What Public Officials Need To Know About - Texas Municipal League

What Public Officials
Need to Know About...

What Public Officials Need to Know About
Planning And Delivering
Public Works Projects
In The 21st Century
The effective selection and use of engineering and architectural consultants by public agencies
presents a major professional challenge for public works officials, chief administrative officials
and governing bodies. The manner in which this responsibility is carried out can affect the
public’s confidence in the agency and its officials either positively or negatively.
American Public Works Association
Texas Council of Engineering Companies
1001 Congress Ave., Suite 200
Austin, Texas 78701
Phone: (512) 474-1474
www.cectexas.org
1

INTRODUCTION
The planning and construction of public works projects is a major
part of the mission of cities, counties, school districts, water districts
and other public agencies. Taxpayers and ratepayers expect to see
projects completed expeditiously. Elected officials are often much
more involved in public works decision-making than they were 20
years ago, and the pressure on public works officials to deliver
projects efficiently is significantly greater. Recent events, such as the
devastating hurricanes along the Gulf Coast in 2005, have heightened
public demand for effective and safe infrastructure.
This manual is intended to provide a general overview of the public
works project planning and delivery process, with a focus on tips for
good decision making and case studies of successful projects.
Texas
Council of
Engineering
Companies
2
www.cectexas.org

Table of Contents
I. The Role of Consulting Engineers in Public Works Projects................................... 4
Types of Engineering Services
Engineering Effort vs. Project Cost
II. Selecting an Engineer................................................................................................... 7
Qualifications-Based Selection (QBS)
Why Qualifications-Based Selection Yields Value
Steps in the Engineering Selection Process
III. Negotiating Engineering Fees and Contracts.......................................................... 11
The Scope of Work
Fee Structures
Owner-Generated Fee Curves
Negotiating Engineering Fees
Insurance Issues and Risk
Standard Contracts
Expediting Negotiation and Approval
IV. The Importance of Planning...................................................................................... 19
V. Geotechnical and Materials Testing Issues.............................................................. 21
VI.
23
Special Issues for Building Projects..........................................................................
VII. Project Delivery Options.............................................................................................. 24
Competitive Sealed Bid Proposals for Construction Services
Construction Manager-At Risk
Design-Build
Guide to Project Delivery Options
Appendix A Types of Engineering Services........................................................................ 27
3

I. THE ROLE OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS IN
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
T
he delivery of public works projects and the structure of organizations responsible
for them have both changed significantly in recent years. Twenty years ago,
governmental public works agencies often had large engineering design staffs.
Now, public works leaders are pushed to do more with less staff and to respond
quickly to shifting revenue streams, changing conditions, and the need for specialized
expertise. As a result, agencies have had to rely heavily on consulting engineering
firms to supplement their staff resources and to team with them in the
delivery of projects. Some organizations, such as toll road authorities and major
counties, have become almost exclusively managers of service providers, delivering
hundreds of millions of dollars of projects with very limited in-house staff.
As public
EXAMPLE: Because consulting engineers usually work for multiple clients works organizations
have
and across a geographic area, they may have a better understanding of
regional facilities and can help clients find solutions that extend beyond their changed, the
boundaries. For example, the City of Midlothian retained a consulting firm role of engineering
firms
to plan and design a new wastewater treatment plant. But because the firm
was knowledgeable about other regional systems in the area, it suggested that has evolved
the city investigate hooking up to a regional system. In the end, this proved to and broadened
be a more cost-effective alternative.
as well. In the
past, engineering
firms may
have focused
solely on design work, developing plans and specifications for public works staff
to approve and implement. Now, consulting engineers are increasingly retained by
owners to implement complete programs from beginning to end. This involves a
wider range of services, such as capital project planning and scheduling, development
of design standards, management of consultant teams and administration of
construction activities.
Engineering firms are brought in to assist agencies for many reasons. Special technical
capabilities may be needed for a particular project, or a project may be controversial
or politically sensitive. Staffing flexibility may be a reason to use an
engineering firm, since public works programs rarely require the same level of
engineering effort from year to year and in-house staff cannot be hired and fired to
4
In a public works project, the engineer is the owner’s agent --
the eyes and ears and trained mind that exclusively represents
the owner throughout the process of conceiving, designing,
and constructing the project. The engineer’s skill, experience,
and independent judgment provide the owner the best
assurance of project integrity and true value. That assurance,
in turn, helps meet the public trust in expending taxpayer
funds.

match production needs. Other considerations often cited by owners include the
cost-effectiveness of private sector services, the innovation and ideas brought in
through the competitive selection process and the clear lines of responsibility for
schedule and quality in an outsourced project.
The roles of consulting engineering firms can vary widely. The services typically
provided to public agencies relate to planning, design and construction of capital
projects. An engineering firm might serve as a city’s flood plain manager, deal
with state and regional agencies on the city’s behalf and help educate the city council
on flooding issues. A firm might have an operational role in dealing with water
line breaks, treatment plants or traffic signals. In the regulatory area, a firm might
provide plan and plat review, help develop and modify codes or provide long-range
community planning. In the area of capital
project implementation, a firm might
perform design or manage other design
teams and perform construction administration
services.
Obviously, all of these services can be performed
by in-house staff. The value of a
consulting firm is that it can provide personnel
with diverse expertise on a less
than full-time basis, bringing the best-inclass
skills to bear on particular problems.
Just as the needs for engineering services
vary, the firms that meet these needs also
vary in organizational structure, size and
capability. Many engineering firms provide comprehensive, diversified services to
owners. Other firms provide specialized services, such as geotechnical, civil, structural,
mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP) or environmental engineering. These
firms can provide their services directly to an owner or through a prime firm in a
subconsultant relationship. On large, multi-disciplinary projects, it is customary to
retain a prime firm with subconsultant professionals providing specialized services
under the direction of the prime.
DFW Airport’s 4.81-mile
Skylink is the world’s largest
airport train.
TYPES OF ENGINEERING SERVICES
The services offered by consulting engineers can be grouped into two broad categories
• Planning and consulting studies
• Services related to construction projects
Money invested in quality design at the
front end of a project often can save
significantly on overall project costs.
5

Engineering consulting studies can include feasibility reports for a capital project,
comparisons of design alternatives, environmental impact analyses, master plans,
land development plans and regional plans, operational studies for a capital facility,
rate studies, assistance in financial analysis, equipment tests, forensic engineering
to investigate causes of a failure and many other kinds of investigations and
reports.
Construction projects typically follow engineering investigations and reports. At
the outset, a study and report phase looks at the owner’s needs and feasible alternatives
and determines project scope. Engineering firms also help owners understand
various project delivery options and assess which is best for their project. During a
preliminary design phase, an engineer could conduct geotechnical and soil investigations,
define project requirements and general scheduling, and deal with regulatory
agencies and affected utilities. After the preliminary design approval, the engineer
develops construction plans and contract documents and provides an opinion
regarding probable costs. A consulting engineer usually assists owners in advertising
for bids or obtaining proposals, issues addenda and interpretations to plans,
helps the owner assess the acceptability of contractors and evaluate bids. In the
construction phase, engineers can provide a variety of services from periodic observation
to full administration. (A more detailed list of types of engineering services
is provided in Appendix A.)
In consulting services and in the design and construction of projects, consulting engineers
are an owner’s agent in solving problems and accomplishing the owner’s goals.
ENGINEERING EFFORT VS. PROJECT COST
Engineering decisions, whether delivered by public works employees or private
sector consultants, are the key factors in the initial cost and long-term value in public
works projects. Engineering costs are typically less than 15 percent of a project’s
construction costs and no more than 2 percent of life cycle costs. But the
decisions that are made during the engineering phase regarding the layout, design,
materials, size, equipment and other facets of a project are critical to how long a
facility lasts, how much it costs to maintain and how well it addresses the problem
it was intended to solve. Money invested in quality design at the front end of a
project often can save significantly on overall project costs.
6
Engineering costs are typically
no more than 2 percent of
life cycle costs.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Construction
Life Cycle
15% 2%
Engineering Costs vs. Project Costs

