By Bruce Jervis
Project owners do not want to be surprised with claims for additional work at the conclusion of a project. Contract clauses usually stipulate procedures that give the owner some advance notice and an idea of the increased cost. An example is found in a subcontract on a recent private project in Ohio.
The subcontract included a “changes” clause, which pertained to issues with work already included in the contract, and an “extra work” clause, which was applicable to work outside the scope of the contract ordered or directed by the project owner. The changes clause required written notice prior to starting the work. The extra work clause required a cost breakdown and supporting documentation within five business days of completing the work. ... Read more.
Featured in this Week’s Construction Claims Advisor:
- Contract Distinguished Changes from Extra Work
- Supplier Failed to Object to Cooperative Pricing Violations
- LLC Owed State Tax -- Could Not Appeal Denial of Claim
By Steve Rizer
When it comes to a numeric limitation on the allowable level of turbidity in discharges from certain construction sites, the industry may not be out of the woods yet. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this month withdrew the limitation and monitoring requirements, EPA emphasized that it may “decide to propose and promulgate additional effluent limitations guidelines and monitoring requirements in a future rulemaking,” … and the industry is concerned.
Associated General Contractors of America (AGC), which estimated that a numeric effluent limit (NEL) for turbidity on construction sites nationwide would have cost the industry about $10 billion a year to achieve compliance, “remains concerned about EPA’s ongoing effort to collect data and perhaps develop a new NEL at some point in the future,” Leah Pilconis, a consultant on environmental law and policy and a senior environmental advisor to AGC, told ConstructionPro Week (CPW). ... Read more.
By Steve Rizer
An energy-saving, “low-cost near infrared selective plasmonic smart window” technology that Heliotrope Technologies Inc. is developing could enter the commercial marketplace within three years, Guillermo Garcia, the Oakland, Calif.-based company’s chief technology officer, told ConstructionPro Week (CPW). This is one of several projects benefiting from the latest round of Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) funding that the U.S. Department of Energy announced last week.
“Near infrared selective plasmonic smart coatings are the first electrochromic windows that dynamically block the sun’s heat without affecting visible light transmittance,” Garcia said. “By applying a small voltage (+/- 2 Volts), users can either block the sun’s heat (we refer to this as our ‘cool’ mode of operation) or allow the sun’s heat to enter the building (we refer to this as our ‘bright’ mode) without sacrificing any natural light. This is an ideal product that can maintain thermal management within a structure while still reducing the use of artificial lighting throughout the day. Traditional, smart window coatings primarily block visible light to initiate thermal management, which reduces the amount of energy savings one can achieve from these products. By selectively blocking the near infrared region of light (sun’s heat), we overcome this problem.” ... Read more.
By Steve Rizer
March 2014 Download Library Addition
As new webinar recordings are made available to the ConstructionPro Network free member Download Library on a monthly basis, ConstructionPro Week will provide a brief summary of each event for the benefit of its readership. Here is the summary for the March 2014 addition:
If an owner is restricted to a design-bid-build delivery method, can building information modeling (BIM) be advantageous for the project? This is one of several questions addressed during the “Q&A” period of WPL Publishing’s “Negotiating BIM Scope” webinar, a recording of which recently was added to the ConstructionPro Network (ConstructionProNet.com) Download Library free of charge for members.
In response to this question, Forrest Lott, principal at Savannah, Ga.-based Lott + Barber, said, “Absolutely.” However, he pointed out that under such a scenario, “we would be missing some opportunities for contractor input.” He noted that the American Institute of Architects’ Integrated Project Delivery Guide “delves into the different delivery methods that are currently out there and in use [and makes it] pretty clear that a design-bid-build delivery method is much more limited than a CM at Risk or CM as Advisor delivery method or design-build or the newer model of integrated project delivery.” ... Read more.