challenges protocol

7/29/2019 Challenges Protocol

1/96

CHALLENGES OF THE SCL

DELAY AND DISRUPTIONPROTOCOL

Tony Farrow

Trett Consultingwww.trett.com


2/96

AGENDA

Background (Contracts, Delays,

Analysis, Claims, Disputes, Resolution)

The Protocol (Structure)

The Protocol (Aims and Achievements)

Challenges in Implementing the Protocol


3/96

Contracts and Project Delays

Contracts have completion dates and liquidated

damages are tied to completion date

Extension of Time clauses maintain LD provisions

where there has been breach by Employer

If Employer causes a delay and there is no EOT

clause, time can (not universal) become at largeand LD clause fails.

EOTs also relate to financial matters including

bonus situation


4/96

Contracts and Project Delays

Contract provisions define the basis of entitlement

Contracts are imprecise as to how to demonstrate

delay and prove entitlement

Debate about actual delay and contractual

entitlement

Hence Delay Analysis Methodology has

developed

SCL Protocol advances Delay Analysis

Delay to be on the critical path


5/96

Extension of Time Methods

Estimate or Model Methods (investigate the EVENT

and its potential impact)

Actual Methods (identify the DELAYperiodand

investigate what caused it)


6/96

Model Based Methods

Global and Net Impact Methods

As-Planned Impact

As-Planned But For

Collapsed As-Built (As-Built But For)

Time Impact Analysis (Impact / Update)


7/96

Actual Based Methods

As-Planned vs As-Built

Windows / Snap-Shot


8/96

ACTIVITY A

ACTIVITY B

ACTIVITY C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11Activity

Event

Model Based Analysis

Estimate of Delay

Original

Completion


9/96

ACTIVITY A

ACTIVITY B

ACTIVITY C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11Activity

Actual Based Analysis

Why Delay?

OriginalCompletion


10/96

Prospective and Retrospective

Approaches P looks forward and anticipates delay

(Preventative; forward looking)

R looks back and establishes cause ofdelay (Curative; allocation of blame)

SCL Protocol offers another approach to

R; put yourself back at the time of theevent and re-assess what might have

happened had things been done

differently.


11/96

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11DurActivity

Completion Date

Week 7

Original Overall Duration 7 Weeks

Critical Path runs through activities A and B

PLANNED PROGRAMME


12/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

As-Built Overall Duration 10 Weeks

Critical Path ran through activities C, D and B

AS-BUILT PROGRAMME

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


13/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4

Lack of Resources

d3

Events d1, d2 and d4 Owner Delays

Event d3 Contractor Delay

DELAYING EVENTS

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


14/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

Uses planned programme

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


15/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

Add in first delay to occur (d1)

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


16/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

Add in first delay to occur (d1)

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


17/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Add in first delay to occur (d1) - 1 Week Critical Delay

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


18/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2


Add in 2nd delay to occur (d2) - No Critical Delay

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


19/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2



Add in 3rd delay to occur (d3)

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


20/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2

Lack of Resources

d3



Add in 3rd delay to occur (d3) - 2 Weeks Critical Delay

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


21/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2

Lack of Resources

d3

Late Info

d4



Add in 3rd delay to occur (d3) - 2 Weeks Critical Delay

Add in 4th delay to occur (d4) - No Critical Delay

AS-PLANNED IMPACTED

A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 2 wks

DurActivity


22/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4

Lack of Resources

d3

Uses as-built programme logic linked

COLLAPSED AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


23/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

VO

d1

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4

Lack of Resources

d3

Critical Path Identified and first employer delay removed

COLLAPSED AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


24/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4

Lack of Resources

d3


Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

Lack of Resources

d3

COLLAPSED AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


25/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4


Lack of Resources

d3

1 Weeks Critical Delay Allocated to d1

COLLAPSED AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


26/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

Bad Weather

d2

Late Info

d4

Critical Path Identified and next employer delay removed

Lack of Resources

d3


COLLAPSED AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


27/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

Bad Weather

d2


Lack of Resources

d3


COLLAPSED AS-BUILT


A 7 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


28/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

Bad Weather

d2


Lack of Resources

d3


COLLAPSED AS-BUILT


A 7 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


29/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7


Lack of Resources

d3


COLLAPSED AS-BUILT



A 6 wks

B 1 wk

C 2 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


30/96

Results from Model Based Methods

As-Planned Impact

1 week critical delay

no critical delay

2 weeks critical delay

no critical delay

Collapsed As-Built


1 week delay

no critical delay


Delay

d1 (VO)

d2

(bad weather)

d3 (lack resources)

d4 (late info)


