Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule

Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule Construction delays chapter three reviewing the project schedule

Reviewing the Project Schedule

The project schedule is best prepared by those who are going to executethe work That is because a Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule is mosteffective when it properly models the project plan Who better to modelthe project plan than the contractor who will be performing the work?The CPM schedule should reflect the contractor’s means and methods forperforming the work In this regard, it is said that the contractor “owns”the project schedule But, if that is the case, what is the owner’s role?Most construction contracts require the contractor to develop a CPMschedule for submission to the owner The contract may also require the con-tractor to submit periodic schedule updates So, while the schedule “belongs”

to the contractor, the owner has an interest in making sure that it exists Thesubmission of the baseline schedule provides an owner with the opportunity tounderstand the contractor’s plan for the project This should include the con-tractor’s assumptions regarding the owner’s role and the roles of other parties.Upon submission, the owner should review the baseline schedule toensure that the contractor’s plan, complies with the contract requirements,represents a reasonable plan, and follows CPM scheduling best practices.Similar to the baseline schedule submission, the submissions of peri-odic schedule updates are also an important consideration for the owner.Because the CPM schedule is the only project management tool thatidentifies the project’s critical path and, thus, forecasts when the projectwill finish, it provides the most reliable measure of project delay throughthe life of the project

Thus, it is recommended that the owner require the contractor toprepare and submit a project schedule that meets the contract require-ments to ensure that both parties know the plan and have a reliable tool

to evaluate progress and facilitate timely completion of the project Toaccomplish this, owners should perform a thorough and knowledgeablereview of the project schedule This submittal should be treated similar toevery other submittal received from the contractor For example, just as

an owner relies on a qualified structural engineer to review the tor’s steel shop drawings, the owner should have a qualified and experi-enced scheduling professional to evaluate the project schedules

contrac-35 Construction Delays Copyright © 2018 Trauner Consulting Services, Inc.

REVIEWING THE BASELINE SCHEDULE

A project’s baseline schedule should represent the contractor’s initialplan for performing the project work As the initial plan, the baselineschedule should not contain any actual start or finish dates This is animportant point that should not be ignored If the reviewer decides forsome reason that showing some progress in the baseline is acceptable, besure to confirm that the program is set to calculate using Retained Logic.CPM software allows the scheduler to select a variety of calculationmethods, the most common being Retained Logic, Progress Override,and Actual Dates These calculation methods are described in detail later

in this chapter as they are more relevant to schedule updates that containactual progress

Because the baseline schedule is a model of the contractor’s initialplan, it should represent the contractor’s plan for completing the projectbased on the contract requirements and project conditions known at thetime of bid, not on any information that only became known after thecontract was awarded Such new information may trigger a change to thecontractor’s plan It is important that the baseline schedule represent theplan at bid so that the effect of any change can be assessed by comparison

to the baseline schedule

Because the baseline schedule is used to track progress, quantify ect delays, and mitigate delays, both the contractor and owner shouldwork together to develop and approve a baseline schedule that complieswith the contract, represents a reasonable construction plan, and complieswith CPM scheduling best practices That said, owners should understandthat when reviewing a baseline schedule, perfection is not the criteria for

proj-an acceptable schedule Owners should also recognize that just as tant as having a baseline schedule that is acceptable to all parties is theneed to have the baseline schedule accepted as quickly as possible

impor-As stated above, the key aspects of a baseline schedule review are:

• Confirming that the schedule complies with the contract

• Determining that the schedule represents a reasonable plan

• Verifying that the schedule utilizes good CPM scheduling practices

Does the baseline schedule comply with the contract?