II. selecting an engineer
QUALIFICATIONS-BASED SELECTION (QBS)
Both federal and Texas law provide for a specific process that must be followed
when governmental entities retain engineers. This process is referred to as
qualifications-based selection, or QBS. QBS is a two-step competitive
contracting process based on the evaluation of a firm’s capabilities, experience
and technical skills in relation to the needs of a particular project.
Professional Services Procurement Act (Section 2254.004, Government
Code):
In procuring architectural or engineering services, a governmental entity
shall (1) first select the most highly qualified provider of those services on
the basis of demonstrated competence and qualifications; and (2) then
attempt to negotiate with that provider a contract at a fair and reasonable
price.
1.
QBS
Selection of Firm
Negotiation of Fee
Under Texas law, the failure to follow a QBS process in selecting an
engineer can result in a contract being voided. The law may also be
enforced through injunctive or declaratory relief. So doing it right saves time and
money.
The typical QBS process has two phases:
Phase I (Selection): The first phase involves the selection of the firm most qualified
to do the work. Initially, the owner publicly solicits services for a particular
project. In response, interested firms submit statements of their qualifications and
ability to design the project, including the qualifications of the project manager and
other staff that will be working on the project. The owner evaluates the respondents
only on the basis of experience and qualifications – cost is not a factor – and
typically develops a short list of three competing firms. Usually interviews are
held with the short-listed firms. Finally, the firms are ranked in order of most qualified.
An aggressive and innovative
design approach improved
overall streetscape aesthetics
while supporting a friendlier
environment for pedestrian
and traffic access in Longview.
Phase II (Negotiation): The second phase
involves the negotiation of the fee. The
owner and the highest-ranked firm define the
scope of services and negotiate a fair and
reasonable fee for the services to be performed.
If negotiations are not successful,
discussions are terminated and the owner
contacts the next most highly rated firm,
with the process continuing until a contract
is signed. A subsequent chapter will provide
more information on fees and negotiation.
This process can be shortened. If an owner
has extensive experience with a firm and is
7

satisfied that the firm is the best for the upcoming work, a public request for qualifications
from other firms is not required by law. Similarly, an owner can make a
selection after receiving statements of qualifications, without conducting interviews.
The more complicated the project, the more an extensive selection process
is advisable. The success or failure of a project can depend on such factors as the
ease of communication between an owner and the consultant’s project manager.
The primary prohibition in the QBS process is that competitive bidding is not
allowed.
WHY QUALIFICATIONS-BASED SELECTION YIELDS VALUE
QBS is the law, but why is that the case After all, competitive bidding procedures
apply to most procurement decisions by governmental entities. Why not professional
design services
QBS
is the law,
but why is that
the case
■ Bidding is appropriate, but only when detailed specifications or a detailed
scope of services are known. When commodities are procured by a governmental
entity through competitive bidding, one of the requirements is that each bidder
is bidding on the same commodity. Detailed specifications ensure that bidders
have equal opportunities. Engineering services are procured before the scope of
work for a project is highly defined; in fact, engineers are retained to develop the
scope of work. Since the owner cannot know the precise services to be provided
before the project is designed, fair competitive bidding is impossible.
■ QBS encourages technical excellence and innovation. A system that simply
seeks the cheapest service will produce lower quality design and therefore more
expensive projects. When fee becomes a major criterion for selection, a design
firm’s approach has to change. Applying higher standards or technical excellence
could render a response noncompetitive if another respondent applies
lower standards. Advanced technologies or new features that could save money
over the life of the project may not be added because another firm, not including
these features, may offer a lower upfront price. Instead, systems that are easy to
design are selected. Less experienced personnel are used and few options are
evaluated. QBS, on the other hand, encourages collaboration with the client to
find the best solutions within budget constraints.
EXAMPLE: A 12,000-foot long, $36 million outfall tunnel was needed to drain
North Central Expressway in Dallas. During a qualifications-based selection
process, an engineering firm won the project with a radical new idea – an underground
detention vault mined deep under a city park to completely eliminate the
need for the outfall tunnel. The city hired the firm and subsequently built the
Cole Park Detention Vault, saving around $8 million in construction.
8

■ Quality design is the biggest factor in
long-term cost. As noted above, design
costs are typically a very small percentage
of life cycle costs. However, the skills,
experience and judgment provided by engineers
during design are the biggest factors
in determining life cycle costs. Shortcuts in
design may be cheaper in the near term, but
it almost inevitably costs more in terms of
maintenance, rehabilitation and operational
costs. QBS promotes a long-term focus.
■ Quality design affects construction costs.
Shortcuts in design are penny-wise and
pound-foolish. Firms competing on the basis of price rather than value can
develop plans without evaluating options or with minimal details that often
require much decision making in the field by the contractor. On a structural
project, an engineer could design only the most heavily loaded members, then
repeat the conservative design throughout the structure, resulting in oversizing
and higher construction costs. Since construction costs are typically 85-90 percent
of project costs, expansion of these costs is much more significant than the
cost of full design services.
The use of pipe loop studies
for a new treatment facility
was an innovative approach
utilized by engineers to plan a
new storage and recovery
project for the San Antonio
Water System.
■ The essence of the design process is a collaboration between engineer and
owner. The critical element in the design process is collaboration between the
owner and the engineer. To a real extent, work on a project begins when an
owner and the most qualified firm enter negotiations. To arrive at a price, the
owner and engineer must jointly establish goals and project scope, eliminate
ambiguities, clarify assumptions and set realistic expectations about schedule
and budget. Bidding tends to eliminate this dialogue and gives professionals an
incentive to work against their client from the beginning in order to gain an
advantage on the competition for a low price.
■ No two design solutions are the same. People often believe that engineers
practice an exact science, learning formulas and applying them similarly.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Engineering is based on the application
of education, experience, opinion and judgment. Not all engineers have the
same level of experience in every specialty or project type, and not all can bring
that experience to bear on a project in a timely manner. Not all engineers apply
the same level of creativity and ingenuity and not all have the same level of
communication skills. Doctors, lawyers and accountants often differ in the application
of their professional judgment; engineers and architects are no different.
■ QBS is cost-effective. Although it is not a low-bid process, QBS does consider
cost. An owner is under no requirement to accept the proposed compensation of
the highest-ranked firm. Owners can and do proceed to negotiate with other
firms. At the same time, to get the best value owners should expect to pay reasonable
fees for the services required.
STEPS IN THE ENGINEERING SELECTION PROCESS
9

EXAMPLE: A Texas water supply district was faced with construction of a
156-mile raw water pipeline through a rural area. The construction costs of a
cookie-cutter design were estimated at more than $150 million. However, the
district retained an engineering firm with experience in many large pipeline
projects. Because of this experience, the consultant was able to design a system
that was constructed for $105 million, generating savings through custom
engineered piping products, innovative construction techniques, use of native
materials and innovative project sequencing.
Some of the important objectives in selecting a consultant are:
■ Participation by a sufficient number of consultants to ensure selection of a qualified
firm.
■ Fair competition, with due respect for not unduly burdening the consultant community.
This means ensuring that the demands on agency staff and consultants
is proportionate to the size of the project.
■ Objective comparison of agency needs and goals with the capabilities of the
firms considered.
■ Involvement of stakeholders whose satisfaction with the end project is critical.
With these objectives in mind, the typical process of selecting an engineering
consultant includes:
■ Deciding to use an engineering consultant.
■ Development of a basic information packet and issuance of a request for qualifications
(RFQ). Often, the RFQ will include a listing of the criteria that the agency
will use to evaluate proposers.
■ Receipt of consultant responses.
■ Review of responses and identification of a short list of firms to interview.
Typically, a short list will be no more than 3-5 firms; an invitation for an interview
will often include additional information on the project.
■ Interviews.
■ Evaluation of interviews and determination of most qualified firm. A score sheet
or evaluation form can be used to assist interviewers with a set number of points
awarded for specific areas. Evaluation factors can include experience of the firm
on similar projects, experience of the project manager on similar projects, experience
of the team, project approach, innovative ideas, special capabilities, previous
experience with the agency and similar factors that are related to experience
and qualifications.
■ Notification of most qualified firm, negotiation of scope, fee and contract terms.
A qualifications-based selection can move expeditiously. For example, there is no
requirement under Texas law for agencies to advertise if they have a satisfactory
relationship with a firm or if they feel they can select an appropriate group of invited
respondents. Of course, this option must be balanced against the need for any
public process to be perceived as fair. Furthermore, the evaluation of respondents
and the selection of the most qualified firm can and should happen within days of
the interview process.
10