31/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

As-Built Overall Duration 10 Weeks

Critical Path ran through activities C, D and B

AS-PLANNED vs AS-BUILT

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


32/96

AS-PLANNED vs AS-BUILT (WINDOWS)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity

Programme divided into time slicesand analysed progressively

1 2 3


33/96


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


1


34/96


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


2


35/96


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Completion Date

Week 10

Completion Date

Week 7

A 8 wks

B 1 wk

C 5 wks

D 4 wks

DurActivity


3


36/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

Planned

Finish Date

1

The planned programme is reconstructed and divided

into snap-shot periods

TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS


37/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

Planned

Finish Date

DelayInfluenced

End Date1

Delays occurring within the first snap-shot period are

added and the programme is re-analysed



38/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

Planned

Finish Date

1

The actual progress within the

snapshot period is researched


DelayInfluenced

End Date


39/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

Planned

Finish Date

1

The planned programme is updated to reflect the actual

progress within the snapshot period and then re-analysed


End Date

based on

Actual

Progress

DelayInfluenced

End Date


40/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

End Date as at

end of 1st

snapshot

period

2

The next snapshot period is analysed



41/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

2


DelayInfluenced

End Date

Delays occurring within the 2nd snap-shot period are

added and the programme is re-analysed

End Date as at

end of 1st

snapshot period


42/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

2


The actual progress within the snapshot

period is researched

DelayInfluenced

End Date

End Date as at

end of 1st

snapshot period


43/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ground Works

Basement

Floor 1

Floor 2

Floor 3

2


End Date

based on

Actual

Progress

The planned programme is updated to reflect the actual

progress within the snapshot period and then re-analysed

DelayInfluenced

End Date

End Date as at

end of 1st

snapshot period


44/96

Programme Float


45/96

Two Main Types

Terminal Total


46/96

15 days

10 days

10 days

Contract Completion Date

TERMINAL FLOAT

TOTAL FLOAT


47/96

Who Owns the Float ?


48/96

10 days

10 days


TERMINAL FLOAT


49/96

EMPLOYER

DELAY


TERMINAL FLOAT

10 days

10 days


50/96


10 days

10 days

EMPLOYER

DELAY

15 days

TERMINAL FLOAT

CONTRACTOR

DELAY


51/96


10 days

10 days

EMPLOYER

DELAY

15 days

TERMINAL FLOAT

CONTRACTOR

DELAY

Original Contract period


52/96

CONCURRENCY


53/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


Revisionto the

Works

Bad

Weather

InsufficientResources


54/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


Revisionto the

Works

Bad

Weather

InsufficientResources


55/96

M&E

Structure

Finishings

Revision

to the finishingWorks

Contractors

M&E design

fault

identified


56/96

Delay

A

Delay

B4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Actual

Completion


57/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

Actual

Completion


58/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

1 Week EOT

EFFECT OF THE EMPLOYERS FAULT

Actual

Completion


59/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

1 Week no L&E/

1 week LDs

EFFECT OF THE CONTRACTORS FAULT

Actual

Completion


60/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

Employers

Fault

Contractors

Fault

Actual

Completion


61/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

Employers

Fault

Contractors

Fault

Actual

Completion

EFFECT OF THE EMPLOYERS FAULT

2 Weeks

EoT


62/96

4 weeks

4 weeks


3 weeks

Delay

A

Delay

B

Contractors

Fault

Employers

Fault

Employers

Fault

Contractors

Fault

Actual

Completion

1 Week

Prolongation costs

EFFECT OF THE CONTRACTORS FAULT


63/96

THE SCL PROTOCOL


64/96

THE PROTOCOL (STRUCTURE)

CORE PRINCIPLES

GUIDANCE NOTES

S1. Explains the Core Principles

S2. Deals with Programming and Record Keeping

S3. Extensions of Time (Prospective)

S4. Extensions of Time (Retrospective)

APPENDICES

A. Definitions

B. Model Specification Clause (Programmes)

C. Model Specification Clause (Records)

D. Illustrations


65/96

CORE PRINCIPLES

Good Programme Systems and Management

Good Record Systems and Management

Contemporaneous, incremental, assessment of delays and

award of Extensions of Time

Time Impact Analysis is the preferred methodology

Float Project owns, Contractor receives compensation

Concurrency Contractor receives Time but no Money

Retrospective delay analysis Re-live the Project; contradicts

usual assessment of damage?