The first question to answer when reviewing the contractor’s baselineschedule submission is: Does the baseline schedule comply with the

contract? The first step to answering this question begins with the tal The submission must be complete It should include all of the requiredcomponents and printouts described in the contract’s scheduling specifica-tion If there are missing reports or charts, then the submission should beconsidered incomplete and, potentially, nonresponsive However, rejectingthe submission on this basis may not be the correct action If the submis-sion includes essential elements, such as the native CPM schedule file and

submit-a bsubmit-aseline schedule nsubmit-arrsubmit-ative, it msubmit-ay be possible to complete the reviewwithout the required printouts The basis for rejection of a baseline sched-ule is always a judgment call that should be balanced against the need toobtain timely acceptance of the baseline schedule

It is advisable that the project’s preconstruction meeting be used as aforum to discuss the contractor’s schedule The preconstruction meeting

is a good opportunity for the contractor to present the schedule to theproject stakeholders and to explain how it intends to use the schedule andother project controls to manage and monitor the progress of the work.This meeting is also a good opportunity for the owner to discuss how itintends to use the project schedule during the course of the project, such

as to manage the time impact of changes on the project, to evaluate timeextension requests, and to mitigate delays during the project

When reviewing a baseline schedule, it is first necessary to have athorough understanding of the project’s scope of work and contractrequirements, which includes understanding and enforcing the require-ments of the project’s scheduling specification Armed with this knowl-edge, the reviewer should evaluate the baseline schedule’s compliancewith the following items This list is not intended to represent a completelist of all contract requirements for every construction project; however,

it is recommended that the reviewer, at a minimum, ensure that the line schedule complies with these common contract requirements

base-• Meet contractual completion dates and duration(s) The baseline ule should not forecast achievement of a contract completion datebeyond the contract-required date or in excess of the contract duration.Examples of contract completion dates include, but are not limited to:

sched-• Substantial Completion Dates

• Final Completion Dates

• Maintenance-of-Traffic Milestone Dates

• Interim Milestone Completion Dates

• Phase Start and Completion Dates

• Incentive Dates

• Include the entire project work scope Examples of categories of ities that should be incorporated in the baseline schedule shouldinclude, but are not limited to:

activ-• Preparation, submission, and review of permit applications

• Issuance of permits

• Preparation and submission of submittals

• Initial review, possibly second review, and approval of submittals

• Fabrication and delivery of materials

• Right-of-way acquisitions

• Owner-supplied materials

• Utility work

• All on-site construction work

• All off-site construction work

• Testing, balancing, and commissioning of systems

• Include work of all responsible parties Examples include scheduleactivities for the owner, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, suppliersand material-men, all third parties (architect, engineers, utilities, per-mitting agencies, railroads, etc.); every party or entity who is responsi-ble for completing work, has decision-making responsibility, or isresponsible for a deliverable on the project

• Comply with all contractual work restrictions Examples include, butare not limited to:

• Environmental work restrictions Examples include a restriction onhow close the contractor’s operation can get to the nest of a partic-ular species of bird during mating or fledgling season, or an in-water work restriction, which would not allow the contractor toperform any in-water work during a fish-spawning season

• Navigable water work restrictions Examples include restrictions on thehours during the day or days of the week that a contractor’s bargecan be located within the navigable portion of a waterway

• Storm water management requirements Examples include requiring thecontractor to install temporary storm water control measures beforephysical construction work begins

• Comply with contract lane closure, phasing, or traffic staging ments Examples include:

require-• Compliance with the contract phasing or staging

• Requirements to maintain a specified number of lanes to be open

to traffic during construction

• Requirements that specify the number of lanes that need to beopen to traffic during a.m and p.m rush hours.

• Requirements for the contractor to perform road work at nightand have the road open to traffic during daytime hours

• Include contract-specified durations for activities such as owner mittal reviews, delivery of owner-supplied materials, etc

sub-• Comply with the contract scheduling specification requirements, such as:

• Maximum activity durations

• Types of logic relationships used

• The use of relationship lags or leads

• Specified level of detail

• Consideration of inclement weather, as required

• Inclusion of contract-stipulated milestones

• Inclusion of activity coding or WBS coding

• Assignment of party responsible for the activity

• Use of the longest path, not float, to identify the critical path

• Retained Logic, Progress Override, and Actual Dates options

• The use of activity constraints

The baseline schedule submission’s noncompliance with any mandated requirement typically constitutes adequate grounds for rejectingthe submission and requiring the contractor to revise and resubmit thebaseline schedule However, it is appropriate to use some judgment whengauging the significance of the deficiency Many deficiencies can be notedwith a request for the deficiency to be corrected and the baseline sched-ule be resubmitted prior to submission of the first schedule update.Remember that, while it is desirable to have a baseline that adequatelymodels the contractor’s plan in the context of the contract requirements,both parties will benefit from having an accepted baseline schedule asearly in the project as possible

contract-Does the baseline schedule represent a reasonable

plan for completion?

