The following abstracts have been submitted for consideration for the 2014 Annual Meeting in New Orleans, LA. The final program will consist of approximately 100 tracks.
(CDR-1496) Modified Window Analysis for evaluating delay claims
Primary Author: Mr Ghulam Mujtaba Shaikh PE, PMP AAA Partnership
Abstract: Large and complex construction projects can last for years, and delay claims for such projects can sometime span for very long durations. Reviewing a delay claim at the end of a multi-year project can result in a very extensive analysis, requiring review of critical path(s) and near critical paths for every schedule update over several years. The additional review of related project documentation can make this analysis very costly, especially if litigation is involved. In this paper, a modified window analysis approach has been adopted to demonstrate how a group of schedule windows depending on the critical path or other factors can be merged to define a modified window. The delays are then evaluated as a group based on these modified windows. Recommendations are made for excusable and non-excusable delays in order to leverage a negotiation, saving the client significant costs.
(CDR-1510) Trends in Construction Claims & Disputes
Primary Author: Mr James G Zack Jr CFCC Navigant Consulting, Inc.
Abstract: Claims and disputes are a constant in the construction industry, regardless of whether the industry is doing well or poorly. The number of claims seems to have risen during the recent recession despite the downturn (or perhaps as a result of downturn) in the industry. This presentation, based on research conducted by the Navigant Constructin Forum, overviews some relatively recent trends related to construction claims and disputes in the areas of concurrent delay suspensions of work time extensions notice and claim filing requirements calculation of home office overhead proof of differing site conditions and risk transfer in the design/build environment. Through this insight it is believed that owners, design professionals, construction managers, contractors and subcontractors can devise ways to avoid such issues going forward thus making projects more successful, and more profitable, for all stakeholders.
(CDR-1526) Ranking AACE International's Forensic Schedule Analysis Methods
Primary Author: Mr Robert M D'Onofrio PE URS Corporation
Abstract: Studies show that application of the various forensic schedule analysis methods result in different conclusions, even when applied to the same identical fact pattern, because each method treats delay in a different way. The primary limitation on method use is the availability of source data and documentation. When necessary information is available, such as schedule updates and as-built data, then the various AACE Forensic Schedule Analysis methods can be ranked in accordance with technical accuracy and merit. The ranking of AACE Forensic Schedule Analysis methods may then be compared with applicable case law and legal decisions in the United States and overseas, and other guidelines, such as the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol.
(CDR-1530) PREDICTING THE LOST LABOUR VALUE IN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS WITH LINEAR MODEL
Primary Author: Mr Samuel Ikechuku Egwunatum Delta State Polytechnic, Ozoro
Abstract: Inspite of the extensive literature on lost labor estimation methods in construction project circle, some of the methods in use continue to raise spurious and consistency questions in terms of given repeatable value when applied to different construction scenarios. Clients, contractors and consultants are left to their fate of selecting a method for evaluation of their claims on the basis of situation specifics. This study investigated selected case studies of construction projects by quantifying their lost labor values on the basis of Leonard and Moselhi's framework. Arising from the statistical propensity which the data tend to exhibit, a Linear Model was developed to predict the lost labor value of construction work items on the differential iteration of baseline and actual output of Labor. This gave a consistent and holistic approach to the estimation of lost labor values in construction projects without regards to circumstances of application.
(CDR-1532) INFERENCES ON THE RELIABILITY LEVELS OF LOST LABOUR ESTIMATING METHODS
Primary Author: Mr Samuel Ikechuku Egwunatum Delta State Polytechnic, Ozoro
Abstract: Recent studies conducted in the construction industry and particularly the AACE recommended practice No. 25R-03 on lost labor estimation has shown that all the methods used for quantifying lost labor in construction projects have some varying degree of accuracy occasioned by the non-unified and standardized approach of measurement. The studies have identified the limitations of the underlying measurement principle not to be an exert science. In view of these variational tendencies exhibited by these methods, this study investigated the severity of the accompanying degree of uncertainty of the methods. This was conducted through a well structured questionnaire by mapping out the sampling frame to select the sample size of respondents. By instrument of mean score the research was able to report on the reliability levels of the estimating methods. This will alleviate the credibility and spurious doubt on any of the method demanded by clients for the purpose of measurement and award of claims.
