25 May 2022
REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE DELAY ANALYSIS METHODS
The purpose of any delay presentation should be to demonstrate that the critical path of the project has been affected by events for which the Employer is responsible, or for which an EOT entitlement exists under the Contract, and that as a result, the Time for Completion or Completion date requires extension
The various text books will describe numerous ways of assessing and presenting delays / EOT entitlement, however practically there are two main approaches
Both methods rely on the baseline programme but differ in their consideration (or not) of actual progress.
In general summary of the principles involved
In both cases, the approaches will maintain the baseline logic and sequence for any future period not covered by the delay analysis. The difference in approach can often result in widely different results and presented entitlements, as follows. The example involves a foundation Contract, the delay event relates to an increase in quantity of the piling works (in a baseline programme that included some free float (2 weeks) in the planned programme duration)
The baseline programme was planned as follows
The piling quantity increased by 50%.
The impacted “as planned” presentation was as follows in claiming an EOT of 1.5 months
The actual as built chronology associated with the programme included the following
Accordingly, the “as built” presentation was as follows in claiming an EOT of 0.5 months
Whilst in this case the “as built” delay of 2 weeks can be justified by the quantity increase it is clearly shown that “as planned” and “as built” approaches can easily result in different delay presentations ) ( in this instance 1 month)
Most Contracts will not specify a method of delay analysis but sometimes in the wording of the EOT clause will imply the requirements
This is true for the new FIDIC contract (1999 1ST Edition) which uses the words “is or will be delayed” which implies that both the use of impacted “as built” and “as planned” can be used.
In general, the use of impacted “as planned” approach is suitable for the early stages of a project but as progress increases, it has already been shown that the accuracy of the analysis reduces and the presentation of entitlement can be distorted
Since the overall legal principle of any claim is to put the harmed party back in the position it was before the breach/event it is reasonably clear that in many circumstances the use of an impacted “as planned approach” delay analysis would be inappropriate as it can often result in an improved position for the Contractor.
In overall summary, the use of as built or as planned presentations should be considered against the following criteria
SUGGESTED DELAY ANALYSIS / PRESENTATION METHOD
Early Stages of a Project
Middle and later stages of a Project
Site Works generally do not follow baseline logic
Baseline activities have internal float
Numerous Contractor culpable delays
This method will highlight these
This method will generally hide
Author: James Bristow