III. NEGOTIATING ENGINEERING FEES AND CONTRACTS
THE SCOPE OF WORK
Any contracting process is about defining what each party is looking for in an
agreement. The absolute key to a good engineering contract is a clearly defined
scope of work for the project – what the engineer will study and deliver. This
agreement comes out of significant discussion between the selected firm and the
owner about options, goals, schedule, budget and other project parameters.
An engineering scope of work is typically developed collaboratively between the
owner’s professional staff and the engineer. The outcome is a definition of the
nature and geographic limits of the
project, the various tasks to be accomplished,
the options to be explored, the
standards to be employed, the range of
deliverables and the schedule for completion.
The absolute key to a good
engineering contract is a clearly
defined scope of work for the project.
Defining the scope of services on an
engineering project is mostly about defining expectations. Too often, project performance
elements are not communicated in sufficient detail early on. Instead,
each party makes assumptions based on their experience with past projects. This
usually leads to two sets of assumptions that do not match.
Some of the key items that should be defined and discussed between client and
engineer include:
■ The most important aspect of the project to the client (e.g., schedule, cost
public relations, quality, innovation, etc.).
■ Previous studies and planning documents that relate to the project.
■ Standards to be used and additional standards and specifications that apply.
■ Reviewing agencies that will be involved and departments within the owner’s
organization that will be involved.
■ Required deliverables, including frequency with which preliminary work
will be submitted.
■ The time required for reviews by the owner.
■ The format for deliverables.
■ The level of subsurface utility engineering to be performed.
■ The level of right-of-way services to be performed, such as number of easements,
right-of-entry and easement acquisition services.
■ Permit requirements and who is responsible for obtaining them.
■ The level of effort to be expended in the study phase of the project, such as
type and number of alternatives to be considered.
■ The schedule for each phase of the project.
■ The number of separate bid packages to be prepared.
■ The level of construction phase services to be performed along with the
roles and responsibilities of each party.
11

■ The level of effort associated with environmental investigations.
■ The level of effort for archeological investigations.
■ The level of geotechnical investigation and who is to perform.
■ The topographic and boundary survey requirements for the project and
identify any previous survey work to be incorporated into the project.
■ The survey control network to be used as a basis for the project.
FEE STRUCTURES
There are various fee structures in common use in engineering contracts, depending
on the type of work involved.
■ Lump Sum: All work within a defined scope is to be completed for a set
fee. This type of contract is commonly used when the scope of work can be
clearly defined. Lump sum contracts minimize paperwork burdens on both
sides during the billing process, since payment is usually based on a
percent-complete basis.
■ Hourly Rates: All of the work in a defined
scope is to be completed at agreed-on hourly
rates. This type of agreement is typical
where scope is more undefined, such as in a
planning contract. For contracts that extend
over several years of work, it is common for
escalators to be included that recognize
inflationary cost factors.
Engineers working with the City
of Killeen and Fort Hood
designed an expansion of the
existing airfield to meet both
military and civilian standards,
resulting in substantial savings.
■ Cost Plus Fixed Fee: All of the work in a
defined scope is to be completed for a sum
equal to the cost (including overhead costs)
accumulated in performing the work, plus an
additional fixed fee sum, up to a maximum
amount. The total fixed fee portion is paid
regardless of the actual cost of the work performed.
This type of contract is used for
complex projects that may have somewhat
unpredictbable workloads, such as public
involvement processes.
■ Monthly Retainer: A range of work will be performed for one lump sum
divided equally into monthly fees, over the life of the project or contract. This
is basically a lump sum fee type project, with the exception that it is billed in
fixed monthly amounts. It can apply to repetitive projects such as field inspection
services.
■ Schedule of Rates: All work within a defined scope is to be completed for
established rates based on completed work, regardless of hours expended.
This type of contract is best applied to field services, such as geotechnical services
which may be paid for based on completed tests or feet of borings.
Subsurface utility engineering is also commonly paid for based on length of
underground utilities located.
12

The selection of the fee structure can be made collaboratively between the owner
and the engineering firm. However, for optimum results, either a single individual
or a closely-knit contract team must understand the links between contract scope,
fee and terms. Problems can sometimes arise when contracts are negotiated by
legal or accounting staff without the involvement of technical
or project management staff. Technical staff must
understand the limitations and conditions of a contract.
And in any professional services contract, fees cannot be
separated from scope of work.
OWNER–GENERATED FEE CURVES
Some entities with high volumes of similar work develop
fee curves, which estimate average engineering fees based
on construction cost. Fee curves have some value in certain
situations, but they have many limitations as well.
First, they typically address only basic engineering services
for a project. Many other services such as environmental assessment, geotechnical
investigations, stormwater planning, traffic studies, hydraulic and hydrology
studies, topographic and boundary surveys, appraisal services, right-of-way acquisition
services, regulatory permitting, grant applications and public involvement all
bear little relationship to construction costs and must be estimated differently. The
cost of these so-called “extra services” is never included in fee curves.
Also, fee curves must be constantly
updated. They address a correlation
between engineering costs and construction
costs at a given point in
time, but these two sets of costs do
not have a static relationship and
have different inflationary and
deflationary pressures over time.
Some agencies have been known to
use fee curves from the 1970s and
Tasks
Personnel
Owners must appreciate the uniqueness of
each project location, utilities, traffic control,
safety issues, construction sequencing and
construction methods available to the
contractor.
80s to develop fees, even though these curves are completely outdated and have
been formally withdrawn by organizations that developed them.
Similar to fee curves, fee tables are sometimes used in the design of new buildings.
The fees for these types of services are defined by industry standards. Some public
agencies publish a fee table which lists construction cost ranges for typical projects
and a corresponding architectural engineering (A/E) percentage fee. Like any fee
determination, the level of services above or below industry standard would have
an impact on the fee percentage.
NEGOTIATING ENGINEERING FEES
Probably the most common method of negotiating engineering fees is through the
development of a spreadsheet with a breakdown of tasks on the vertical axis and a
breakdown of types of personnel on the horizontal axis, with the fee developed by
13