(CDR-1554) Calculation of Delay Costs during Concurrent Non-Critical Construction Work
Primary Author: Mr Barry Allan Tozer MEng Tozer & Assoc Pty Ltd
Abstract: The paper provides an alternative method of calculation for assessment of project delay costs where productive work is being undertaken concurrently with a critical path delay. The limiting case where no concurrent work is undertaken is non-controversial. In that case, the cost is calculated from the delay period ascertained from the critical path and the average daily actual cost for all time-related resources. Where work is continuing on unaffected parts of the site or unconnected activities, this approach invariably overstates the actual delay cost. The alternative methodology attributes a percentage of on-site time-related cost to the direct cost of the non-critical work being undertaken concurrently. That amount is deducted from the delay cost entitlement. The additional cost per time period is readily calculated to determine the total delay cost. The alternative methodology may be presented graphically so that the impact of the delay on costs in each time period is better understood.
(CDR-1593) Forensic Schedule Analysis Methods: Reconciliation of Different Results
Primary Author: Mr Patrick M Kelly PE PSP Navigant
Co-author(s): Mr John C Livengood CFCC PSP Navigant
Abstract: Perceived wisdom within the construction industry is that different Forensic Schedule Analysis (FSA) methods produce different results on the same set of facts. Although there are many potential variables that could cause this, such as bias of the analyst or the quality of the implementation of a method, some experts have expressed concern that the methods themselves generate different results and are therefore some may be potentially defective. But do the different methods actually generate different answers when applied properly to the same set of facts, or are the observed differences natural aspects of the methods that can be documented and quantified? This paper will explore that question by examining a specific set of facts and applying each of the four major FSA methods the As-Planned vs. As-Built, Contemporaneous Period Analysis, Retrospective TIA, and Collapsed As-Built to those facts. Further, if the methods do generate different results, the paper will explain how and why that occurs, how to quantify and reconcile the differences, and what conclusions a FSA expert should draw from those differences.
(CDR-1606) Delay & Standby Claims in Offshore Facilities Installation
Primary Author: Mr Kenji P Hoshino CFCC PSP Project Controls & Forensics LLC
Co-author(s): Mr Jeffery L. Ottesen PE CFCC PSP Alta Cascade Inc
Abstract: This paper is an introduction to schedulers of traditional 'land-based' construction of certain concepts that are specific to delay and standby claims in offshore oil and gas facilities construction and installation. The concepts include, schedule-related assessment of extended offshore carryover work, the use of 'tornado-format' schedules in vessel chartering, and considerations of ocean conditions in calendaring schedule tasks. The discussion of the concepts utilizes actual case studies from the authors' experience in offshore oil and gas industry.
(CDR-1621) Effective way of controlling issues related to changes in the construction project
Primary Author: Mr Saptarshi Chakraborty Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
Co-author(s): Mr Gopakumar Raghavan Nair Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
Abstract: Construction contracts like many other types of contracts allocate risks to the parties to the contract according to agreed terms with regard to the quality, quantity, time and nature of work. Nowadays, issues and disagreement are common in the construction industry due to the complex nature of projects, due to misunderstanding, improper management, and shortage of skilled manpower, economic uncertainty etc. Changes in construction contract are probably one of the most noticeable ingredients for the problems between parties of the contract. This paper discusses aims to examine common problems related to variations and the adequacy of the management including dispute resolution methods available in the industry. Also, to explore more suitable and effective process from the modern construction world to deal with change management issues more appropriately. The conclusion is that although there is no panacea to variation related issues, definitely it can be avoided or minimised by sensible approach and use of suitable and effective process.
(CDR-1632) (Panel Discussion) Great Debate: Is Cumulative Impact a Provable Reality?
Primary Author: Dr Anamaria I Popescu PE PSP Hill International
Co-author(s): Mr Mark F Nagata PSP Trauner Consulting Services, Inc.; Mr Robert D. Kelly Jr CFCC PSP Alpha Corporation; Mr Patrick Curtis Kelly PSP Alpha Corporation
Abstract: The concept of Cumulative Impact is one of the most controversial areas of construction claims. Conceived during a time when measurement of productivity was difficult, Cumulative Impact claims seek to account for additional labor costs which are not directly attributable to an individual change order, but are instead allegedly the result of the aggregated and synergistic effects to productivity of an excessive number of changes to a single contract. Despite case law supporting its existence, forensic schedule analysts continue to raise questions about this controversial claim. Does Cumulative Impact exist, or was the rationale flawed from inception? Is it possible to segregate productivity losses in order to define specific cumulative impact losses, or is a Cumulative Impact claim always a total productivity loss claim? And is there a way for a contractor to put together a claim that an owner will ever find acceptable? This paper will provide an overview of the theory behind these claims, and will address the arguments for and against Cumulative Impact claims, highlighting the key areas of the controversy.