Determining whether or not the baseline schedule represents a reasonableplan for completion is more subjective and requires more judgment thandetermining whether the baseline schedule complies with the contractrequirements The best way to evaluate the reasonableness of the baselineschedule is to begin by asking some of the following questions:

• Does the critical path make sense? As stated earlier, the critical path isthe defining feature of a CPM schedule It is the work path that deter-mines when the project will finish As a result, only delays to the criti-cal path will delay the project Therefore, the baseline schedule’scritical path has to make sense with regard to the project’s scope ofwork Knowledge of the project’s scope of work should enable thereviewer to predict the work path or type of work that he or sheshould expect to see as responsible for determining the project’s com-pletion date even before reviewing the contractor’s baseline schedulesubmission For example, if the project is a multiyear bridge replace-ment, the reviewer would not expect to see landscaping as the initialwork item on the critical path Plus, on a multiyear project, the criti-cal path shouldn’t begin at a moment of time in year two or threewithout a thorough explanation.

• Does the sequence of work in the baseline schedule violate mandatoryconstruction sequencing? This concern is not usually addressed in thecontract’s scheduling specification However, an experienced reviewerwho is knowledgeable about the project’s scope of work should walkthrough the baseline schedule’s sequence of work and verify whether

or not the sequence of work violates mandatory constructionsequencing For example, does the baseline schedule show drywallcompleting on a particular floor before in-wall MEP rough-in is com-plete? The reviewer should keep in mind that there is a differencebetween “mandatory” construction sequencing and “preferential”construction sequencing Mandatory sequencing is the order of thework that all contractors have to abide by, and is generally dictated bythe physical conditions that exist regardless of the contractor’s meansand methods An example of mandatory logic would be the need toplace rebar in a slab before the concrete can be placed Preferentialsequencing is used to depict work sequences that the contractor pre-fers These may be a function of the contractor’s selected means andmethods, or they may be a function of resource limitations or pricingrestrictions For example, the contractor may prefer to build the proj-ect using only one crane and this may dictate a certain constructionsequence Note that rejecting the baseline schedule based on the con-tractor’s preferential construction sequencing might be viewed asdirecting the contractor’s means and methods

• Do the near-critical paths make sense? Near-critical paths are workpaths with low total float values that, if delayed before the next update,

might consume their available float, become critical, and, potentiallydelay the project These work paths are usually identified by their totalfloat values For example, the reviewer could define near-critical workpaths as work paths with total float values that range between 0 and 20workdays (roughly 1 month, which is the time between updates) Thisrange should be determined both by the project’s complexity and itsduration Complex, short-duration projects might have more near-critical paths of work than projects that have a greater duration.Based on the project’s scope of work, just as the reviewer of the base-line schedule should be able to predict the work path that is the criticalpath, the reviewer should also be able to predict the work paths that he

or she would expect to be one of the near-critical paths When evaluatingwhether the near-critical paths make sense, the reviewer should look forwork paths that should be included, but are not, as well as work pathsthat are included, but should not be

When a near-critical path is unexpected, the reviewer should tracethe logic along that work path to determine if the path contains unneces-sary logic revisions or inflated activity durations that would suggest thecontractor is attempting to sequester or hide float along the work path.When a work path that would be expected to be near critical hasmore float than expected, the reviewer should check to see if an activity

on the path is forecast to be performed earlier than it could be due tomissing mandatory logic If a logic relationship is missing, then thereviewer should be able to explain this deficiency in its review comments

• Does the baseline schedule identify night work, shift work, or time hours? Based on discussions with the contractor, the reviewershould find out if the contractor’s bid is based on working beyondnormal-workday hours This is also something that should be dis-cussed in the narrative report, which will be discussed later in thischapter

over-• Does the baseline schedule properly consider and depict the tor’s obligation to meet the requirements of other entities, such asFederal, State, Local, Municipal permitting-related work limitations,and safety-requirements? For example, does the baseline schedule con-sider and properly account for the time needed to prepare, submit,review, and approve the crane permit application or roadway shut-downs needed for construction?

