In order to receive proof of CEU credits, you must watch this presentation in its entirety and complete the survey.
Level: Intermediate
TCM Section(s):
6.2. Asset Change Management
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
Venue: 2020 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: This paper was initiated by a situation encountered on a large institutional project. The owner stipulated a finish on or before contractual completion date. To gain a competitive cost advantage, during the bidding process, the contractor planned their work to be completed three (3) months early but there was no mechanism in the bidding process, such as the requirement for a bid schedule, to identify this condition. As work started the contractor’s schedules were compliant with the contract requirements and consistently showed a construction completion date, three (3) months earlier than the contractual finish no later than completion date. Late in the project, the consultant provided changes which required the contractor to be on site after their anticipated construction completion date but not after the final contractual completion date. The contractor put forward a request for additional compensation for the additional time on site, after their planned completion but before the contractual completion date.
This paper reviews the issues raised by this situation including ownership of project float, ownership of earned contingency and contract risk allocation. The paper also investigates the current recommended practices, legal and provides some alternative contracting solutions to deal with similar issues on future projects.
TCM Section(s):
6.2. Asset Change Management
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
Venue: 2020 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: This paper was initiated by a situation encountered on a large institutional project. The owner stipulated a finish on or before contractual completion date. To gain a competitive cost advantage, during the bidding process, the contractor planned their work to be completed three (3) months early but there was no mechanism in the bidding process, such as the requirement for a bid schedule, to identify this condition. As work started the contractor’s schedules were compliant with the contract requirements and consistently showed a construction completion date, three (3) months earlier than the contractual finish no later than completion date. Late in the project, the consultant provided changes which required the contractor to be on site after their anticipated construction completion date but not after the final contractual completion date. The contractor put forward a request for additional compensation for the additional time on site, after their planned completion but before the contractual completion date.
This paper reviews the issues raised by this situation including ownership of project float, ownership of earned contingency and contract risk allocation. The paper also investigates the current recommended practices, legal and provides some alternative contracting solutions to deal with similar issues on future projects.