P&M evaluated numerous change orders and claims on Seaport projects. The reviews provided significant support of the Port’s position and identified and documented salient justifications. Again, specific results varied, but they were generally extremely positive for the Port. Examples are as follows:
Shilshole Bay Marina Redevelopment Project: Delivered through GC/CM contract, the project involved complex and intricate logistics with challenging operational requirements. A Subcontractor to the GC/CM submitted a claim for inefficiencies and time extension that amounted to a request for just over $450,000. P&M performed the claims analysis and after completion of the analysis and associated negotiations, the claim was reduced to $321,000 saving the Port around $140,000. The robust nature of the review and the fairness by which it was conducted helped maintain a cordial rapport between the Contractor and the Port.
Terminal 18 North Apron Upgrade: Contractor submitted change order request alleging that pile driving productivity was adversely impacted by obstructions in the ground. P&M thoroughly reviewed the claim that included a “measured mile” study where actual and standard pile driving production were compared. The change order was ultimately resolved about half of the initial request or about $77,000.
In July 2007, P&M as the Prime Consultant was awarded the open order contract for Claims Analysis services with the Port of Seattle Engineering Department, Aviation and Seaport Divisions.
The P&M team significantly supplemented the Port's available construction management staff capabilities and assured a comprehensive, thorough, analytically sound evaluation of major change orders and claims on key projects.
The claims analysis support processes were varied but consistently provided advanced techniques and tools of schedule (time) impact analysis, cost impact analysis, and forensic cost or schedule analysis using Primavera Project Planner and MS Project. Comprehensive evaluation reports were prepared that presented recommendations; supported the results of the analysis and, provided the Port appropriate justification for its position.
Other cost analysis techniques were used to perform a similar level of evaluation on cost claims. Analysis and evaluation also included appropriate review of the contract documents, general conditions, as well as relevant field conditions and events occurring during construction.
Jul 2007 to Jun 2009
Click here for further information.