contrac-• Are the activity durations reasonable? The contractor’s activity tions should either be consistent with typical production rates for the

dura-respective work activities or operations, or the contractor should beprepared to commit to extra resources to achieve short durations Thecontractor’s primary resources used to perform the work are its selec-tion of labor and equipment Just as different equipment has differentcapacities, not all work crews produce at the same rate Therefore, thecontractor’s selection of the equipment and labor that are available

to complete the work will affect its planned production rates Keep

in mind that the contractor’s activity durations may also be influenced

by the:

• Timing of the work and work hours Shift work is often ered to be less productive and could result in longer work activitydurations

consid-• Project working conditions Factors such as seasonal weather, peratures, and where the project is located may also result in longerwork durations

tem-• Time to mobilize and demobilize labor and equipment.Depending on the needs of each work activity, mobilizing for aparticular work activity may result in longer activity durations

• Safety considerations

• Site access

• Size and proximity of laydown areas

• Predicted downtime or inefficiencies

• Additional time for performance risk The contractor has the risk

of performance of the work Thus, it may include activity tions to provide a cushion or contingency to account for likelyrisks

dura-Unlike instances when nonconformance to contract requirements mayprovide an immediate basis for rejection of the baseline schedule, when areviewer questions whether the baseline schedule represents a reasonableplan for completion of the project for the reasons discussed above, thereviewer must use judgment when determining the right response to thecontractor The reason for this subjectivity is that questions and concernsrelated to the items discussed above do not automatically justify rejection

of the baseline schedule; some might and some might not For example,

if the reviewer believes and can show that the critical path depicted in thebaseline schedule does not make sense based on the project’s scope ofwork, then this deficiency may be considered as an adequate reason alone

to reject the baseline schedule However, when the reviewer has concernsrelated to, e.g., the reasonableness of activity durations and the

contractor’s level and utilization of labor and equipment, the reviewershould request the contractor to provide more information or schedule ameeting to address the reviewer’s concerns Again, the overriding concernshould be to achieve an acceptable baseline schedule as early in the proj-ect as possible For this reason, the parties should look for ways to directlycommunicate to expedite the review and revision process.

Does the baseline schedule violate good CPM

scheduling practices?

If a baseline schedule violates good CPM scheduling practices, the resultcould be a baseline schedule network that does not respond properly toprogress, the lack of progress, or schedule changes Examples of issuesthat violate good CPM scheduling practices include are:

• Improper or overuse of constraints As discussed in Chapter 2, Floatand the Critical Path, constraints can alter activity total float valuesand create instances that may violate mandatory construction sequenc-ing Constraints are not a suitable substitute for appropriate networklogic relationships Constraints should only be used to model actual orcontractual work requirements or restrictions For example, lateraccess to a portion of the work may be represented using a Start-On-or-After constraint, also called an Early-Start constraint Similarly, acontractual completion date, such as the Substantial Completion date

or an interim milestone date may be represented using a or-Before constraint, also called a Late-Finish constraint One way tolimit the use of constraints is to limit their use to modeling onlycontract-mandated dates All other constraints must be by mutualagreement

Finish-On-• Proper use of work calendars As discussed in Chapter 2, Float and theCritical Path, the schedule’s work calendars identify the workdays andnonworkdays that determine when activities can occur Calendars may

be used to model contractual limits, environmental restrictions, andseasonal limitations They may also be used to model contractor pre-ferences, such as longer work weeks and multiple shifts The calendardefinitions and assignments should be reviewed to ensure that thework calendars properly represent the work limitations in the contract,but that they do not overly restrict when work can occur

• Overuse of lags A lag is the amount of time inserted between logicrelationships A lag is most commonly used when two activities arelinked to one another with a Start-to-Start (SS) relationship For

example, by connecting two activities with an SS relationship with a2-day lag, the scheduler is instructing the software to forecast the start

of the successor activity 2 days after its predecessor is planned to start

Fig 3.1 depicts this SS, 2-day lag relationship between these twoactivities

It is important to note that lags do not represent an activity’s progress,they just represent the passage of time For example, as depicted in

