from planning and programming, integrated project delivery is a seamless delivery model that provides owners with certainty of outcome; the assurance that the project will start and finish in an organized and deliberate manner meeting project schedule and budget requirements while delivering complete facility functionality.