State transportation authorities’ reliance on traditional financing mechanisms such as gas taxes and federal support has waned of late as these mechanisms have proved insufficient to keep pace with the escalating demand for transportation infrastructure in the United States. As a result, public-private partnerships (P3) are increasingly viewed as a part of the solution to this problem. A partnership between the public and private sector allows both entities to “mutually benefit” from the private sector’s equity/debt financing structure and ability to bring innovation and efficiency to the table. Companies have formed consortia either to lease the existing toll roads through what is termed as a Brownfield project model or deliver design-build-finance-operate projects categorized as a Greenfield model. A case-study based approach helps to identify the organizational structure, nature of the key participants and risk characteristics of these Greenfield-Brownfield P3 models. The four cases identified for study include, the Pocahontas Parkway in Virginia, SR-125 in California representing the Greenfield model and the Chicago Skyway and Indiana Toll road under the Brownfield model. An analytical template comprised of a project finance structure, risk matrix for each of the four cases and Porter’ s segmentation matrix for the selected private sector project participants is used to characterize the structure of the P3 arrangement in the cases. The project finance structure illustrates the formation of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) to delineate the role played by different participants. Risk matrices developed for all the four cases helps to identify the allocation of risks among the state and the SPV or the concessionaire. Porter’ s segmentation matrix helps to identify the activities of the key players or sponsor companies in various sectors including infrastructure, across the world. The SR-125- Greenfield- model seems to have evolved from Pocahontas Parkway as the private sector solely finances the project and assumes the high revenue risk and responsibility to operate and maintain the facility. The Brownfield model faces a political backlash in the U.S., and this risk has become fundamental to the model. Based on their core competencies, companies decide in which of the two models they are suited to participate. Their individual expertise adds value when they collaborate to deliver a public-private partnership. Finally, further evolution of the Greenfield and Brownfield models depends upon the developments in the U.S. P3 market. / Master of Science

Increasingly, states are relying on creative financing and asset management to maintain and improve the nation's transportation infrastructure since budgetary challenges constrain potential options. One method of tapping into alternative sources of capital is the public-private partnership (PPP or P3). A public-private partnership is a long-term contractual agreement in which the public sector authority assigns a traditionally public responsibility (such as operations and/or financing) to the private sector participant, in hopes of achieving mutual benefit. First employed in the contemporary era in the late 1980's by California and Virginia, the public-private partnership has continued to become a more popular delivery method. A thorough review of the literature on the subject reveals both academic and institutional material covering a wide variety of P3 topics. Garvin's (2007) P3 Equilibrium Framework supplemented the current body of knowledge by building upon past research to better analyze the performance of existing and proposed PPP's or serve as a resource when developing future projects. The Framework allows the user to assess a project or program and determine its potential for producing desirable results. This research utilizes case studies to gain further insight into P3 projects and programs, as well as the performance of the original P3 Equilibrium Framework. The cases include the evolution of legislation in California and Virginia, and four projects that resulted from these programs: the State Route 91 Express Lanes, Dulles Greenway, Pocahontas Parkway, and failed I-81 Improvement proposals. Application of the original framework to the case studies led to several refinements. The changes provide more comprehensive appraisal mechanisms and improve the applicability and consistency of the P3 Equilibrium Framework. In addition, the concept of "tension" is introduced, which in effect is a means of describing the stress between the interested parties of a P3 arrangement. Ultimately, the revised Framework helps to structure perspectives of P3 arrangements and is underpinned by the notion that these strategies must balance the interests of society, the state, industry, and the market for ultimate success. / Master of Science

abstract: Water utilities across the United States are facing numerous challenges, such as limited funding and increasing project complexity, in constructing and upgrading their aging infrastructure. One innovative method to overcome these challenges is through the use of alternative project delivery methods (APDM), such as construction management at-risk (CMAR) and design-build (DB). Previous research has shown that APDM have the potential to deliver higher performing water infrastructure projects when compared to the traditional design-bid-build (DBB) method. However, there is a need to further examine APDM practices and develop tools that may support utilities in the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. This study fills the knowledge gap by conducting several studies that may support public and private utilities in improving the delivery of their APDM water infrastructure projects. First, APDM implementation practices for water infrastructure projects are identified by assessing the state of practice, particularly during project procurement and execution. Second, DB project administration best practices are determined to support utilities seeking to add DB to their organization’s project delivery toolbox. Third, a pioneering web-based project delivery method decision-support tool was developed to aid utilities in selecting the appropriate delivery method for their water project. Finally, project-specific factors and attributes that impact project delivery performance are investigated through exploratory modeling and analysis. The study collected data on 75 completed treatment plant projects, conducted interviews with ten utilities that successfully deliver their water projects using DB, and worked closely with several industry experts through industry workshops and panels. Key findings related to water infrastructure project delivery revealed in this study included: (1) guaranteed maximum price (GMP) is the preferred compensation type for APDM projects; (2) utilities statistically having the lowest comfort level with delivering CMAR projects; (3) qualifications-based procurement is an effective DB project delivery practice; (4) the identification of 13 key project delivery method selection factors; and (5) the three highest predictors that impact unit cost performance are project complexity, project team chemistry and communication, and project size. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Civil, Environmental and Sustainable Engineering 2020