(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 All,
1. In a sewergae line laying project, in a particular path there was enough float, say 60 days in the baseline programme.
2. The Contractor started the works 30 days later than the plan date. At the time of investigation he found an underground utility at site, which was not shown in the tender documents.
3. He had to take the authorities permit for the exposing of that utility and the relocation of it, prior to start his scope of work. This relocation took around 45 days and extended the project completion by 15 days.
4. The Contractor issued an EOT Claim of 15 days due to this unforeseen event.
5. The Client denied it saying that if the contractor had started on time, this delay could have been covered within time. The Client put this 45 days rerouting works in the baseline programme and justified it.
6. The Contractor replied that even with a delay of 30 days in the commencement, he could have finished the work on time, if there was no unforeseen utility at site. Since this is an independent path he was focusing to complete just before contract completion date, regardless of the finish date mentioned in the baseline programme.
How this situation can be analyzed?. I think he cannot claim the 15 days EOT, because he didn't utilize the baseline float for the timely completion and success of the project.
Best Regards
Kannan
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Thanks Mike and Raymund,
Sorry for late. I was out of office.
Mike: In the Contract it is not clearly mentioned who owns the risk of unforeseen obstruction. Instead it is mentioned that for the awarded scope of works as per tender/contract drawings, it will be the responsibility of the Contractor to rerout the existing utilities (if required).
Raymund: If the rerouting works is added to the Contract baseline programme(with enough float), it will not impact the Contract completion date. Delay will be reflected after considering the actual start of the work by Contractor.
The Contract should give proper justification for the late start of that activity. The available float was reduced, just before the starting of the event- because the Contractor didn't assign the resources as per the baseline.
So I think the parties should go for a compromise on the delay days.
Best Regards
Kannan
Mike,
During the Planning and Scheduling of Activities, the contractor is solely responsible in calculating and allocating the Labor required for a certain activity. The contractor may prolong or shorten duration of activity in respect to their capacity or availability of Resource.
If an activity schedule can be delayed to a certain period it is the contractor’s discretion. The Contractor planned and scheduled the project based on what they possess.
Regards,
Hi Raymund
What is your authority on the different "ownership" of total and free float?
I have never come across this distinction before so I am interested to learn.
If as you say the Project owns the float then by what right does the Contractor take use of it for his own purposes.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Hi Kannan,
In my own Opinion.
The Total Float of the entire Project or it may be termed as Buffer Time is owned by Both the Owner and Contractor while Total float or Free Float for individual Activity is owned solely by the Contractor.
There are some valid reasons in the delay of start of an activity which is sometimes beyond the contractor's control.
The Site have to be Handed Over to Contractor free of obstructions. Rerouting of all existing underground services shall have been done prior to Issuance of Notice to Proceed.
I assume that the entire Project was disturbed with the presence of the Unforseen.
Therefore, the re-routing duration shall be added to the Contract Project Duration.
Regards,
Hi Kannan
This is the perrenial question "Who Owns the Float" and have to say that the Employer has a point.
Other things to consider are:
1. Who carries the risk of unknown underground obstructions in the contract. (see FIDIC clause 14)
2. Should a reasonable contractor investigate for live services - declared or not - before starting any excavations.
I have just completed a delay analysis on a similar situation where the unknown service diversion stopped piling works - but that was on the critical path. The Employer awarded a full EoT.
If there was available float then the result would have been different.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies