No coordination on drawings. Who pays?

[alkyne2005]

Hello all,

I am and EC and we just bid a prison addition. We were low and during the pre-construction meeting, we were asked a question about the lightning protection. I informed the Architect and GC that the electrical drawings and the electrical specifications say nothing about lightning protection. And they don't! On one of the A series sheets is has a general note about lightning protection being installed. The Architect said we should have reviewed the entire 400 page contract set during bid. This is becoming a very serious problem as construction documents get steadily worse.

Who pays? I am also a PE and spend many years designing and I was always told that if I left something off my drawings, that it was my fault.

 

[charlie b]

Much depends on the wording of that general note and the wording of your bid documents. If, for example, the note is vague and is worded in the context of "if a system is installed, then . . . ," or if your bid describes the work scope in a way that includes only the tasks you name, then you are off the hook. Otherwise, you may have to do some negotiation.

 

[brian john]

In my expierence many bid documents are lets through everything at them and see what sticks.

When we bid testing the documents say to FULL NETA Specs that is what we bid to, we seldom get the jobs. Latrer we here about all the problems encountered because of a good "tough" insopector that holds the other firm to the letter of the specs. Other times they get what they pay for which is not IMO conforming to the specs.

I feel the folks writing these specs need to do a comprehensive spec for eachj project not just photocopy a set from "SOME" previous project.

 

[charlietuna]

Years ago when GC's began asking EC's to bid jobs from electrical drawings only -- i figured it was time to get away from these cheapskates! And when i asked them how i was supposed to determine working heigths--their statement was--"you can come to our office and look at our complete set of drawings" !!! I had to sue an engineer for $26k due to his mistake in engineering an emergency power system in a building--he made the mistake--"TOLD" us to fix it and he would go to the owner and pay for our work. Six months later i found out he had no intention on admitting to the owner that he made a mistake. A judge asked if his firm had "ERRORS AND ADMISSIONS" insurance?? He said "yes". Judge said "pay the man!" .. Old time Engineers are a thing of the past !!

 

[ron]

There are many times on projects that I work on, that the GC or CM go to a lightning protection install company direct.
Depending on how your contract/bid is laid out, you can just say that you thought the lightning would be direct issued from the CM/GC.

 

[ITO]

Don?t panic there are a lot of ways to go about this, all estimates are flawed the real money is made or lost in project management. Besides if you had not have left it off, you would not have gotten the job.

You are really not giving enough information for anyone here to help you formulate an effective way to handle this.

1) What does your scope say?
2) What does your contract say? (does it tie you to all the plan pages or specifically mention the LP system?)
3) What does the note say?

Depending on the three questions above, who is to say the LP is in your scope? If its not defined as part of your scope then the GC should have taken quotes and covered it himself.

One tactic maybe if you are hooked with it, then perhaps you can appeal to the GC and owner to help you cover what the Architect and Engineer should have coordinated.

On the other hand since there is no specification, maybe the bare minimum LP for this job is not something to get worked up over. Have you gotten a quote yet? If they don?t like the bare minimum it opens the door for a change order.

Also DO NOT respond to the GC right away about this, spend a few days mulling it over and come up with a good way to handle it. Make the GC sweat a bit and come up with the best argument and/or appeal depending on which one you will be selling.

 

[charlie b]

A judge asked if his firm had "ERRORS AND ADMISSIONS" insurance??

That would be "Errors and OMISSIONS insurance." The "erorrs" part is about publishing something, within the design package, that is wrong. The "omissions" part is about failing to include something, in the design package, that should have been there.

 

[jimmyglen]

Welcome to the forum

There has been some good advice on this thread

I would tell them that you dont do lightning protection work (unless you really do )

for example - we dont and we would might not have ever included that


"If you cant dazzle them with brilliance - baffle them with B.S"

 

[charlietuna]

Thanks for the correction Charlie--But in this case it was "ADMISSIONS" since the engineering firm had to "admit" that the engieer he had assigned the work at this building for ten years was not even certified ! The owner was not happy with that, especially since they had other problems in the past. The guy was schooled in Russia and never licensed here.

 

[alkyne2005]

Scope of work

Scope of work

Our scope of work is spelled out as division 26. Which included the E sheets and the 26000 specifications.

I have to be careful because the GC on this project is a good customer and it is his job to mediate between us and the engineer. I believe I know how I will handle the lightning protection now. Just tell them they should have gotten another sub.


My goal with this post was to try and find some legal presidence in this type of conflict. I am talking a book that I can look up these legal questions and argue with them.

For example, it is becoming very common for electrical engineers to leave entire mechanical units off the E drawings and them telling us that we should have checked the M series sheets for that during the bid process. I know we have to coordinate; say if a unit is sized for a 50A breaker and we have to change it to a 60A breaker in the field. But how do I legally fight it when the electrical engineer completely omits items on the E sheets and his ego is too large to let him admit he made a mistake.

 

[ITO]

?
I have to be careful because the GC on this project is a good customer and it is his job to mediate between us and the engineer. I believe I know how I will handle the lightning protection now. Just tell them they should have gotten another sub?

If they are a good customer then perhaps it might work better if you told them the truth, that you did not pick it up and that since they are hooked with it that you would be happy to help them out with the conduit portion. PVC is cheep and it?s inexpensive PR.

?My goal with this post was to try and find some legal presidence in this type of conflict. I am talking a book that I can look up these legal questions and argue with them?

Just my two cents but legal arguments with ?a good customer? rarely work out like you think they should.

? how do I legally fight it when the electrical engineer completely omits items on the E sheets and his ego is too large to let him admit he made a mistake.

Two part answer:

1) Project management is more about sales than anything else. How you sell yourself, your business, and the solutions to your problems. Even in a coordination meeting if you go into it heavy handed telling everyone how it is going to be or what morons they are you will be about as successful as you would adopting the same attitude while trying to sell a used car.

When you find omitted items write an RFI asking for circuiting and direction for hooking up the equipment in question. Then when the RFI is answered write up a quick transparent RFC (request for change) and then hand deliver it to the GC and SELL IT. On changes like this I am very kind to the engineer and just get enough to cover the mistake and take great care to not criticize or bruise the engineers ego, because once Mr. Perfect gets defensive its pretty much over.

Nine time or of ten a good PM can get paid for these mistakes. If you are approachable sometimes the engineer will call you back and ask you to burry it in some other owner originated change or in some like this which I am more than happy to do. The idea is to get paid for your work and to do it gracefully.

2) Scopes and contracts will make or break you. When do a proposal you should have a very detailed scope letter spelling out what is and what is not covered. My canned letter has about 75 bullet points that are checked off. I developed this for the retail finish out market which had RFQs that usually had scopes to be filled out anyway. Sometimes if the contract or contractor is squirrelly I will attached my scope letter to the contract as an exhibit as well.

The new thing that you (all of us) need to be looking for in contracts is verbage that ties our scope to all the plan pages and specifically lists out all the A, M, P, S, C (ect) pages. Also I am starting to see verbage that says something to the effect that the contract is for a completed project, in lieu of Division 16 (or Div 26) and this benign little sentence would legally hook you for those missed items, and you would have to be one hell of a sales man to get paid for them. Read up on contracts or better yet take some seminars on them, there is a lot you need to know.

To wrap this up play the lawyer when sign your contract, but change hats and play the salesman when you are doing the job and collecting changs.

 

[weressl]

Hello all,

I am and EC and we just bid a prison addition. We were low and during the pre-construction meeting, we were asked a question about the lightning protection. I informed the Architect and GC that the electrical drawings and the electrical specifications say nothing about lightning protection. And they don't! On one of the A series sheets is has a general note about lightning protection being installed. The Architect said we should have reviewed the entire 400 page contract set during bid. This is becoming a very serious problem as construction documents get steadily worse.

Who pays? I am also a PE and spend many years designing and I was always told that if I left something off my drawings, that it was my fault.

Even though it is sloppy engineering and you can take him onto the PE board, sound like contractually you had it and you should have questioned the notes on the A series(?) pre-bid. Even though I am not a PE, I would be ashamed to put such notices onto the drawings without specifying it of what does this mean. (How many terminals, what kind, downcomers, connectors, etc.)

 

[ITO]

PEs around here NEVER engineer LP systems on the plans, they are always scoped out in the specs under Div 16,17,25 or 26.

If its on an A sheet chances are the PE did not even specify it and it was something the Architect came up with.

 

[sparky 134]

When I present a proposal I state that my proposal is based on the information provided on the 'E' drawings. I will review the 'M' drawings if I need add'l information about the RTU's.

More and more it seems architects and engineers are trying to shift the burden of responsibility from themselves to the subs. I feel that if there is something relevant to the 'E' drawings than it should be shown on the 'E' drawings.

Recently I've had a couple of GC's deliver drawings without any engineering. They requested that the subs engineer the drawings and then present a bid. No thanks.

 

[bradleyelectric]

Recently I've had a couple of GC's deliver drawings without any engineering. They requested that the subs engineer the drawings and then present a bid. No thanks.

Could be a number of reasons for this.

1) GC is getting in on the budget number in the early stage of the project so they get a good look at the job when it gets engineered. Do a quick markup of the plans and submit a proposal with a scope as you normally would. Preface the proposal with "We are proud to submit our budget number for this project" That will help assure you get the look when it gets engineered or if they accept your scope they may just overlook the "budget" line in your proposal. It will give you the ability to give your number another look before you elevate it.

2) It's a negotiated job and if you scope it right it will be yours off your design.

3) a number of other reasons. If you like the job, GC or owner you may want to mark it up.

 

[satcom]

When I present a proposal I state that my proposal is based on the information provided on the 'E' drawings. I will review the 'M' drawings if I need add'l information about the RTU's.

More and more it seems architects and engineers are trying to shift the burden of responsibility from themselves to the subs. I feel that if there is something relevant to the 'E' drawings than it should be shown on the 'E' drawings.

Recently I've had a couple of GC's deliver drawings without any engineering. They requested that the subs engineer the drawings and then present a bid. No thanks.

"More and more it seems architects and engineers are trying to shift the burden of responsibility from themselves to the subs."

They are not trying to shift any work, their cilent are trying to cheap out, some EC's think they can do design work, I guess they figure the same as the hacks, design is not rocket science.

 

[ITO]

With all due respect if you can?t do a load calc, layout and budget on resi job then maybe you should hang up your Kliens and go do plumbing or something? seriously take that as a wake-up call.

Maybe it?s a commercial job, which may take more time but again its not rocket surgery and whatever you do come up with is still a budget and still subject to engineering review which if you are smart should be part of you budget.

This business is all about budgets, nothing and I mean NOTHING gets built without a budget and if you don?t wanna play ball that?s fine their will always be somebody who will.