66/96

GUIDANCE NOTES - S1

Definitions (Appendix A)

Extension of Time principles

Float

Concurrency

Mitigation (best endeavours)

Variations

Global Claims

Overheads

Profit

Acceleration (does not address Constructive Acceleration)


67/96

GUIDANCE NOTES S2

Form of Programme (Appendix B)

Method Statement

Timetables for issue (Initial and Agreed)

Updates and Revisions

Software

Record Keeping (Appendix C)


68/96

GUIDANCE NOTES S3

Extensions of Time during the Project (Prospective)

Time Impact Analysis

Updated Programmes

Revised Programmes

Level of detail in any analysis

Illustrations (Appendix D)


69/96

GUIDANCE NOTES S4

Extensions of Time after the Project (Retrospective)

Four Methods

Updated/Revised Programmes Balance taken re time/costs

Consider the terms of the Contract

Factual analysis or Entitlement driven?

Placing oneself back at the time of the delay


70/96

THE PROTOCOL

-AIMS-

Not intended as a contract document

Offers specification terms for programme

management and record keeping

Offers guidance in the management of delay and

disruption that is, in the management of change

Extensions of Time should be dealt with at the time Time Impact Analysis is the recommended method


71/96

THE PROTOCOL

-ACHIEVEMENTS-

Hoped that Contracting Parties would adopt its

recommendations Prospective X

Hoped/Attempted to have industry contractingbodies adopt it Prospective X

Attempted to have the Courts adopt it

Retrospective X Delay Analysts adopt it

Added to knowledge; Great Debate!


72/96

THE PROTOCOL

-CHALLENGES-

Must be Industry/Profession/Employer led

Main Contractors would be unwise adopting it with

Subcontractors

It reduces risk pre-set rules/outcomes

It increases riskassumes one solution for all cases

Early delays tend to over-compensate the Contractor

Protocol needs re-drafting to remove optional aspects


73/96

THE PROTOCOL

-CHALLENGES-

Needs to deal more practically with constructive acceleration

Should advance a debate on the fairness of condition

precedent clauses

Does it amend the basis upon which damage is normally

assessed?

English law focussed; need to consider other legal systems.


74/96

THE PROTOCOL

-CONCLUSIONS-

Drafting requirements

Commercial implications; risk issue

Methodology greatly influences outcomes

Practical implications; skills and resources

required

Not widely adopted yet on live projects

Authors to be complemented for creating

Great Debate


75/96

DELAY CASE STUDY


76/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


77/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme

Delay 1 Slow Progress

ProjectedAs-Built


78/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


Late Switchgear

Delivery

Delay 2 Notified

ProjectedAs-Built

Delay 3

Inherent Design Fault

Discovered


79/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


Late Switchgear

Delivery

Delay 2 Notified

Delay 3


Discovered

ProjectedAs-Built


80/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


Late Switchgear

Delivery

Delay 2 Notified

Delay 3


Discovered

ProjectedAs-Built

Delay 4Crane Delay


81/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


Late Switchgear

Delivery

Delay 2 Notified

Delay 3


Discovered

ProjectedAs-Built

Delay 4Crane Delay


82/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme


Late Switchgear

Delivery

Delay 2 Notified

Delay 3


Discovered

ProjectedAs-Built

Delay 4Crane Delay

ActualCompletion


83/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

Late Switchgear

Delivery

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built

Crane Delay

ActualCompletion


84/96

REVIEW

Collapsed As Built Method


85/96

Collapsed As-Built Method

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

Late SwitchgearDelivery

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built

Crane Delay



86/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built

Crane Delay




87/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built


Both

equally

critical



88/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

ProjectedAs-Built




89/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

ProjectedAs-Built

p

Reverse

the

Sequence



90/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built


Reverse

the

Sequence



91/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Inherent

Design Fault

ProjectedAs-Built

p



92/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

Approved Programme

Slow Progress

ProjectedAs-Built


Employers Liability for Week 11 & 12As Planned Impact Method


93/96

As-Planned Impact Method

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

200T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme

Delay 3


Discovered

plus

1 Weeks Float

Concurrency - No Critical Delay by Subcontractor A


94/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

2000T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme

y y y

Dominant Delay - 2 Weeks Delay by Subcontractor B


95/96

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 STEEL FRAME

2 WALLS & ROOF

3 SWITCH GEAR

4 ACCESS GANTRY

2000T CRANE

Sub-Contractor A

Main Contractor

Sub-Contractor B

Main Contractor

Main Contractor

PlannedCompletion

Approved Programme

Late Switchgear

Delivery

Answer 1


96/96

Answer 1

Month 11 - Subcontractor A

Month 12 - Main Contractor

Month 13 - Subcontractor B

Answer 2

Month 11 - Subcontractor A



Answer 3




Answer 4

Month 11 - Employer's Liability


challenges protocol

Documents