Fig 3.1, if two activities are connected with an SS relationship with a day lag, the 2-day lag may be intended to represent the amount of prog-ress made by Activity A that may be necessary to enable Activity B tobegin This use of a lag enables the scheduler to connect these two activi-ties in a way that better models how the work will be completed.However, as depicted in Fig 3.1, the forecast start of Activity B is deter-mined by two things First, the SS, 2-day lag relationship links the start ofActivity B to the start of Activity A In other words, this relationshipdirects the software to assume that Activity B can only start after Activity

2-A starts Second, the 2-day lag instructs the software that the earliest thatActivity B can be forecast to start is 2 workdays after Activity A starts Asstated above, lags only represent the passage of time Therefore, whenActivity A actually starts, the software will show that Activity B can start

2 workdays later regardless of the progress made on Activity A

The use of lags in and of themselves is not bad scheduling practice.However, a problem arises when lags are overused Their overuse canresult in instances where the work paths, even the critical path, are notbeing driving by the actual progress of activities, but rather by the lagsthemselves, in other words, by the passage of time itself and not by prog-ress.Fig 3.2 depicts an instance of the overuse of lags and how this canmask or misrepresent the true status of the individual work activities and,thus, the project

Figure 3.1 Example of start-to-start, 2-day lag logic relationship.

Fig 3.2 represents a way that contractors often link work activitiesusing SS lag relationships in their project schedules Let us assume thatthe four activities in Fig 3.2are the four initial activities on the project’scritical path The use of successive lags, as depicted in Fig 3.2, results in

a situation where the actual progress on the first three activities on thecritical path is not driving when their successor activities can start This isnot in itself bad, but it does place a burden on both the contractor andthe owner to understand this limitation in the driving relationships As aresult, extra care will need to be taken in both preparing and reviewingthe schedule updates The ability of a CPM schedule update to incorpo-rate the “actual progress achieved” coupled with the time needed tocomplete the remaining work will determine when the schedule willforecast project completion So, while these lags may adequately definethe original plan, it may be necessary to modify or change this logic inthe update

• Use of negative lags Contractor’s sometimes use negative lags to forceactivities to start on or finish on specific dates In most instances, thecontractor’s use of negative lags in its CPM schedule should be consid-ered an indication that shortcuts are being taken and the scheduler isnot following good CPM scheduling practices

A negative lag is the opposite of a positive lag A positive lag sents the amount of time separating the starts of two activities linked with

repre-a SS relrepre-ationship or the repre-amount of time seprepre-arrepre-ating the finish of one repre-ity and start of another activity linked with a Finish-to-Start (FS) relation-ship Conversely, a negative lag allows the successor activity to begin

activ-Figure 3.2 Example of overuse of lags.

before the predecessor starts or finishes depending on the relationshiplinking the activities.

An example of the use of a negative lag is depicted inFig 3.3

Fig 3.3shows two activities, the fabrication of structural steel and theerection of structural steel, and how they are connected to one anotherwith an FS relationship with a 20-day negative lag This FS relationshipwith a negative lag between these two activities may appear to show thatnot all of the structural steel fabrication needs to be complete to beginstructural steel erection

However, planning to start steel erection 20 days before fabricationcompletes is counterintuitive to the typical thinking behind planning andscheduling Steel erection typically requires expensive resources, suchskilled labor and cranes, and involves considerable risk during erectionuntil the structure is complete and stable To make the process as efficient

as possible, steel erection would be planned to start once a sufficientamount of steel has been fabricated at a proven production rate Therefore,

a better model would be to breakdown the structural steel fabricationactivity into preerection and posterection fabrication, allowing those activ-ities to be connected with FS relationships without lags By breaking downthe fabrication and erection activities into even smaller, more defined com-ponent parts, the model may be improved even more A reviewer shouldquestion the use of negative lags and an owner should consider using ascheduling specification that prohibits the use of negative lags

• Use of Start-to-Finish (SF) Relationships The four types of logic tionships that can be used in CPM schedules are:

rela-• Finish-to-Start—This logic relationship connects two activities bylinking the finish of the predecessor activity to the start of its suc-cessor activity This logic relationship option is the one most

Figure 3.3 Example of a negative lag.

commonly used and does not allow a successor activity to beginuntil its predecessor activity has completed.

