Source: http://www.fedpubseminars.com/Construction-Contracting/Construction-Schedule-Delays/?source=search
Timestamp: 2018-07-15 19:10:19
Document Index: 661903901

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 3', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 4', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 5', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 6', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 7', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 9', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 10', '§ 11', '§ 11', '§ 11', '§ 11', '§ 11', '§ 11', '§ 12', '§ 12', '§ 12', '§ 13', '§ 13', '§ 14', '§ 14', '§ 14', '§ 14', '§ 15', '§ 15', '§ 15', '§ 15', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16']

Studies show that when applied to the same identical scenario, different schedule delay analysis methods will produce a variety of different results. By breaking each method down to its most basic elements, it is easy to identify the differences between methods. Courts and boards have opined on a variety of different methods in what appears to be a myriad of case law, but upon closer inspection is actually fairly consistent with regard to a number of basic principles.
In this course, the different schedule delay methods are ranked in order of acceptance based on case law and legal decisions. The standard principles for schedule delay analysis are outlined, and a review of recent case law explains what makes specific methods preferable to other methods. You will also learn how the expiration of contract time can endanger a project, and how to properly resolve delay claims. The course will cover everything participants in the construction arena need to know about industry publications including the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineers International’s Recommended Practice for Forensic Schedule Analysis.
Learn from the most published experts on schedule delay analysis methods in the industry.
This course will follow the 727-page treatise authored by two of the course instructors - Construction Schedule Delays - a comprehensive guide to schedule delay law and analysis. The treatise deftly bridges both the legal and technical aspects of the topic from an easy-to-understand, but detailed presentation of law and examples. In addition to addressing the major delay analysis methods in use today, the instructors will review legal aspects of other critical topics, such as basics of CPM scheduling, concurrent delay, and constructive acceleration.
Some key topics and course objectives include:
• Understand the various methods that have been used by experts for forensic schedule delay analysis and the pros and cons of those considered acceptable
• Understand the importance of key principles and factors in performing a legitimate schedule and delay analysis
• Understanding the difficult issues of acceleration, loss of productivity, cumulative impact, and successfully managing the contract completion date
• How to avoid, mitigate, and successfully resolve potential delay claims
• Eliminating the mystery of the software in forensic delay analysis
• Update on established and current trends in case law related to schedule and delay analysis
• What participants in the construction arena need to know about the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineers Recommended Practice 29R-03 Forensic Schedule Analysis
MATERIALS INCLUDED WITH COURSE:
Construction Schedule Delays, co-authored by course instructors W. Stephen Dale and Robert D'Onofrio - a construction lawyer and an engineer, respectively.
This brand new publication deftly bridges both the legal and technical aspects of the topic from an easy-to-understand, but detailed presentation of law and examples.
In addition to addressing the major delay analysis methods in use today, the book reviews legal aspects of other critical topics, such as basics of CPM scheduling, concurrent delay, and constructive acceleration.
Course Supplemental Materials
Agenda for Construction Schedule Delays
FRAMEWORK FOR DELAY ANALYSIS
§ 1:1 Types of delay
§ 1:2 Compensable delay: time is money
