Detailed Documentation Pays Off

By ROBERT A. EDWARDS,B.S.C.E.

State of Georgia — $0.0

Bridge Contractor — $2.8 million

MY FIRST JOB AFTER graduation turned into every project engineer's nightmare. In 1983, the Atlanta-based Malta Construction Company had been awarded a major contract to build 24 highway bridges in 17 months.

There was no fat in our bid. We prepared it with the aid of a Critical Path Management package on our mainframe, and transferred the on-site scheduling and planning to a microcomputer running the PlanTRAC project management system in our field office. This was a large, complex project, but our CPM network showed we could complete it well within the deadline.

What we didn't plan on was an owner who refused to make allowances for the fact that the site preparations were months behind schedule. Our story is all too familiar. Only the happy ending makes it unusual.

Trouble in Paradise

Atlanta, Georgia, skyline, with the tallest hotel in the USA, the Peachtree Plaza.

The entire job—over an 11.5-mile stretch of highway outside Atlanta— was particularly challenging to schedule because it involved so many bridges and the precise transport of large and expensive equipment. Our master schedule had about 9,000 activities. We tied the whole project together into 26 schedules, and ran the weekly updates out of the field office at the job site.

The 9,000 activities were all resource-loaded with materials, heavy equipment and crews. We knew our expected crew loading at any time. We also knew where our $250,000 forming system was going to be and when it was needed at another site. Each stage of the project was .planned to take advantage of the available resources, and the system assured us we had allocated enough resources to keep on schedule.

Georgia Peaches?

We had meticulously planned every aspect of the entire job down to the smallest detail. However, we didn't plan on the state's failure to prepare the job sites. The problem was that the state had awarded four prime contracts on the job at the same time. The first was for the removal of a landfill that was in the path of the highway. The second contract was for earthwork that involved excavation, grading and infill. Then there was our contract for the bridge work. After we were done, a paving contractor was to come in.

The 9,000-activity job stretched over 11.5 miles of Georgia highway, and was planned carefully. But the contractor didn't count on the state's failure to prepare job sites.

The owner, the Georgia Department of Transportation, failed to make sure each of the previous contracts could be completed on time before awarding the next contract. In other words, the state failed to develop a practical project plan and schedule. Naturally, the two contractors before us ran into problems  and no one was updating an overall schedule or managing the project to try and minimize the impact of the delays.

The EPA required that the excavation site be covered each night with six inches of dirt. We had an exceptional amount of rain that winter. That, combined with the extra mud from the dirt cap, kept the landfill excavator from getting his equipment in. This caused the earthwork contractor to start behind schedule. To make matters even worse, the owner hadn't allowed time for relocating utilities. There were multitudinous telephone lines, gas lines, sewage lines, etc., running across the stretch of highway. They all had to be relocated. This threw the earthwork contractor (who had a late start to begin with) way behind schedule.

We were not prepared to dig down through 40 feet of dirt to put in a footing for a pier. Nor were we prepared to fill and grade the ramps for each bridge. So we had to wait until the earthwork contractor had prepared the job site to within a reasonable tolerance. He was so far behind schedule that there was one bridge we didn't even have access to until after the planned completion date of the entire project. Yet the state still tried to charge us damages for failing to complete that bridge on schedule!

Alternate Plans

As the project continued, so did our delays. We put together five different alternative CPM schedules in an attempt to resolve the problem. Each alternative presented a plan for compressing the schedule to its shortest duration by applying more resources. The five proposals were for varying degrees of additional costs, involving additional charges for increased equipment time, increased overtime for labor and the general inefficiency that accrues when you try to compress a schedule beyond its logical flow.

I went to the job sites and collected the data, updated the CPM network and then met with the owner. The state rejected all five proposals and insisted we stick with our original plan. We explained the delays were due to problems beyond our control, and we were denied timely access to the sites. But the state insisted we would be charged liquidated damages if we were late.

We knew right away this job was going to be difficult, so we made every effort to maintain accurate and up-to-date records. Copies of CPM plans and other records were forwarded to the owners on a timely basis. The delays in site preparation were so obvious that we assumed the owner would eventually offer a reasonable settlement. Our records clearly indicated we were doing our best under extremely difficult conditions.

The earthwork was so far behind schedule that the bridge contractor did not have access to certain sites, even after the planned completion of the entire project

Organization Pays Off

To make a long story short, we eventually had to go to the courts and litigate a claim against the State of Georgia. The state assured us that no contractor had been successful in a claim against it. If that was true, then we must have set a precedent when we were awarded $2.8 million.

The original CPM plan we submitted before we started the project served as a baseline. It showed we had carefully thought out and planned the project well beforehand. It also proved we could have completed the project on time if we hadn't been subjected to delays which weren't our fault. That was a pivotal point in winning our case.

Once we established we could have finished the project on time, we had to document the impact of each delay. We could show how each time we were denied access to a job site it delayed the overall project completion and resulted in additional expense on our part. We had to start and stop in some areas many times. This caused a lot of the excess cost. It might cost $1,000 to move a 120-ton crane in and set it up, and cost another $1,000 to move it out. So when we set up our plan for building a bridge, we planned on moving a crane in once and then moving it out when it wasn't needed at that site. Because of the delays caused by the earthwork, we'd have to move the crane in to do one abutment. Then we'd have to move it out to a bridge that had pier work ready. Then we'd have to move it back to the first bridge for a couple of piers. Each additional move was an unplanned expense. CPM scheduling let us plan these extra moves to minimize the overall effects as much as possible, and at the same time it documented the additional costs.

Our documentation was so good we not only proved we didn't owe the state any damages for the delays, but the state actually owed us money for failing to provide access to the job sites. Our $3,000 PlanTRAC system, probably the lowest-priced tool we used on this job, was worth its weight in gold—about $2.8 million worth. ^

Robert A. Edwards worked as a civil engineer for four years before he became frustrated with the construction business. He was so impressed with the PlanTRAC system that he began working for the company that produces it—Computerline. Mr. Edwards is now Vice President of the Pembroke, Mass.-based firm.

Reprinted from Architectural & Engineering Systems