(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.
Hi Planners,
I need your advise for this matter. The Contractor has been lapsed for their Contractual completion date but the project remain incomplete (XX% complete) which difinitely requires Extension of Time to complete the outstanding works. The delay is a direct results of Force Majeure including delay matters from both Contractor and Owner. Consequently, Contractor applies for an extension of time, but no level III program has been submitted. They intent to submit the program upon approval of the 1 year EOT. As a planning Consultant, I required them to perform a delay analysis using retrospective method. Using the approved baseline shedule, they should carry out a delay analysis by applying disruption events to the affected activities which must undentifiable the delay from the Contractor and Owner including Force majeure. I informed them that right after ran the program the resulted extended period would be an entitlement to the Contractor (subject for evaluation by me). The problem is, they dont have complete historical data of the delay events and they dont even know how to perform TIA. Is it correct approach in performing the Time Impact analysis? what's your openion and advise?. (by the way, this Contractor is stakeholder of the project of about 25% share).
Regards,
Albert
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Dear Evaristus,
Based on your narrative, Shell is fair to Exterran because the responsibility is with the Contractor. The simple answer is base on your simple narrative.
Of course, I believe there are lots of documentation, evidence that Exterran might have in their possession that may make my conclusion very naive.
Thank you.
Scarlett
Dear All,
Exterran Energy Ltd, Nigeria was contracted to Build,Operate,Own and Maintain (BOOM) an LNG Plant for SPDC. Shell had a number of in-service inspectors guiding Project Delivery. At final inspection, it was lately discovered that threaded fittings were installed in place of socket welded fittings as per contract spec. Shell rejected the facility and insisted Exterran screwed up the job and should therefore remedy it at own cost. Is Shell fair to Exterran? Your comment Please!
Ujam
Dear All,
there are details are required to be cleared, how the project was not running for all this period and the contractor did not even submitted the required program.
know body can identify where are the contractor delays and where are the other parties delays without presence of approved program.
2nd issue is that the contractor is requisting oe year EOT i order to agree to submit the program ,i found no basis for the contractor request and he has to submit the original program with sufficient logical detail then get it approved and he can use the approve program to show his entitlement for EOT.
I would emphasize the part of Mike's response about an "interim EoT". At some point in the future an executive for the contractor's firm is going to look at a blotch of red ink on a cost/revenue spreadsheet, spit out his coffee, and then start screaming at the site team to make up the lost money.
At that point, the claim has a good chance of turning ugly. No project wants or needs that.
If you're being retained by the Owner and the Contractor is failing to do any kind of TIA, then I suggest you make the best go of it you can on your own as a service to the Owner. Identify what you think is a reasonable EoT and then present it to the Owner; with their blessing, you present it to the Contractor. If they really are lacking expertise and can't get themselves together to form a reasonable EoT, you stand a marginal chance of them agreeing to what you've laid out for them. Even if they don't agree 100%, you have a basis for moving forward with some payments and EoT so that when someone from the Contracting firm finally figures out that the project is in the red, you'll be starting off discussions at a very different place than, "we know you're due something but we're not giving you a penny or an inch until you prove it".
If you know that the Contractor is due SOME quantity of time, then for the sake of the project and the Owner put in a little work to come up with a conservative estimate of the EoT required. The Owner's cost projections and money/time budgeting expectations at a minimum deserve that attention.
Hi Rajesh
Since the work is in progress the best method to us is an Impacted As Planned method where you take the Original contract programme and impact all the Employer Delays onto it one by one in strict order that they impacted the works.
Make a note of the delay effect of each one as you impact it.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Dear friends,
I am a planner from the Contractor's side. My project is delayed now and still on-going. There are delays from the Client as well as from Contractor. Apart from this we were awarded additional works without any formal revision in the project completion date. The project has several interim milestones. We have reached a situation where we are supposed to present a delay analysis study to establish EOT. Can you please suggest a best method of analysis as the project is still live?
Regards,
Rajesh
Does the contract require a specific analysis to be done for EOT Request. With regards to retrospective delay analysis I would recommend AACEI recommended practice.
The first thng you need to do is get the historica date, you need to confirm the actual dates when the dalay occured. You do not approve and EOT if you don't have all the information with you. You as a consultant you need to provide the analysis for you client. If you client is the owner, you may want to start doing the analyzes of the owner delays and recomend them to extend the contract up to that point, then leave the remaining time to the Contractor, he needs to suopport that time otherwise,no extension of time can be provided for unsupported information. Revise the contract clause about Contract Time and recommend the application of that clause after the extension of time based on owner delay. If you don't extend the contract based opn owner delays the contactor can look for acceleration costs also.
Regards,
XO
Dear all,
please be reminded that in all coditions of contract we will find clauses related to the proccedures of claims ad mai part i=of this is the proper otification and substaitiation for the contractor claim.
the contractor him slef has to submit first the notification and 2nd the documents,records and analysis to substaitiate his claim.
Dear:
Since the contractor is one of the project stakeholders that could be limit ur space, what I mean Any issue on the table needs two parties, a party defendant and a party claims , in ur case the two parties are almost same, the best advice I can give is do not do other people works , u will be the one who evaluate the submissions , based on the submittals type and level ur determination should be leveled , in mean time notifications in timely manner will be so useful.
Regards,
Mai
Hi Mike & Sunley,
Thank you very much for your advised. Actually, the level III program is not cost loaded only allocation of resources, and to measure the physical progress that is paramount to the control of the work and based upon the direct manhours, but no way related to payments. The payment usually generates from the Payment Verification Certificate (PVC) which is being provided at site.
It has been agreed that the Contractor shall continue the project at their own expenses and there will be no more expenditure from the Owner. However, there is no agreeement of who will pay for the Consultant, because Contractor admits that they cannot afford to pay. It remains under resolution.
Thanks
Albert
Hi Albert,
I support Mike's advice and strongly suggest you do an analysis of concurrent delays inorder to exempt that delay from the prolongation costs due to the EOT.
Regards,
Sunley Mathew
Hi Albert
The rule is "He who alleges must prove"
If your contractor cannot substantiate an EoT it is not your job to do the work for them.
You responded orrectly when stating what is required of the contractor although I would add that if there is a mixture of Contractor / Employer delays then the rulles of concurrent delays must also be applied.
The employer may of course make an interim EoT for what he considers to be a resonable award but he is not obliged to do so in the current circumstances.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies