Website Upgrade Incoming - we're working on a new look (and speed!) standby while we finalise the project

Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

DELAY BASIS, COMMENTS NEEDED.

19 replies [Last post]
Mon, 2008-08-18 04:57
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
As a Planning Engineer from a Consultant, I received a Primavera progress report containing a 35 days delay and a letter of intent to claim for 120 days (Impacted As-Planned, reflecting events) with similar cut-off date from the Contractor. From my side, I will use the lesser duration of delays and further evaluate reductions.

Any comments/reactions?
Top

Replies

Sun, 2008-09-28 06:38
#1
Charleston-Joseph...
User offline. Last seen 3 years 17 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 1347
Groups: None
Brad,

Since you are US based,

Search the AACE. PSP - planning and scheduling professional literatures and some RP recommended practice

They have a lot of comprehensive approach and methodology in delay analysis.

Cheers,
Charlie
Top
Sun, 2008-09-28 06:13
#2
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
Hi Brad

There are a number of excellent books on methods of delay analysis which you can find on the RICS bookshop. About Time by Mr Litten is from an adjudicators viewpoint as is as good as they get.

As a rule of thumb the four methods are:

As Built v As Planned - use when sub contravt work packages are sandwiched between other trades.

Impacted as Planned Analysis - use for work in progress as it shows the "Likely Effect" of a delay event.

Time Impact Analysis - used for forensic analysis of past events - success relies entirely on how good the As Built Records are.

Note in some projects it is necessary to combine the above three methods.

Collapsed As Built - now discredited - don’t even think about it.

In the US the Time Slice method is still being advocated but it is in reality a Time Impact method done over and over again. It is time wateful and will not show true cause and effect and concurrency is very difficult to ascertain.

Hope that helps

Best regards

Mike Testro

Top
Sat, 2008-09-27 23:49
#3
Anoon Iimos
User offline. Last seen 2 years 45 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 22 Sep 2006
Posts: 1422
Groups: Pinoy Planning Planet Community
here!, other questions please? (i believe a lot of experts here will answer, including me...rhmm, sorry), just be patient to wait
Top
Sat, 2008-09-27 16:54
#4
Brad Richey
User offline. Last seen 12 years 44 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 22 May 2008
Posts: 20
Groups: None
where is the best place to research the proper way to do an Impacted as planned analyses v/s time impact
Top
Wed, 2008-08-27 23:40
#5
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
Hi guys.. Im back again.

I have this in mind... I disregarded the submission of EOT from the Contractor which was the Impacted As-Planned and the basis will be the Progress reports with the current project(Primavera) and incorporating the events and issues that ocurred. My point is, whatever the resultant effects of the issues and events in the currents schedule, the current schedule would only be the ONLY/SOLE BASIS of EOT claims. Checking and monitoring activities which NOT STARTED and NOT COMPLETED. Am I right with it? Will there be any other contentions from the contractor that I may be excpecting due to my statements?
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 04:45
#6
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
Yes, the contractor is entitled with EOT, but subject to evaluation. The thing is, in Primavera progress report, they incurred 35 days delayed due to the undefined provisional items, while physical %ages states that there is no delay.

Initially, I just concluded that I will not use the Impacted As-Planned submitted by the contractor and I want to have other’s opinion with that. As what I’ve got from Mr. Mike.

Cheers!
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 04:02
#7
Pranab Kumar Deb
User offline. Last seen 3 years 24 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 291
Groups: Civil Engineering
Hello Marwan,

So it is clear that the employer is liable for the delays.
moreover the contractor even tried to mitigate any future delays by starting earlier than the contractual start date, when there was a situation of the work force sitting idle , the contractor moved his resources to "other areas" .

Hence i believe that the contractor is entitled to atleast 35 days of EOT( or whatever time the work could not be progressed due to non -issuance of construction drawings) along with the associated prolongation costs.

120 days is fictious for me , since if there is such a long gap in the contract duration than the contractor must have ben asked to demob/remob for the period, specially when it is just the site devlopment works.

regards

deb
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 03:34
#8
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
Other company delegated by the employer.
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 03:14
#9
Pranab Kumar Deb
User offline. Last seen 3 years 24 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 291
Groups: Civil Engineering
Hello Marwan,

who is producing the construction drawings? You or the contractor ??

regards
deb
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 02:57
#10
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
YES!!!

One thing, the baseline schedule is based from the earliest construction drawing issues. Then latter, new issues came out superseding previous. Actually, we may say that we are already out of sequence in the baseline schedule because of design changes as what the contractor says. And reports comes out that, physically, they are not delay.

Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 02:45
#11
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
Hi Marwan

I am starting to get a clearer picture.