§ 1:3 Excusable but not compensable delays: shared fault or no fault
§ 1:4 Inexcusable, noncompensable delay: liquidated damages
§ 1:5 Daubert issues and the art of analysis
§ 2:1 History
§ 2:2 Origins of critical path method
§ 2:3 Origin of schedule delay analysis methods
§ 2:4 Time Impact Analysis
§ 2:5 As-planned versus as-built
§ 2:6 Impacted as-planned
§ 2:7 As-built critical path
§ 2:8 Collapsed as-built/“but-for”
§ 2:9 Evolution of methods over time
§ 2:10 Float
§ 2:11 Critical path
§ 2:12 Longest path or zero float path
§ 2:13 Delays after the expiration of contract time
§ 2:14 Resolution
§ 2:15 Float on the critical path
§ 2:16 Logic and updates
§ 2:17 Means of schedule constraint—Logic ties
§ 2:18 Leads and lags
§ 2:19 Long duration activities
§ 2:20 Open-ended activities
§ 2:21 Assigned constraints
§ 2:22 Calendar constraints
§ 2:23 Categories of scheduling constraints
§ 2:24 Physical constraints
§ 2:25 Contractual constraints
§ 2:26 Preferential sequencing constraints
§ 2:27 Resource loading or cost loading the schedule
§ 2:28 Intermediary milestones
§ 2:29 Progress updating
§ 2:30 Updating schedule to reflect actual progress
§ 2:31 Incorrect dates
§ 2:32 Retained logic vs. progress override
§ 2:33 Revising the schedule to reflect changes and revisions to the plan going forward
§ 2:34 Adjusting the contract completion date to account for excusable delay
§ 2:35 Responsibility for failing to update schedules
§ 2:36 Subcontractor harmed by owner changes
§ 2:37 Corrections to CPM schedules after-the-fact
LEGAL ISSUES IN DELAY ANALYSIS
§ 3:1 Burden of proof
§ 3:2 Delay to critical path required
§ 3:3 CPM is dynamic/updated CPM schedules required
§ 3:4 Contemporaneously granted time extensions
§ 3:5 Delays vs. suspensions under federal contracts
§ 3:6 Right to early completion
§ 3:7 Acceleration
§ 3:8 Concurrency
§ 3:9 Pacing
§ 3:10 Noncritical delay/delay absorbing float
§ 3:11 Offsetting delay
§ 3:12 Apportionment
§ 3:13 Acceleration
§ 3:14 Waiver of completion
§ 4:2 Equitable adjustments vs. damages
§ 4:3 Equitable adjustments
§ 4:4 Breach damages
§ 4:5 Mitigation of damages
§ 4:6 Common types of delay damages
§ 4:7 Labor costs
§ 4:8 Material costs
§ 4:9 Equipment costs
§ 4:10 Direct overhead (extended project overhead costs)
§ 4:11 Indirect overhead (unabsorbed home office overhead costs)
§ 4:12 Disruption vs. delay
§ 4:13 Liquidated damages
§ 4:14 Proving delay damages
§ 5:1 The basics
§ 5:2 Source of the rule
§ 5:3 “No damage for delay” clauses
§ 5:4 Common law exceptions to contractual provisions
§ 5:5 Preference a_orded to remedy granting provisions
§ 5:6 Active interference
§ 5:7 Abandonment or delays unreasonable in length
§ 5:8 Waiver
§ 5:9 Material breach of contract
§ 5:10 Legislative responses to “no damage for delay”
§ 5:11 Federal contracts
OVERVIEW OF SCHEDULE DELAY ANALYSIS METHODS
§ 6:1 Method introduction
§ 6:2 Categories of schedule delay analysis methods
§ 6:3 Time impact analysis (TIA) category
§ 6:4 Collapsed as-built category
§ 6:5 As-built critical path category
§ 6:6 Impacted as-planned category
§ 6:7 Total time category
§ 6:8 Fact pattern
§ 7:1 Time impact analysis
§ 7:2 Time impact analysis (adjusted)
§ 7:3 Example implementation
§ 7:4 Judicial analysis
§ 7:5 Windows (unadjusted)
§ 7:6 Example implementation
§ 7:7 Judicial analysis
§ 7:8 Prospective TIA
§ 7:9 Example implementation
§ 7:10 Judicial analysis
§ 7:11 Wide windows
§ 7:12 Example implementation
§ 7:13 Judicial analysis
§ 7:14 Summary of cases involving time impact analysis
§ 8:1 Collapsed as-built method
§ 8:2 A cautionary tale: Youngdale & Sons Construction Co. v. U.S.
§ 8:3 Positive treatment of the collapsed as-built method
§ 8:4 Traditional collapsed as-built implementation (remove owner delays)
§ 8:5 Collapsed as-built (removing contractor delays)
§ 8:6 Collapsed as-built (stepped removal)
§ 8:7 Collapsed as-built (using contemporaneous updates)
§ 8:8 Treatment of major delay types
§ 8:9 Summary of cases involving collapsed as-built method
AS-BUILT CRITICAL PATH
§ 9:1 As-built critical path
§ 9:2 Positive treatment of the as-built critical path method
§ 9:3 Cogefar-Impresit USA
§ 9:4 Sunshine Construction & Engineering, Inc.
