Are We Late? Oh, It’s Over Already? Which Delay Claim Methodology Should I Use?
June 13 @ 2:00 pm - 3:30 pm$246
As the clock winds down in sports, waning seconds are marked by particular measurements: the two-minute warning, the 24-second shot clock, and arbitrary injury time, somehow all seem to work well for their respective games. Just as strange things like empty goals, a lot more time-out calls, and faked injuries happen inside the final minute in sports, similarly strange things tend to occur on construction projects when time is winding down or has run out altogether. The Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACE International) Recommended Practice 29R-03 on forensic schedule analysis identifies several methodologies that can be utilized by parties to analyze project delays But it’s a 100-plus page document which is challenging to sift through, if not altogether overwhelming. This session provides practical guidance for owners and contractors to aid in understanding AACE International’s Recommended Practice to determine the ideal methodology to employ in analyzing delay on your project. We will provide valuable insight for those in the position of reviewing and responding to time extension requests, Requests for Equitable Adjustments involving delay, and delay claims themselves. Additionally, we’ll look at the strengths and weaknesses of the more common methodologies to help identify approaches that can reasonably be considered given certain factual and contractual circumstances.
AACEi Recommended Practice (RP-29-3)
- Daubert challenges
- Recognized Methodologies
- Contract Prescribed?
- Forecast versus retrospective analyses
Which methodology is right for you?