• Start-to-Start—This logic relationship connects two activities bylinking the start of the predecessor activity to the start of its succes-sor activity

• Finish-to-Finish—This logic relationship connects two activities bylinking the finish of the predecessor activity to the finish of its suc-cessor activity

• Start-to-Finish—This logic relationship connects two activities bylinking the start of the predecessor activity to the finish of its suc-cessor activity

Fig 3.4provides graphical examples of these four logic relationships.The SF relationship is as counterintuitive as the FS relationship is intui-tive and logical Similar to the use of negative lags, a reviewer should con-sider the use of SF relationships as a potential red flag that may indicate thatthe scheduler is inexperienced and using software features improperly At aminimum, this logic should be questioned by the reviewer

• Misuse of Scheduling Features Other problems arise when the tractor combines the improper use of lags and constraints to overcome

con-a lcon-ack of detcon-ail Fig 3.5 depicts a situation where the use of a 10-daylag artificially forces the bridge steel submission and procurementwork path to be the project’s critical path

Figure 3.4 Precedence diagramming method logic relationships.

Fig 3.5shows that the piers are ready to accept the placement of tural steel on Day 39 However, the 10-day duration between the delivery

struc-of the steel and erection struc-of the steel is forcing the steel erection to begin

on Day 41 and, thus, forecasting the completion of the project on Day 60

Fig 3.6 depicts the same project using three different logic theories

So, which option is the best way to model the intended sequence of thework?

Option 1 forecasts that the project will finish on Day 60 and the cal path starts with the approval of the steel shop drawings That activity

criti-is followed by the delivery of steel, mobilization of the steel erector, theerection of the steel, and finally the completion of the bridge on Day 60

Figure 3.5 Example of 10-day lag on the critical path.

Figure 3.6 3 representations of the same project.

Additionally, the substructure work path, which consists of the installation

of the piles, foundations, and piers, has 2 workdays of float relative to thecritical path

However, when digging a little deeper, the reviewer should ask twoquestions First, will it take 10 days for the steel erector to mobilize?Second, does the contractor plan to wait until all of the steel is delivereduntil the steel erector mobilizes? On a typical project, the answer to thesequestions may be no In that case, similar to the logic in Fig 3.8, theschedule logic is overly restrictive

Option 2 also forecasts that the project will finish on Day 60.However, due to the use of the constrained start of the mobilization ofthe steel erector on Day 40, the critical path starts on Day 40, not Day 0

In fact, the steel approval and deliver has 9 days of float and the ture work has 1 day of float From a practical perspective and barringextenuating circumstances, a predefined start date to mobilize the steelerector should not determine when the erection of the steel would beginand the contractor should plan for the steel erector to be mobilized andready to begin erecting steel when the piers are ready to accept steel andthe steel is on site

substruc-Option 3 forecasts that the project will finish on Day 58, 2 days earlierthan the other options In Option 3, the critical path begins with the sub-structure work and as soon as the piers are complete and can accept thesteel, steel erection is scheduled to begin

Of the three options, Option 3 represents the best way to model theexample plan without using unnecessary constraints, lags, or activities

Fig 3.7depicts two ways to depict a plan for completing a road struction project

con-If you were asked to decide which of the two options above provides

a more useful depiction of the project’s scope of work and plan for pletion, the obvious answer is Option 2 The problem with Option 1 isthat the lack of detail and the use of non-FS logic relationships with lagshas created a situation where all of the project work is on the criticalpath Option 2 depicts the work in smaller and more measurable workpackages The added detail in Option 2, combined with the use of FSrelationships, will enable the project team to identify which portions ofthe work are planned to occur each week and how the actual progress ofthe work activities will affect the critical path and the end date of theproject

com-• Sequestering Float The sequestration of float is the elimination or

“hiding” of float in the schedule by inflating activity durations or bythe use of unnecessary preferential logic relationships to reduce totalfloat values By hiding float in this manner, contractors improperlyreserve float for their own use It is important to note that the seques-tering of float conflicts with the idea that float is a shared commodityowned by the project and not for the sole use and benefit of one party

or another Therefore, a clear understanding of how the contractaddresses float ownership is essential