estimating the number of hours of effort required for each task for each level of
employee. For example, for the drainage aspects of a roadway project the detailed
breakdown of the engineering tasks might include hours for project management,
determining drainage area boundaries, obtaining storm sewer maps, hydraulic computations,
layouts for channel improvements, etc. For each of these tasks, the hours
required by the project manager, senior engineer, senior structural engineer, civil
engineer, CADD operator and others can be estimated. These hours can then be
multiplied by the billing rate for each position to determine the total fees. The
table below illustrates this example:
EXAMPLE: ROADWAY DRAINAGE PROJECT
TASK
Project
Manager
Senior
Civil
Senior
Structural
Civil
Eng
Survey
Crew
CADD
Total
Hours
Materials
& Supplies
Per Diem
& Travel
1. Project Management
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
2. Drainage Area Boundaries
3. Obtain Storm Sewer Maps
4. Hydraulic Computations
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
$ 0
5. Layouts for Improvements
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
6. Other
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
7. Other
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
8. Other
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$ 0
$ 0
SUBTOTAL (HOURS)
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
$ 0 $ 0
There are ways to assess the fairness and reasonableness of a fee estimate - such as
averages (dollars per linear foot on certain types of projects) or dollars per sheet of
plans. However, there is no magic bullet or golden curve that yields an automatic,
perfect answer to fee negotiation.
Owners must appreciate the uniqueness of each project. Engineering projects have
many variables – location, utilities, traffic control, safety issues, construction
sequencing, construction methods available to the contractor and so forth. In a civil
engineering project, an added variable is that many of the unknowns are underground
and unseen, and not identifiable through available imaging tools.
Even for a relatively simple project such as widening a road from two to four lanes,
consider the issues that must be addressed. There are utility relocation issues,
including determining whether there is an opportunity to upgrade and relocate the
utilities; signing, signalization and traffic control issues; where to mobilize equipment;
whether there are alternatives that minimize needed right-of-way; drainage
issues; life cycle issues related to pavement; and many more.
In many cases, projects with similar construction costs can involve very different
14

engineering and planning efforts. Consider a project that involves replacing a
water line along a residential street as opposed to a new water line in open country.
Some of the engineering issues that would have to be resolved in the residential
area but not in the open country include: where is the
existing water line, what other utilities are under the street,
what is the condition of the line, where are the service laterals,
how to maintain service during the project, what
was the land use in the past, what will development be in
the future, are there schools nearby, can service be shut
down during construction, how to maintain fire protection,
how to best provide for repair in the future with the least
disruption, will additional right-of-way be needed and
should pavement be repaired or substantially reconstructed.
The point is that a contract for engineering services is
not about purchasing a set of lines on a sheet. Rather it
is accessing trusted advice based on judgment about
what is the most cost-effective way for an owner to approach a project where
the construction and life-cycle costs dwarf the engineering costs.
It also is important for owners to understand the diversity of specialties that can be
required for even a small project. Services required can include not only civil engineering
but also surveying, environmental services, public involvement, hydrology
and hydraulics, electrical engineering, structural engineering, process engineering,
corrosion assessment, instrumentation and others. On all but the simplest jobs, the
engineer is bringing together a unique set of specialists and managing the interface
between them. For an owner, the value of using private sector providers is the ability
of those providers to marshal the appropriate skills for each job without maintaining
these skilled employees or staff between jobs.
INSURANCE ISSUES AND RISK
Engineering firms typically carry two types of insurance:
■ General liability insurance, which covers work site accidents, automobiles, etc.
■ Professional liability insurance, which covers the results of professional
negligence.
Negligence on the part of a design professional means the failure to meet a customary
standard of care, which is defined as the duty to have a degree of learning and
skill ordinarily possessed by reputable engineers practicing in the same or similar
locality and under similar circumstances.
What the relevant standard of care is and what is meant by negligence by design
professionals is commonly misunderstood. The standard of care is not and can
never be perfection. Any engineer — and any knowledgeable owner — will tell
you there is no perfect set of plans.
Whether the job is rehabilitation of an existing facility or a brand new facility on a
15

greenfields site, engineering projects always involve some level of unknown information.
As-built plans for a pre-existing facility may not be available. Subsurface
conditions can be particularly problematic. Geotechnical investigations can provide
knowledge of soil conditions, but that knowledge is never perfect. The existence
of underground utilities is another unknown, to the point that an entirely new
discipline known as subsurface utility engineering (SUE) has developed in recent
years.
An investment in front-end site assessment activities is always a trade-off. It costs
money, but can uncover problems that would cost more to correct at a later date.
On the other hand, it is rarely worth the expenditure to develop a “perfect” knowledge
of site conditions.
Nor can a design professional guarantee costs or price. Design of a facility often
commences 12 to 18 months ahead of construction and no engineer can predict the
bidding climate that far into the future. Commodity prices can go up and down rapidly,
as steel and oil have done in recent years. The timing of other projects, which
can drastically affect the number of bidders, cannot be controlled.
Some owners seem to
to their
n
Insurance
Policy
n
think that a contract, once executed, transfers all risk
engineer and contractor. However, knowledgeable
owners recognize that any construction project
involves risk, that the contracting process involves
risk-sharing, and that some responsibility for
unknowns simply must be assumed by the owner
and cannot be shifted away. An engineer’s job is
to minimize that risk within the limits of cost-effectiveness
but it is impossible, within average
fees, for all risks to be absorbed by an engineer
or for that engineer to guarantee a risk-free project.
The best way to deal with these eventualities is
through a contingency fund to pay for both
engineering and construction changes due to
unforeseen conditions, with the size of the
fund established on a case-by-case basis
driven by anticipated project risks.
Other mechanisms for managing risk
include:
■ Escrowing bid documents in case of
later dispute.
■ Establishing a dispute resolution process.
■ Appointing a knowledgeable owner’s
representative to facilitate decisionmaking.
16

STANDARD CONTRACTS
Many agencies develop their own standard forms of agreement for use on professional
services contracts for engineers. These vary widely in form and content, and
in some cases may be inappropriate to a specific assignment or may need significant
modification before use. Owners should note that there are industry-accepted
engineering services contracts, and standard terms and conditions that can be
obtained through the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) and other
professional societies. These documents were prepared through the joint efforts of
NSPE, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and others, and are commonly
referred to as the Engineers’ Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC)
family of documents. In addition to these EJCDC documents, the American
Institute of Architects (AIA) has prepared a family of documents. However, these
are targeted towards buildings, and their use on traditional public works and other
predominantly engineering projects is not advised.
When a design professional enters into an agreement to perform services, whether
the services are provided as part of a Prime Agreement or in the role of a subconsultant,
it is advisable to retain the services of an attorney familiar with contract
law. In those circumstances when an attorney is not retained, it is advisable to have
a risk management specialist or a person intimately familiar with risk to review,
provide comments, and assist in negotiating equitable and reasonable contract
terms.
Some of the key components to effective contracting and risk management
include:
■ A well written and concise Payment clause.
■ Scope of work, with fee, schedule and exclusions.
■ Indemnification provisions that properly distribute the risk to the party most
able to control the risk (See additional discussion below).
■ Insurance limits and coverages that are fair and appropriate for the type of
project that is envisioned.
■ Limitations of liability language that may limit the design professional’s liability
for those projects that are highly complicated or risky, or that have a
compressed schedule.
■ Communications with client (an important aspect of subconsultant
agreements).
■ Other topics such as taxation and consequential damages.
One method of risk-shifting is contractual provisions under which owners sometimes
attempt to have contractors or consultants indemnify the owner against an
owner’s negligence. These provisions are sometimes used in construction contracts,
where some elements of transferred risk, such as site safety, are insurable.
As to design contracts, however, Texas law prohibits owners from requiring
engineers and architects to indemnify an owner for the owner’s negligence.
Furthermore, a public owner may get indemnity from an engineer or architect
only for certain specific things - the design professional's negligent acts, intentional
torts, infringement of intellectual property, and failure to pay a subconsultant.
All other contractual indemnities are prohibited.
17

Such provisions are void and unenforceable, even in private contracts.* The policy
reason behind this law is that professional liability policies carried by design
professionals cover only the actions of an employee or subconsultant of the design
professional. Any contractual provision intending to cover the negligence of others
would void the policy. Furthermore, since engineering firms typically have few
assets other than smart people and computers, such provisions would have little
real utility. The preferred approach is for the owner to be responsible for the owner’s
negligence, the engineer to be responsible for the engineer’s negligence, and
areas in between to be apportioned based on degrees of responsibility.
EXPEDITING NEGOTIATION AND APPROVAL
It is not uncommon in the governmental arena for contract approval and finalization
to take far longer than it should because of departmental approvals or sequential
approvals by the governing body. It makes sense to expedite this process.
When contract terms are agreed to, there is usually excitement on the part of the
project team – both on the owner’s side and the engineer’s side – to get started.
Discussions as to scope are fresh and the project team ready to go. If final checkoffs
don’t happen for one, two or three months (or more) there can be a loss of
momentum.
Development of a master plan utilizing a
video surveillance system enabled the
Uptown Houston Development Authority to
improve mobility and to address increasing
traffic volume and changing traffic patterns.
18
* See Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code, Sec. 130.002 (b): “A covenant or promise in,
in connection with, or collateral to a construction contract other than a contract for a single
family or multifamily residence is void and unenforceable if the covenant or promise provides
for a registered architect or licensed engineer whose engineering or architectural design services
are the subject of the construction contract to indemnify or hold harmless an owner or
owner's agent or employee from liability for damage that is caused by or results from the negligence
of an owner or an owner's agent or employee.