It seems that your contractor has been required to reschedule his work sequence in order to mitigate potential delays.

He is obliged to do this provided it doesn’t cost him any money. If it has cost money then he should have said so before rescheduling so as to get approval.

If partially complete drawings were used for contruction then - if there was no instruction to do so - it would be at the contractors risk.

Best regards

Mike Testro
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 01:59
#12
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
No work stoppage occured beacause, eventhough partial and incomplte construction drawings have been issued were used.
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 01:48
#13
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
Thanks! It is helping.

The provisonal items are not yet defined and not yet clear.

There is no work stoppage beacause the resources is diverted into other areas, say preparatory works and others, considering the project is site development/utilities. And in the progress reports, there is no delay in the physical works, setting aside or excluding the provisional items.
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 01:15
#14
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
Hi Marwan

My comments on your text are in [brackets].

There is no work stoppage happened. [What is the cause of delay if work did not stop.]

The Impacted As-Planned has discarded the use of Floats. Am I right? [Yes - Float will be absorbed when an event is impacted.]

The 35 days delay in the progress report will be the actual situation that has transpired even there were events that caused this 35 day delay. [There has to be a delay event - impacted on to an activity - to create an impacted as planned analysis.]

Generally, the over-all reasons of the those delays were issuance of construction drawings. In the 35 day delay presented in the progress report was causing some provisional items being pushed forward, that in the discretion of the the Employer/Employer’s Rep, may be deleted from the contract and/or instruction maybe issued to the contractor to proceed. [Are the provional items Defined or Undefined? Defined P Sums have to be included in the programme - Undefined do not.]
The point is, the contractor has commenced the contract earlier in the their own, [The contractor is not allowed to keep any advantage from an early start - if the drawings were issued in good time to complete the work on the contract date then no EOT is allowed]
then, may not knowingly, absorbed the impact of the delay. So the EOT claim may not granted, [Yes see above]
but, interim cost is will be and should be analyzed further and it will be harder to analyze. [Why consider interim costs if no EOT is allowed?]

I hope this helps

Best regards

Mike Testro
Top
Tue, 2008-08-19 00:02
#15
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
The type of project we have is Utilities.
Top
Mon, 2008-08-18 23:50
#16
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
There is no work stoppage happened.

The Impacted As-Planned has discarded the use of Floats. Am I right?

The 35 days delay in the progress report will be the actual situation that has transpired even there were events that caused this 35 day delay.

Generally, the over-all reasons of the those delays were issuance of construction drawings. In the 35 day delay presented in the progress report was causing some provisional items being pushed forward, that in the discretion of the the Employer/Employer’s Rep, may be deleted from the contract and/or instruction maybe issued to the contractor to proceed. The point is, the contractor has commenced the contract earlier in the their own, then, may not knowingly, absorbed the impact of the delay. So the EOT claim may not granted, but, interim cost is will be and should be analyzed further and it will be harder to analyze.

More comments please. We hope I can get help from you guys.

I need to give a better recommendation basing from my statements above from your experiences.

Thanks.
Top
Mon, 2008-08-18 10:50
#17
Mike Testro
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 14 Dec 2005
Posts: 4418
Groups: Building Information Modelling, Content Moderators, GPCCAR Editors
Hi Marwhan

In an Impacted as Planned delay analysis the claimant has to demonstrate the delay causation period which would be from the day the drawings should have been issued to the day the drawings were issued - presumably 35 days in this case. (query Calendar or working days?)

This event has to be linked to the delayed activity - presumably development of workshop drawings and the programme re-scheduled.

I presume you have an electronic copy of the contract programme so you can do this for yourself.

The impacted delay will rarely be the same as the 35 days because it could:
1. Use up float and be shorter.
2. Span a new non-work period and be longer.

The shift from 35 days to 120 days would only be possible if you had a very long work embargo period somewhere in your contract.

Remember that the result of an Impacted as Planned analysis only shows the "Likely Effect" on the progress of the work so be a bit cautious before recomending an EOT.

Best regards

Mike Testro
Top
Mon, 2008-08-18 07:30
#18
marwan ibrahim
User offline. Last seen 15 years 29 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 31
Groups: Civil Engineering
Disruption was caused by issue constructions drawings, concurrent to its shopdrawing approval. Would patiality of issuance of construction drawing valid for reduction of EOT?
Top
Mon, 2008-08-18 06:52
#19
Pranab Kumar Deb
User offline. Last seen 3 years 24 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 291
Groups: Civil Engineering
Hello Marwan,

I believe 35 days is the overall delay , right?
If so from where is the 120 days coming.

what are the reasons of the delay? who is liable.
Unless you give all these details it is really tought to judge.

regards
deb
Top