§ 9:5 Negative treatment of the as-built critical path method
§ 9:6 Example implementation: as-built critical path
§ 9:7 Example implementation: as-built critical path using schedule updates and as-built data
§ 9:8 Treatment of major delay types
§ 9:9 Summary of cases involving as-built critical path method
§ 10:1 Impacted as-planned method
§ 10:2 Historical treatment of the impacted as-planned method in the United States
§ 10:3 Early acceptance
§ 10:4 Suspicion
§ 10:5 Example implementation: impacted as-planned global insertion
§ 10:6 Example implementation: impacted as-planned compare owner/contractor impacted schedules
§ 10:7 Example implementation: impacted as-planned stepped insertion
§ 10:8 Treatment of major delay types
§ 10:9 Summary of cases involving impacted as-planned method
TOTAL TIME/AS-PLANNED VS. AS-BUILT
§ 11:1 Total time method
§ 11:2 Total time method and total cost method
§ 11:3 Historical treatment
§ 11:4 Example implementation
§ 11:5 Treatment of major delay types
§ 11:6 Summary of cases involving total time/as-planned vs. as-built method
§ 12:1 Method comparison study results
§ 12:2 Method comparison study conclusions
§ 12:3 Summary of cases referencing schedule delay methods
GUIDELINES FOR SCHEDULE DELAY ANALYSIS
§ 13:1 Guidelines for schedule delay analysis—Checklist
§ 13:2 —Details
SCHEDULE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
§ 14:1 Example schedule specification provisions
§ 14:2 Recommended schedule contract and specification topics
§ 14:3 Owner's (or owner's agent's) schedule administration best practices
§ 14:4 Contractor's (or subcontractor's) schedule best practices
SOCIETY OF CONSTRUCTION LAW DELAY AND DISRUPTION PROTOCOL SUMMARY AND REVIEW
§ 15:1 Summary of Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol
§ 15:2 21 Core Principles
§ 15:3 Guidance sections
§ 15:4 Review of Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol
AACE RP29R-03 FORENSIC SCHEDULE ANALYSIS SUMMARY AND REVIEW
§ 16:1 Summary of RP29R-03 Forensic Schedule Analysis
§ 16:2 Organization and scope
§ 16:3 Source validation
§ 16:4 Method implementation
§ 16:5 Analysis evaluation
§ 16:6 Choosing a method
§ 16:7 Review of RP29R-03 Forensic Schedule Analysis
D'Onofrio, Robert
Robert M. D’Onofrio, P.E. is a Principal at Capital Project Management, Inc. in Blue Bell, PA. With a prior firm, he spent five years on-site on the World Trade Center construction in New York City, where his responsibilities included review of schedule delay and disruption claims on behalf of the owner. Mr. D’Onofrio has evaluated over $4 billion in claims on construction projects. He is the co-author of Construction Schedule Delays, an 1100-page treatise on construction schedule delay law and analysis published by Thomson Reuters and updated annually. Mr. D’Onofrio is a licensed professional engineer in New York, Pennsylvania, and Florida. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from Cornell University, and a Master of Engineering in Civil Engineering from Cornell University.
Dale, W. Stephen
W. Stephen Dale is a Senior Vice President and serves as the General Counsel for WSP│Parsons Brinckerhoff for the US, Caribbean and Latin America region. He was formerly a partner with the law firm of Smith Pachter McWhorter, PLC, a construction and public contract boutique located in Tysons Corner, Virginia. Mr. Dale is co-author of Construction Schedule Delays, an 1100-page treatise on construction schedule delay law and analysis published by Thomson Reuters and updated annually. He holds a Bachelor of Arts from the University of North Carolina and a Juris Doctorate from the University of North Carolina Law School.
Walker, Owen
Mr. Walker is a partner at Smith Pachter McWhorter, PLC and is an experienced attorney in commercial construction and government contracts law. He represents owners, developers, design professionals, contractors and subcontractors in all phases of construction projects, from contract preparation and negotiation through dispute resolution and litigation. Mr. Walker counsels regional, national and international clients on legal matters, including contract formation, administration and performance, claim entitlement and liability, contract termination for convenience and default, quantification of damages, delay and critical path scheduling, design-build and joint venture issues, mechanic's liens, and performance and payment bond claims. Mr. Walker counsels federal government contractors on a range of issues, including preparation of certified claims, bid protests and other procurement issues, internal investigations, compliance with the Federal Acquisition Regulations, and False Claims Act issues.
Mr. Walker has represented clients before federal courts, boards of contract appeals, state courts, and alternative dispute resolution. He has worked on a range of projects such as an ammunition manufacturing plant, chemical demilitarization plant, underground highway tunnel, large scale transit system, overseas military installations, professional cricket stadium and a university baseball stadium.