IV. THE IMPORTANCE OF PLANNING
P
ublic works planning is not solely a technical exercise. It begins with policy
decisions made by elected officials and citizens. What is their vision for their city
or county What do they want it to look like in the future
Planning implements this vision. It defines capital facility needs based on policy
decisions about growth and includes implementation plans with the associated
codes, ordinances and financial plans that are required.
There are many levels and types of planning. For
example, master planning may focus on long-term
water and wastewater system needs or the development
of a long-range thoroughfare plan. It involves
an inventory of assets and some predictive standards
for maintenance, replacement, repair and restoration.
Increasingly, a Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) database is an essential tool in the
municipal planning process.
A capital improvement plan (CIP) implements
the vision. A CIP is necessarily more reactive and
responsive to constituent groups in various parts of
a city, county or special district, but it should be
based on the life cycles of capital assets and the
management program for these assets. Otherwise, each project can become a
“political football.” A financially unconstrained plan is worth an initial review,
since it shows a true picture of what must be accomplished, whether financed by
cash or debt. The CIP must then be divided into construction packages based on
deficiencies. Many engineering firms have the capability to assist public works
departments in tasks such as programming, scoping, prioritizing and defining of
real estate requirements.
Public officials are often asked,
“What is your vision for the future”
Planning implements this vision.
Finally, project-level planning is an essential part of a successful project, since it
deals directly with the demands and needs of stakeholders and constituents that
may be affected and defines their expectations. Good planning could involve minimizing
neighborhood and business impacts, communicating clearly what the
impacts will be, proper scheduling and rapid communications when deviations
from the schedule occur.
19

EXAMPLE: Prior bond programs of the City of San Antonio had been plagued
by poor cost estimates, leading to delays when not enough money was available
to complete projects as advertised. A consultant team developed better estimates
of probable cost and narrowed down utility and environmental problems before
the program went to voters, increasing the odds that the program could be delivered
on time and on budget.
Proper planning also can yield results at the level of individual bond programs.
Anyone involved in public works has seen situations where, because of inaccurate
cost estimates, far more projects are crammed into a bond package than can be
built with available funds. In the end, promised projects do not get built or only
pieces of projects are built. Citizens, elected officials and staff are all frustrated.
Good planning in this instance is political insurance for elected officials.
A “roll-in” technique minimized
down time for a railroad bridge
replacement project in Alvarado.
20

V. GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIALS TESTING ISSUES
G
eotechnical engineering and construction materials engineering and testing
(CoMET) are critical to the success of almost any construction project, yet each is
too often taken for granted.
Geotechnical engineering deals with site subsurface conditions, foundations, and
the interface between the two. Construction claims and
litigation often stem from problems associated with
engineered construction beneath the surface of the
earth. But many times, these problems could have
been avoided through effective geotechnical engineering
practices. Good project planning should not focus
on social, cultural and environmental considerations
alone. It makes little sense to route a proposed pipeline
around a wetland or a cemetery and not consider subsurface
conditions that might make one alternative easier
and less costly to construct than another.
(ASTM E-329)
Construction materials testing and engineering is often
associated with geotechnical engineering, because
effective geotechnical engineering requires the geotechnical
engineer of record to observe excavation to compare actual subsurface
conditions to those the engineer predicted based on test borings. CoMET services
involve more than soil, rock, and other subsurface materials, however; they also
involve steel, asphaltic concrete, aggregates, polymers, fill, and a variety of other
materials. These services are vital for verifying that the constructed elements comply
with plans and specifications for the project. For that reason, under Texas law,
construction materials testing for acceptance and verification purposes is an
engineering activity and must be under the supervision of a licensed professional
engineer.
Engineering firms that offer geotechnical engineering and construction materials
testing and engineering services typically have their own laboratories accredited by
one or more independent accrediting bodies, such as the American Association of
Following Tropical Storm Allison,
engineers working for the Harris
County Flood Control District
updated flood hazard information,
helping set the standards for FEMA’s
new national multi-hazard flood map
modernization initiative.
21

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the American Association
for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA), or others. The firms also employ field personnel
who, typically, are certified by organizations such as the National Institute
for Certification in Engineering Technologies (NICET), the American Concrete
Institute (ACI), or the American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT).
Laboratory accreditation documents a laboratory’s commitment to quality assurance,
standard operating procedures, personnel training, audits, and record keeping.
Although some testing laboratories operate without the direct supervision of
licensed engineers, the most widely accepted laboratory standard – ASTM E-329 –
requires engineering supervision of the laboratory, laboratory staff, and field staff.
The success of a project can be enhanced by relying on a geotechnical engineering
and/or CoMET firm whose laboratory complies with ASTM E-329 and is accredited
by one or more recognized programs, and whose field personnel have had their
capabilities certified by one or more recognized programs.
In the past, geotechnical engineers often served as subconsultants to civil engineers.
Increasingly, owners are choosing to contract directly with geotechnical engineers
who are experienced with the type of construction involved and who are familiar
with local conditions. This approach helps ensure that critical risk factors are considered,
and that they are considered sooner rather than later. At the same time, the
entity that contracts with the geotechnical engineer, be it an owner or design consultant,
needs to be experienced enough to manage the impact of geotechnical decisions
on construction cost. For example, the interpretation of geotechnical reports
prepared for a roadway project could drive decisions about materials used in pavement
thickness that could significantly affect the cost and quality of construction.
Similarly, construction materials engineering and testing services should be contracted
directly by the owner. For certain types of project delivery processes, this is
a legal requirement. (Texas Local Government Code Sec. 271.116(c) and Texas
Education Code Sec. 44.038(d) are examples of this requirement.) Occasionally,
owners or design engineers working for owners attempt to include testing services
as part of a contractor’s bid. Depending on how the contractor procures these services,
this approach can be illegal and, in any event, is inappropriate in appearance
if not fact. Owners engage CoMET firms to help ensure that contractors achieve
specified conditions. Contractors that control CoMET services can easily schedule
tests to their advantage, but to the detriment of the owner.
The Harris Substation, which provides
electrical power to the
University of Texas at Austin campus,
is likely the most compact substation
in the world and the most
reliable for a research institution.
22