(CDR-1638) Evaluation of Changes in Oil & Gas Projects
Primary Author: Mr Richard J Long PE Long International, Inc.
Abstract: Owners frequently initiate design changes to the EPC contractors scope of work on oil & gas projects. The delay and disruption costs alleged to be associated with changes can be a significant and painful surprise to the owner should the contractor ultimately submit a cumulative impact claim. This article discusses the uniqueness of design changes on oil & gas projects and how such changes can have a significant ripple effect on the work, including the potential effect of changes on various equipment operations the need to understand, agree upon, and analyze the totality of the scope of changes the effect of changes on the various process operating conditions the various cost considerations that should be contemplated in evaluating changes, the potential effect of a change on environmental and safety designs and hazardous operations reviews and the need for the owner and the contractor to consider the effect of changes on multi-discipline design coordination and fabrication of specialty equipment. Finally, a discussion of the methodologies for preparing and evaluating a cumulative impact claim is presented.
(CDR-1643) Proof is in the Records
Primary Author: Mr Ronald K Grant R Grant Consulting, LLC
Co-author(s): Mr Kenneth Roberts Schiff Hardin, LLP
Abstract: Resolving disagreements and disputes on construction projects, from inside the trailer to inside the court room, is imperatively dependent on well-maintained documentation. However obvious this may seem, its common for parties to not be prepared early on to validate their position with a full range of evidential documentation. On one end of the scale is a partys inability to easily find and retrieve the relevant documents among mountains of retained files. On the other end is a complete failure to have created or retained the proper records. Being unprepared or unable to provide sufficient documentation to support a position early in a disagreement or dispute often leads to an escalation of the time and expense for a resolution, which leads to the need for third party assistance before a defensible position can be established. This article will focus on practical tools and solutions on how to manage and monitor the creation, capturing and retrieval of useful project documentation that can reduce the cost and time involved in resolving disagreements and disputes.
(CDR-1659) Lost Productivity - Finding the Missing Puzzle Pieces and Contract Bars
Primary Author: Dr Tong Zhao PE PSP Delta Consulting Group, Inc
Co-author(s): Mr J. Mark Dungan Delta Consulting Group, Inc
Abstract: A contractor makes certain assumptions regarding the scope of work represented in a contract, specifications and drawings, construction sequence, and schedule. Should those conditions change, the contractor may suffer economic losses related to unplanned extra effort. However, in the case of lost productivity, identifying the cause and effect is often illusive and in some cases contracts even try to explicitly bar loss of productivity claims. This paper discusses loss of productivity, an important piece in the construction claim puzzle, and application of the measured-mile methodology to prove the damage. This paper also discusses potential methods of recovering extra labor when loss of productivity claims are explicitly denied in the contract.
(CDR-1669) Performing Forensic Analysis on Complex EPC Schedules
Primary Author: Mr Michael S Dennis CCP Project Controls and Forensics
Abstract: This paper is a review of the problems we face in forensic analysis today with increasingly larger and more complex project schedules for EPC contracts. It will cover the potential problems caused during the life-cycle and evolution of the project schedule. Along with the problems that are encountered at the end of the job, due to the schedule size, complexity and the issues caused by the scheduling software. It will discuss analysis techniques for analyzing these massive schedules forensically (summarization, EPC individually, period by period, etc...) along with potential pit falls to avoid. The presentation will make use of both real life case studies and my experience with complex project schedule analysis.
(CDR-1683) Untangling Concurrent Delay on Pipeline Projects
Primary Author: Ms Greta A Martin PE PSP Alta Cascade
Co-author(s): Mr Christopher J Brasco Watt Tieder Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP; Mr Jeffery L. Ottesen PE CFCC PSP Alta Cascade Inc
Abstract: Construction projects for LNG pipelines typically follow linear-sequenced work plans. Such projects literally begin at a point A and end at a point B. In CPM terms, there may be only a single critical path, or a single string of planned activities that define the entire scope of work. Such schedules seem simple in principle and design, and because of this simplicity, contractors and owners frequently spend less time developing the schedule and simply dive into the construction work. If preparing such a schedule is so simple, why then do so many linear projects experience delay and pose contractors difficulty in proving cause and effect? This paper presents delay concurrency as defined by US and British case law, distinguishes between literal concurrency and functional concurrency, and presents how schedulers, experts and triers of fact can identify delay concurrency on linear projects.
