Hi Samer,

1. In my understanding, the impact on the Programme due to the ongoing delay event, as of instruction date is 124 days. 

2. As per the awarded EOT for other 3 events, an interim agreed revised completion date is original contract completion +60days.

3. The data date of interim revised baseline is the instruction date. So this program will definitely shows a negative float of minimum duration of 64 days.

4. or you have to either reduce the duration for the sequence of activities due to the ongoing delay event or not to show these activities in the interim baseline, in order to have zero TF. Both of these are not standard planning practices. Removing these activities will affect the overall progress measurement. Reducing the duration will reflect unrealistic productivity against the quantity.
5. Therefore in my opinion, there is no harm in showing the negative float in this interim baseline programme, and it is your right to inform the Client about the delay event impacting the Programme, which is beyond your control. Also these details to be reflected properly in the narrative anlong with the submittal. 

6. Meantime submit the interim EOT claim until the closing of the ongoing delay event. 

BR

Kannan

Samer & Kannan, Really, it gets more complicated to me, especially Kannan's item 4. Perhaps I cannot figure it out until I've seen the schedule itself. Anyway, in my opinion, what matters most is: What event really is driving or pushing the contract completion date? The four (4) events I supposed cannot be open-ended, which means, individually or independently, may drive or push-forward the contract completion date. However, there should be one event that must govern these group of delaying events, assuming that we're talking of only one affected milestone (contract completion). It gets more complicated when your contract is dealing with "interim milestones" and have independent considerations, but shall ultimately form parts of the whole contract or project. Samer, your problem I guess will depend on how you had structured your existing schedule, considering the "interim milestones", if this is really the case.

Samer, Ok, as I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong), on the date of the signing of the client's instruction, you got a negative float of 124 days. The date of the instruction should be the new reckoning point of your schedule (new data date), of course considering all actual data in the left of the data date. Now as perhaps a way for recovery, the client granted you with 60 days. So you still have -64 days balance. I'm not sure if you were working on calendar days (continuous without non working day) or not, otherwise, I guess you have to consider non-working days as well. Anyway, I would suggest two (2) scenarios: 1. Update your schedule up to the date of the instruction (data date), to show -124 days (negative float), save and make several copies as back-up. 2. On the same schedule (and data date), apply the 60 days as granted by the client, run the schedule and see what would be the total float (my guess it's not -64), again make back-up copies. Now, you got two types of schedules, make sure you have stand-alone back up copies. To be continued...depending on your own strategy from here. By the way, make sure that your client is aware of what you're doing. For me there's nothing wrong with being transparent as regards the works.

Samer, I cannot understand how did you arrive to a figure of 124 days delay or impact when you said the event is still continuous? Is it an on-going or in-progress activity? If it is, then the 124 days may not be correct. Or in the end or once completed, you might get more delays, or perhaps less than 124 days. Or have you reported this figure (124 days) to the client on a certain period or data date, and the client acknowledge it? Otherwise, or if the client is not aware of it, then (for me) still you cannot be certain about this figure (124 days or 64 days as you had been granted with 60 days as you mentioned). And how did you calculate the 124 days by the way?

In that case, why cant you submit an Interim Revised Baseline Programme for progress monitoring purpose only, reserving your rights for the EOT claim once the last event is closed. This should be recorded in minutes , official letter etc.

Mean time submit the interim EOT claims every month for the open delay event until it is closed.

BR

Kannan

If you got 4 delay events, I wonder why the client acted on the other three and disregard the first one? If it is a series or sequence of events, then perhaps it can be counted as just one delay event? Maybe if you can elaborate further about the relationships or logics of these events (if any), then perhaps the readers may able to give you with best advices.