VI. SPECIAL ISSUES FOR BUILDING PROJECTS
M
any public works initiatives are civil engineering projects – water, wastewater,
roadways and similar projects – in which most of the specialties required are engineering
disciplines. However, when a public entity plans, designs and constructs a
building project such as an office building, fire station or convention center, there is
a need for both engineering and architectural expertise.
Generally, either an architect or engineer can act as prime professional on a building
project. In considering which discipline should act as the prime, an owner should
consider the nature of the project. If a project is comprehensive and involves a considerable
amount of space planning and other architectural work, an architect is usually
the prime. In this case, it is important to remember that the architect’s fee will
include a significant percentage for managing the overall multidisciplinary team.
The scope of services (and the fee) of the consulting engineer, in turn, will be limited
to only those services that support the architect’s effort and generally will exclude
time for overall project management, coordination and communication with the
owner, presentations and program development. Often, public officials do not
understand this arrangement and are disappointed when they perceive that engineers
acting as subconsultants are unwilling to assume extensive communication and programming
responsibilities. If these services are desired from subconsultants, they
should be included in the fee.
Many engineers are also skilled at serving in the role of prime consultants. When
the scope of work is primarily engineering, an owner should consider retaining an
engineer as the prime consultant. For example, if the primary task in a project is the
replacement of mechanical and electrical systems, an engineer should be considered
as prime professional even if minor structural or architectural modifications are
required.
Renovation work is generally hard to quantify, especially as it applies to building
systems such as mechanical, heating and cooling and control systems. Often this is
due to the complexity and interdependence between the systems. The best way to
achieve maximum value is to conduct a system evaluation study prior to establishing
a fee. The engineer can perform an engineering evaluation, quantify unknown areas
and develop a comprehensive scope of work definition. In addition, construction
costs can be also estimated to make sure that the public agency has sufficient funds
and reasonable expectations as to what can be accomplished with those funds. At
that time, a reasonable fee can be established. Generally, renovation fees are as
much as 40 to 50 percent higher than design fees for new construction.
For regional areas within Texas where the International Building Code is the standard,
the selection of a firm to perform special inspections must be made by the
owner or his professional representative. The contractor may not select and employ
a firm to perform special inspections.
23

VII. PROJECT DELIVERY OPTIONS
T
he term “project delivery” is used in the construction industry to describe different
ways of structuring and contracting for the services required for a project.
Until the last decade, the most common method of project delivery was one commonly
referred to as “design-bid-build,” a term that represents the most common
sequence of activities in a project. In this system, an owner retains an engineer or
other design professional to develop detailed plans and specifications for a project,
then puts these out for competitive bids from contractors, and contracts with the
winning bidder to build the project. In this approach, an owner has a contract with
the engineer and a separate agreement with the constructor.
Beginning in 1995, the Texas Legislature began to authorize alternative procedures,
often referred to collectively as "alternative project delivery." For many years, these
procedures were, for the most part, limited to vertical construction, or building
projects. However, in 2007, the Legislature extended certain of the options to the
infrastructure area.
The
consulting
engineer is
traditionally
the owner’s
agent.
The most common alternative project delivery processes are:
■ Competitive sealed proposals for construction services (also called negotiated
contracting). Fundamentally, this is a method that allows an owner to select a
contractor based on considerations other than strict low-bid. For example, an
owner can consider a contractor’s reputation, the quality of the services, utilization
of historically underutilized businesses, the owner’s past relationship with
the contractor, long-term cost, schedule or other factors that are spelled out in the
request for proposals. Under the competitive proposal method, the design of a
facility is the same as under a traditional process. That is, an owner retains
an engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications prior to advertising for
proposals. The only difference is the method of selection of the constructor.
Under current Texas law, competitive sealed proposals can be used for all kinds
of projects, including building projects and infrastructure.
■ Construction manager-at risk (sometimes called “design-contract-build”).
CM-at risk is probably the most widely utilized alternative to design-bid-build in
Texas. In the CM-at risk method, an owner has a separate contract with an engineer
who retains full responsibility for design of the facility. The term “construction
manager-at risk” is simply another term for the constructor, who is in
this model selected differently and at an earlier stage in the process.
In the CM-at risk model, the contractor is typically selected earlier in the process,
typically on the basis of experience and qualifications. Although the engineer/designer
maintains final responsibility for the design, the contractor/CM can
have input into constructability issues. At some point in the process, the contractor/CM
provides a guaranteed maximum price for the facility, which the owner
can accept or negotiate.
24

In many ways, the CM-at risk approach offers the advantages of design-build
without the disadvantages of that process. The owner maintains a contractual
relationship with engineer/designer, who remains the agent of the owner looking
out for his or her interests. At the same time, this approach fosters a less adversarial,
more cooperative relationship between the engineer and the contractor,
which enhances constructability and reduces claims.
CM-at risk has been predominantly used in building construction, but legislative
changes in 2007 permit its use in the infrastructure area as well.
■ Design-build. Design-build is a method of construction procurement under
which design and construction services are contracted through one entity, either a
joint venture between an engineer/design and a constructor or from a single entity
that has both capabilities. Design-build is often oversold as a panacea for project
delivery problems. Since an owner has a single point of responsibility and does
not have to manage the interface between the designer and the constructor, supposedly
this process can offer fewer hassles.
However, these advantages are often more theoretical than actual and there are
downsides to design-build. For example, the owner’s contractual relationship
with and ability to rely on the design professional is fundamentally different. In a
traditional project, the engineer is the owner’s agent and is charged with protecting
the owner’s interest. By contrast, in a design-build project, the engineer or
design professional is often a subcontractor to the contractor and vulnerable to
pressures to compromise quality.
Design-build projects can succeed, but owners must take care to define their
needs precisely and to assemble or select a team that understands the design-build
process. Also owners using design-build procedures must be more sophisticated
about the construction process in order to protect their interests.
Under Texas law, there are actually two separate sets of procedural rules for
design-build, depending on whether the project is a building project or a civil
engineering, or infrastructure, project. All governmental entities can use designbuild
for buildings. However, the use of design-build for infrastructure is limited
to local government entities above 500,000 population until September 1, 2009
and after that date is limited to local government entities above 100,000 in population.
In addition to these delivery methods, Texas law also authorized the use of construction
manager-agents, but this concept is not, in the strictest sense, a construction
project delivery method. Rather, it is an option for adding an additional layer to
the traditional project. Owners occasionally retain a construction manager-agent in
an advisory, fiduciary capacity to perform some of the owner’s administrative
responsibilities such as invoicing and payment. However, the CM-agent does not
supplant or replace the services of an engineer/design professional or a constructor.
In summary, project delivery options are complex and many more resources are
available through Texas CEC and other organizations. The key issue is to fit the
needs of a given project to the appropriate delivery system. An engineer/design
professional can be a guide in this process.
25

Management
Structure
Legislative Term
Definition
Pros
Cons
Best Suited
Least Suited
GUIDE TO PROJECT DELIVERY OPTIONS
Governmental
Entity
Governmental
Entity
Governmental
Entity
Governmental
Entity
General
Contractor
A/E
General
Contractor
A/E
Construction
Manager
Architect/
Engineer
Design/
Builder
Subcontractors Subcontractors
Subcontractors
Subcontractors
Competitive Bidding Competitive Sealed Proposals Construction Manager-at Risk
Design/Builder
A delivery method wherein the
Governmental Entity selects an architect/engineer
to design and develop
construction documents from which the
Governmental Entity solicits lump sum
bids. Selection is based on the lowest
responsible bid and the contractor
serves as a single point of responsibility
for construction.
A delivery method similar to competitive
bidding. The Governmental Entity
selects an architect/engineer to design
and develop construction documents.
Once documents are fully complete the
Governmental Entity solicits sealed proposals.
Selection is based on a combination
of price and other factors that the
Governmental Entity deems provide
best value.
A method where the construction manager
serves as the general contractor
providing pre-construction and construction
services. The Construction
Manager-at Risk provides design
phase consultation in evaluating costs,
schedule, implications of alternative
designs, systems and materials during
design and serves as a single point of
responsibility contracting directly with
the subcontractors during construction.
A method where a single entity is contracted
to provide both design and construction.
The Design/Build team consists
of contractor, architect and engineer.
The Design/Builder contracts
directly with the subcontractors and is
responsible for delivery of the project.
Selection is based on the proposal
offering the best value to the
Governmental Entity.
• Familiar delivery method
• Defined project scope
• Single point of responsibility
for construction
• Open, aggressive bidding
• Selection flexibility
• Defined project scope
• Single point of responsibility for
construction
• No design phase assistance
• Selection flexibility
• Design phase assistance
• Single point of responsibility for
construction
• Team concept
• Change flexibility
• Selection flexibility
• Single point of responsibility for
design and construction
• Team concept
• No design phase assistance
• Longer schedule duration
• Price not established until bidding is
complete
• Potentially adversarial relationship
• Lack of flexibility for change
• Price not established until design
complete
• Adversarial relationship
• Adversarial relationship reduced
• Difficult for Governmental Entity to
evaluate GMP
• Loss of check and balance
• More difficult for Governmental Entity
to manage
• Potential adversarial relationship
between Governmental Entity and
Design/Builder
New projects that are not schedule
sensitive nor subject to potential change.
New projects that are not schedule
sensitive nor subject to potential change.
Larger new or renovation projects
that are schedule sensitive, difficult
to define, or subject to change.
New or renovation projects that are
schedule sensitive.
Complex projects that are sequence
or schedule sensitive. Projects
subject to potential change.
Complex projects that are sequence
or schedule sensitive. Projects subject
to potential change.
Smaller projects
Projects that are difficult to define,
and are less schedule sensitive.
26