(CDR-1688) Constraints in Practical Application of Time Impact Analysis
Primary Author: Mr Devdas K Tamboli CCP PSP Kahramaa Qatar Electricity and Water Authority
Co-author(s): Ms Julie K Owen CCP PSP Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Abstract: Time impact Analysis is a schedule delay analysis technique commonly used on construction projects and highly favored amongst owners due to various advantages it have over other techniques. Thus owners often require through their schedule specifications utilization of time impact analysis as a means to quantify delays. Challenges are sometimes encountered using this technique such as differing staff knowledge and skill sets, improper schedule updates, concurrent events, and masked schedule mitigation. This paper will discuss time impact analysis with focus on the practical applications and constraints in application discussed with the help of examples. At the end recommendations will be provided to make effective use of this delay analysis method.
(CDR-1691) Calculating the As-Built Critical Path
Primary Author: Mr Andrew Avalon PE PSP Long International, Inc.
Abstract: The as-built critical path of a project schedule can be determined by developing as built calculation schedules for each relevant schedule analysis period. An as-built calculation schedule removes verified actual dates from the schedule and revises the activity and lag durations to be equal to the actual durations. The creation of the as-built calculation schedule enables the CPM scheduling software to then calculate the as-built critical path. To properly create an as built calculation schedule, it is necessary to determine the driving predecessor relationships in the as built schedule when there are multiple predecessors to an activity. If a predecessor is not driving, the actual lag duration should be reduced to the originally planned lag value to create float in the as-built calculation schedule. If the determination of driving predecessor relationships is not performed, all activities in the as built calculation schedule would have zero total float and would be equally critical. This paper presents procedures to ensure that the as-built driving lag values are determined objectively to avoid inconsistent or subjective assessments in calculating the as built critical path.
(CDR-1692) Quantifying Daily Schedule Variances to Mitigate Schedule Delays
Primary Author: Mr Dana Fetrow Spire Consulting Group LLC
Co-author(s): Ms Katherine Hull Spire Consulting Group LLC
Abstract: Schedule delays are a common and costly issue on construction projects. CPM schedules assist project teams with identifying and mitigating delays but typically offer a limited view of delays occurring on a daily basis. Due to client demand and a lack of tools in the marketplace, our firm developed procedures and tools, based on industry standard best practice methodologies, to measure schedule variance on a daily basis. As a result of this effort, we identified refinements to the best practices and found that daily variance measurements are not necessarily appropriate for all projects.
This paper describes the issues that led to this effort, methodologies that served as a basis, challenges and lessons learned along the way, and practical applications of the procedures and tools. The paper also includes a discussion on the costs/benefits of quantifying daily schedule variance, a case study that demonstrates the recommended practices for integrating regular schedule variance reviews into a projects management system and the application of daily schedule variance reports to substantiate positions in the event of disputes.
(CDR-1696) Implementing Complex Time Impact Analyses on Oil & Gas Projects
Primary Author: Mr Ronald J Rider Long International, Inc.
Co-author(s): Mr Rod Charles Carter CCP PSP Long International Inc.
Abstract: AACE Internationals Recommended Practices for Forensic Schedule Analysis (29R-03) and Time Impact Analysis - As Applied in Construction (52R-06) provide general guidelines for inserting delay events to impact a schedule. In practice, creating and adding delay events and modeling their schedule impacts can be quite complex, especially on highly impacted oil & gas projects that span several years. This paper discusses the inherent complexities and provides practical considerations and methods for:
Creating fragnet activities and statusing them across multiple analysis windows
Quantifying extended durations to account for additional work
Tying fragnets to impacted activities using Finish-to-Finish (FF) logic
Evaluating contractor-responsible delays that are embedded in owner-responsible events
The methods discussed in this paper are drawn from the authors experience in implementing retrospective Time Impact Analyses (MIP 3.7 Modeled/Additive/Multiple Base) on large EPC oil and gas project disputes. The examples are drawn from a 6,000-activity schedule on a gas plant project impacted by hundreds of changes and delayed by 16 months.