The effect of sequestering float can range from merely reducing totalfloat values along a single work path to hiding so much float that thescheduler makes work paths critical that should not be Identifyinginstances of float sequestration is often difficult, because they can beexplained away as the contractor’s intended means and methods

While contractor’s may be tempted to consider the sequestration offloat to be beneficial, doing so has a large downside for the contractor inthat it essentially masks potential delays caused by the owner In suchcases, where the reasonable duration would have demonstrated delay fromthe owner’s actions, the expanded duration will appear to absorb theadditional time and the contractor will be unable to demonstrate theimpact caused by the owner The bottom line is that there are few games

Figure 3.7 2 depictions of the same project.

that can be played with float More importantly, knowledgeable tors understand that, without a crystal ball, such games may as easily bedetrimental as helpful.

contrac-The primary reason that both the owner and the contractor shouldwant the baseline schedule to be developed using these CPM schedulingbest practices is that both parties ultimately benefit from having a projectschedule that responds properly to progress and to changes that are incor-porated into the schedule The schedule should respond to actual progress

by showing the effect the actual progress has had on the other activities inthe schedule

For example, when an activity on the critical path makes expected progress, the schedule should show the corresponding delay tothe completion date If the activity making slower-than-expected progress

slower-than-is on a noncritical work path with float relative to the critical path, theschedule should reflect the consumption or reduction of that float If thework was sufficiently delayed such that all of this float was consumed, thecritical path may shift to this delayed work path whereby further delayswill delay the completion date

Conversely, if the contractor is able to perform some element of theproject critical path in less time than anticipated, then the schedule shouldshow the resulting savings to the completion date And, if the better-than-expected progress was made on a work path that was not on thecritical path, then the schedule should show an increase in the total floatvalues of activities on that work path

In a similar manner, when changed work, added work, or pated events are inserted into the schedule as they occur, the scheduleshould reliably predict the effect of these on the end date of the projectand on the total float values of the schedule activities

unantici-When a reviewer believes it has identified a departure from CPMscheduling best practice in its review of the baseline schedule, it shouldask the contractor to explain the necessity for that particular feature and,

if the contractor cannot provide a sufficient explanation, the ownershould request that the contractor revise the schedule accordingly

The best way to increase the chances that the baseline schedule is oped in accordance with good CPM scheduling practices is to include lan-guage and provide guidance on acceptable and unacceptable CPMscheduling practices in the contract’s scheduling specification Alternatively,the contract could reference a relevant standard An example of a good

devel-standard concerning CPM scheduling practices is the AGC’s “ConstructionPlanning and Scheduling Manual.”

Again, the contractor’s baseline schedule submission should be treated likeevery other submission the contractor makes during the course of theproject As such, it requires an adequate review and, just as importantly,the correct response

Most construction contracts expect the owner to respond to all tractor submissions Absent contract language stating that the lack of aresponse from the owner is considered a rejection of the submission,when an owner does not respond to the contractor’s submission, it issometimes viewed as tacit approval or acceptance This means that theowner’s inaction can equate to acceptance or approval of the baselineschedule submission Because there is never a guarantee that the baselineschedule submission will comply with the contract, the owner shouldprovide a timely and complete response to the contractor’s baseline sched-ule submission Additionally, because the project schedule will be used tomanage the project, to address instances of delay, and to develop delaymitigation efforts, the owner should, at the very least, review and accept

con-or reject the contractcon-or’s baseline schedule submission

The determination of either accepting or rejecting the baseline ule submission should consider the need to have an acceptable or approv-able baseline schedule as quickly as possible Both the owner and thecontractor will derive a maximum benefit from the schedule by having it

sched-in place as quickly as possible This is necessary so that this key time andrisk management tool is available as the project begins Deviations fromthe contractor’s plan are common early in the life of a project This isbecause the early days of most projects carry considerable risks These riskscan be the responsibility of either party; e.g., site conditions on the part ofthe owner and start-up and learning curve challenges on the part of thecontractor Many disputes have erupted because of the lack of an agreed-

to schedule in these early days of the project By having this key time andrisk management tool available for use by the parties during this key timeperiod, many of these disputes can be more easily resolved or avoided

So, what should the owner’s response to the contractor’s baselineschedule submission be? When should the owner accept the contractor’s