Appendix A
Types of Engineering Services
The following is a more detailed discussion of the types of engineering services described in Section
I.
CONSULTATION SERVICES, INVESTIGATIONS AND REPORTS
These services deal primarily with collecting, interpreting and reporting information, together with
formulating conclusions and making recommendations in order to assist the owner in formulating a
preliminary scope of work for design and construction phases to follow. Services in this category
include:
■ Preliminary and Feasibility Investigations and Reports. These services precede the authorization
of a capital project and may involve extensive investigations, analyses of conditions and comparisons
of several possible design alternatives. These studies may include the impact of a project
upon the environment, operating costs, life-cycle costs, financing considerations and expected revenues
as bases for conclusions and recommendations regarding the advisability of undertaking a
project.
■ Planning Studies. These services may include the broad areas of developing master plans for longrange
capital improvement programs; preparation of land development plans, urban plans and
regional plans; and the investigation of environmental conditions and preparation of environmental
impact statements, with subsequent planning to improve or maintain existing conditions. Such
planning often requires coordination of the work of many engineering and nonengineering disciplines.
■ Appraisals, Valuations and Rate Studies. These services may include investigations and analyses
of existing conditions, capital and operating costs, overhead, costs of financing and revenues as
needed to evaluate property or to recommend establishment of prospective rates.
■ Assistance in Financial Matters. The consulting engineer may be engaged by an owner who is
planning to issue bonds, particularly revenue bonds, to finance a capital project. The scope of services
may include an evaluation of capabilities of existing and proposed facilities to meet present
and projected future needs, opinion of probable construction costs, and an estimate of annual revenue
requirements and a determination of appropriate rates to provide this income. The consulting
engineer also may act as responsible agent to certify that certain terms and conditions of the bond
issues are carried out.
■ Materials Engineering and Equipment Tests. These services include tests of materials and equipment
under established codes and standards, specialized examination of equipment and materials
used in construction and industry, and other inspections and monitoring required by an owner.
■ Direct Personal Service. This includes services such as assistance in preparation for legal proceedings,
appearances before courts or commissions to render opinions and conclusions, and investigations
of technical matters where specialized engineering knowledge, experience and judgment are
required.
■ Other Services. These services can vary to suit special needs of the owner and can include such
27

diverse activities as:
Environmental evaluation
Forensic engineering for structural and other failures
Geotechnical engineering
Operational assistance
Process design, pilot studies, computer modeling
Safety engineering
Surveying engineering
Toxic and hazardous waste evaluations
Representing municipal or private entities in projects proposed for privatization
SERVICES FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Consulting engineering services are required for each phase of a construction project. All essential or
basic services preferably are furnished by the same consulting engineer or consulting engineer team,
although at times services in various phases are furnished by different engineers or by the owner. The
basic services are supplemented by additional services which may be provided by the owner, a specialized
engineer or the consulting engineer.
Basic Services for Construction Projects
Basic services furnished in support of a construction project may include:
■ Study and Report Phase: This phase involves analysis of owner's needs, economic and technical
evaluation of feasible alternatives, determination of project scope, conceptual design and initial
opinions of probable construction cost. Services during this phase may include:
• Reviewing available data and consulting with the owner to clarify and define the owner's
requirements for the project.
• Advising the owner as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or
services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property
surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of
hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed and other
restrictive land use information and environmental assessments and impact statements.
• Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to
approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities.
• Providing analyses of the owner's needs, planning surveys and comparative evaluations of prospective
sites and solutions.
• Generating a general economic analysis of the owner's requirements applicable to various
alternatives.
• Preparing a report presenting alternative solutions available to the owner with the consulting
engineer's findings and recommendations. The report may contain schematic layouts, sketches,
conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations
involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction),
and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number
and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the owner.
■ Preliminary Design Phase: This phase involves the establishment of the general size and scope of
the project and its location on the selected site. Services may include:
• Consulting with the owner, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project
requirements, reviewing available data and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also
be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities.
28

• Advising the owner as to whether additional data or services of the type described in the Study
and Report Phase are required and assisting the owner in obtaining such data and services.
• Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings,
outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution
of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the owner.
• Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs.
■ Final Design Phase: This phase of project development is usually undertaken only after the owner
has approved the preliminary design phase material. The basic services for the final design phase
may include:
• Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the
project based on the accepted preliminary design documents.
• Preparing and furnishing to the owner a revised opinion of probable total project costs based
on the final drawings and specifications.
• Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local,
state or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications
and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished
as additional services described later in this section.
• Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the
owner (and the owner's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms,
general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders,
insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract-related documents.
• Furnishing to the owner the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications and other
contract documents.
■ Bidding or Negotiating Phase: Services under this phase may include:
• Assisting the owner in advertising for and obtaining bids or negotiating proposals for each separate
prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding
documents have been issued, attending pre-bid conferences, and receiving and processing deposits
for bidding documents.
• Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify or expand the bidding documents.
• Assisting the owner in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors,
subcontractors and suppliers.
• When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consulting
with and advising the owner as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment
proposed by the prospective constructors.
• Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the
owner in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction,
materials, equipment and services.
■ Construction Phase: Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the owner
during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the owner's representative.
Such services may be included as a basic service and may comprise:
• Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on
behalf of the owner.
• Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with
design concepts.
• Reviewing laboratory, shop and mill test reports on materials and equipment.
• Visiting the project site at appropriate intervals as construction proceeds to observe and report
on the progress and the quality of the executed work.
• Issuing instructions from the owner to the constructors, issuing necessary interpretations and
clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and
testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work.
• Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered.
29

• Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work,
and recommending issuance of such payments by the owner.
• Observing and assisting performance tests and initial operation of the project.
• Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the contractor.
• Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations
concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages.
Additional Services for Construction Projects
Additional services required during the study, design, bidding, construction and operation phases of a
construction project may include investigations, reports and activities beyond the scope of the basic
services. These services, many of which are previously listed in this section under the category
"Consultation Services, Investigations and Reports," may relate to the owner's decisions as to the feasibility,
scope and location of the project. The research, compilation of engineering data and acquisition
of property may involve professional specialists in engineering and other fields.
30
Additional services not provided by the consulting engineer often are negotiated with other firms or
individuals by the consulting engineer acting on behalf of the owner. Examples of these services may
include:
• Geotechnical engineering - including test borings, sampling and analysis, and recommendations.
• Studies, tests and process determination to establish design criteria for water and wastewater
treatment facilities.
• Land surveys, establishment of boundaries and monuments, preparation of easement descriptions
and related computations and drawings.
• Engineering and topographic surveys for design and construction.
• Mill, shop or laboratory inspections of the materials and equipment.
• Furnishing additional copies of reports, construction drawings, specifications, and other documents
as required for bidding and construction beyond the number specified in the basic services
agreement.
• Extra travel and subsistence as defined by the agreement for engineering services.
• Value engineering - including reviewing the work of other engineers, either within the same organization
or in other firms, to determine whether a proposed solution is optimum and, if not, to suggest
a better approach for meeting the project's functional and financial criteria.
• Redesign to reflect project scope changes requested by the owner, required to address changed
conditions or change in direction previously approved by owner, mandated by changing governmental
laws, or necessitated by the owner's acceptance of substitutions proposed by the constructor.
• Services during construction by a resident project representative, and by supporting staff as
required, to provide more assurance that the construction is accomplished in general conformance
to the design drawings, specifications and other contract documents.
• Quality control inspection and testing of materials used in the construction of a project.
• Assistance to the owner as an expert witness in litigation in connection with the project or in
hearings before approving and regulatory agencies.
• Final investigations involving detailed consideration of operation, maintenance and overhead
expenses; preparation of final rate schedules and earning and expense statements; or appraisals,
valuations, and material audits or inventories required for certification of force account construction
performed by the owner or for extra work done by the constructor.
• Preparation of detailed applications and supporting documentation for government grants,
advances for public works projects or permits.
• Plotting, computing, and filing of subdivision plats, staking of lots and other land planning and
partitioning activities.
• Preparation of environmental assessment and impact statements and other assistance to the owner
in connection with public hearings.
• Extra design effort to meet special conditions such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes or blasts,
or to satisfy abnormal tolerances, along with associated dynamic analysis or testing.

• Assistance in managing a project by acting as the direct representative of the owner in the selection,
engagement, observation, and approvals of the work of architects, other engineers, constructors
and subcontractors; contacts with governmental agencies to obtain permits and documents; and
other services related to project development.
• Assessment of the completed project's ability to meet its design intent relative to capacity, maintainability,
operability or reliability.
• Project peer review.
• Copies of reports or construction documents to the owner in number exceeding that stipulated in
the agreement for services.
• Services beyond scheduled completion dates, particularly with regard to Construction Phase
Services.
At the completion of construction, the consulting engineer may assist in the start-up of project operations.
The consulting engineer may be commissioned to prepare a manual for both operation and
maintenance requirements, providing assistance for adjusting and balancing equipment, identifying
deficiencies and assisting in obtaining corrections, and performing inspection prior to the end of the
project warranty period. The consulting engineer may assist in operator training, setting up job classifications
and salaries, organizing the purchase of supplies, developing charts for recording operational
data, and observing and reporting on project operations.
ENGINEERING SUPPORT SERVICES
The consulting services described above frequently require engineering support services. Geotechnical
engineering, for example, frequently requires services such as taking soil and rock borings, excavating
test pits, sampling and identifying soil and earth materials, field and laboratory tests, and geophysical
measurements and observations. Support services may involve data gathering activities for
specialized purposes. Although some of these tasks are normally accomplished by persons who are
not engineers, the procurement of adequate and correct data usually requires professional judgment
and guidance. Since soundness of any engineering decision is dependent upon the accuracy and suitability
of data obtained in field and laboratory investigations, these supporting services must be under
the guidance of the consulting engineer whose decisions will be based on that data.
31

ABOUT THE TEXAS COUNCIL OF ENGINEERING COMPANIES
Established in 1966, the Texas Council of Engineering Companies, Inc. is the only statewide organization
committed to the business of consulting engineering. Consulting Engineers’ specialties encompass the
spectrum of engineering technology including fields of: Architectural, Acoustical, Environmental,
Industrial, Civil, Electrical, Structural, Mechanical, Chemical, Metallurgical, Geotechnical, Petroleum and
Energy Engineering.
The Texas Council of Engineering Companies is devoted to the advancement of the practice of consulting
engineering, to the promotion of private enterprise, the protection of public welfare and to the improvement
of the economic status of professional engineers engaged in the practice of consulting engineering. It
is the forum for interchange of thought and experience among consulting engineers, for mutual understanding,
and for improvement for engineering, business practices and professional procedures. Texas
CEC is the source for information and cooperative services for common purposes and benefits to all members
in the various branches throughout Texas, and disseminates information explaining the services and
value of
consulting engineers to other professional organizations, businesses, government entities and to the
general public.
Headquartered in Austin, Texas, the Council is comprised of 300 member firms that vary in size from large
staffs with diversified practices to individuals practicing in specialized branches of the profession.
Local and regional chapters include:
Austin
Corpus Christi
Dallas
East Texas
El Paso
Houston
San Antonio
South Texas
Tarrant County
West Texas
For information on how to contact a chapter or consulting engineer in your area,
call Texas CEC at 512/474-1474 or visit www.cectexas.org.
The Texas Council of Engineering Companies is deeply grateful to
the following members, professional colleagues and friends who
have contributed voluntarily and generously of their time and
expertise to help develop the authoritative content of this manual:
Jeff Ross, Steve Bonnette, Joe Campos, Ken Haney, Bill Hindman,
Keith Jackson, Greg Janes, Martin Molloy, Bob Pence, Dev Rastogi,
Bob Reach, Orval Rhoads, Brian Rice, Thomas Stroh, Ken Thomas
and the members of the Texas Council of Engineering Laboratories.
Texas
Council of
Engineering
Companies
Public Works Manual-2007 Edition
32

ABOUT THE TEXAS COUNCIL OF ENGINEERING COMPANIES
Established in 1966, the Texas Council of Engineering Companies, Inc. is the only statewide organization
committed to the business of consulting engineering. Consulting Engineers’ specialties encompass the
spectrum of engineering technology including fields of: Architectural, Acoustical, Environmental,
Industrial, Civil, Electrical, Structural, Mechanical, Chemical, Metallurgical, Geotechnical, Petroleum and
Energy Engineering.
The Texas Council of Engineering Companies is devoted to the advancement of the practice of consulting
engineering, to the promotion of private enterprise, the protection of public welfare and to the improvement
of the economic status of professional engineers engaged in the practice of consulting engineering. It
is the forum for interchange of thought and experience among consulting engineers, for mutual understanding,
and for improvement for engineering, business practices and professional procedures. Texas
CEC is the source for information and cooperative services for common purposes and benefits to all members
in the various branches throughout Texas, and disseminates information explaining the services and
value of
consulting engineers to other professional organizations, businesses, government entities and to the
general public.
Headquartered in Austin, Texas, the Council is comprised of 300 member firms that vary in size from large
staffs with diversified practices to individuals practicing in specialized branches of the profession.
Local and regional chapters include:
Austin
Corpus Christi
Dallas
East Texas
El Paso
Houston
San Antonio
South Texas
Tarrant County
West Texas
For information on how to contact a chapter or consulting engineer in your area,
call Texas CEC at 512/474-1474 or visit www.cectexas.org.
The Texas Council of Engineering Companies is deeply grateful to
the following members, professional colleagues and friends who
have contributed voluntarily and generously of their time and
expertise to help develop the authoritative content of this manual:
Jeff Ross, Steve Bonnette, Joe Campos, Ken Haney, Bill Hindman,
Keith Jackson, Greg Janes, Martin Molloy, Bob Pence, Dev Rastogi,
Bob Reach, Orval Rhoads, Brian Rice, Thomas Stroh, Ken Thomas
and the members of the Texas Council of Engineering Laboratories.
Texas
Council of
Engineering
Companies
Public Works Manual-2007 Edition
32