(CDR-1700) Quantifying Disruption in Power Projects
Primary Author: Mr Anthony J Gonzales Spire Consulting Group LLC
Co-author(s): Mr Jesus Schuldes Spire Consulting Group LLC; Mr Adrian Gerard Saldanha
Abstract: Power plant projects involve huge capital investment employing the services of multiple trades. The complex, intertwined, and interdependent nature of these projects make it difficult to identify an immaculate and untouched Measured Mile. While delays are typically easier to quantify disruptions during construction of a power plant can be more difficult to quantify. Lack of information, data and documentation can prevent analysts from being able to properly perform a measured mile.
Accordingly, this paper will explain the fundamental concepts of the Measured Mile Analysis with recent trends in its use. The paper will outline the approach used by the authors in their professional practice to assist a client in quantifying labor productivity losses due to worksite disruptions. These results were then used as part of a successful disruption claim. Suggestions to improve the implementation of Measured Mile analysis will also be provided.
(CDR-1705) Quantifying Delays in International Arbitration Proceedings
Primary Author: Mr Anthony J Gonzales Spire Consulting Group LLC
Abstract: International disputes are complex and can be difficult to navigate. Multiple international parties, non-descriptive proceedings, varying contracts and governing law can create challenges for substantiating delays. Analysts need to be aware of how to navigate the quantification and substantiation process when faced with evaluating delays on an international project. Accordingly, this paper will provide a review of those methods recognized and accepted in international disputes involving delay. A detailed review of those delay methods recognized and commonly used in Central and South America, Europe, Africa, Asia and the Middle East. In addition, a step wise approach for quantifying and substantiating delays for each area will be discussed.
(CDR-1713) Risk-based delay analysis
Primary Author: Dr Jay Palmos CFCC PSP FTI Consulting
Abstract: Contemporary delay analysis is based upon project schedules, whether baseline or working updates, however this methodology relies too heavily upon the accuracy of the schedule. It is difficult to conceive of an occasion where project schedules are sufficiently accurate that it should be used to predict future delay with forensic accuracy. It is this underlying misconception which leads to poor case-law and delay evaluation throughout a project which often leads to claims and disputes. There is an alternative to complete reliance upon the project schedule. By using risk-based delay analysis one can utilize the schedule in combination with identified risks in order to demonstrate how (and more importantly why) a change in circumstance might affect the completion date of a project. The advantages of using risk-based analysis primarily reside in the fact that delays are identified and documented prior to their occurrence. Further, most risk registers will provide a most/least likely scenario as well as a worst case scenario. My paper would discuss the benefits of this methodology.
(CDR-1730) Contracting for Collaboration: Making the Ideal a Reality
Primary Author: Mr Christopher J Brasco Watt Tieder Hoffar & Fitzgerald, LLP
Co-author(s): Mr Christopher M. Anzidei Law Offices of Christopher M. Anzidei, PLLC; Mr Robert Fraga MBP
Abstract: Collaboration is an oft-used buzz word in the modern construction industry. Given the thin line separating winning and losing projects, collaboration can no longer be left to chance. For this ideal to be realized, it must be the subject of thoughtful planning. The parties can foster meaningful collaboration by devoting their attention to several important factors in planning and executing their project. These factors include selecting the appropriate delivery system and project team, properly allocating risk in the contract documents, implementing a system to identify and manage risk during performance (including both cost and schedule controls), establishing incentives for positive performance, and utilizing efficient dispute resolution methods. Our paper will explore these means of aligning the parties efforts and offer practical tips for how the parties can foster true collaboration in planning and executing their contracts. Furthermore, while unforeseen circumstances occur on every project that give rise to changes, these need not put the project team at odds. Accordingly, we will also address means by which the parties can break impasses without breaking relationships.
(CDR-1757) Pricing and Proving Delay Claims
Primary Author: Mr Michael Berta Exponent
Co-author(s): Mr Josh Ritti Exponent
Abstract: While many construction projects experience delays, properly pricing and proving the delays has become difficult as Owners have learned to limit their exposure to delay claims. This paper will provide the methodology used by claims experts to price and prove delay damages on any type of construction project. The paper will identify common pitfalls and mistakes made when developing delay claims. It provides both an overview and comparison of schedule delay analysis methodologies commonly employed by scheduling experts, providing both advantages and disadvantages of each method. It will explain how a contractors accounting system can be used to price and prove a delay claim. The paper discusses newly developed contract clauses used by Owners to limit delay damages and ways contractors can counter such contractual obligations. By incorporating actual case examples, this paper will leave the reader with an understanding of how certain scheduling techniques can be employed to help quantify the damages resulting from unforeseen time impacts and maximize their chances for recovery of damages resulting from such impacts.