Expert advice in minutes not days. Register it's free and ask your first question now.
ReachBack is a free community help desk for construction professionals run by Built Intelligence. A library of high-quality questions from real users with answers delivered and curated by industry experts.

4,912 questions

5,237 answers

1,011 comments

Register its Free

Download here

NEC PSC: planned Completion under a NEC3 PSC Option G Delivery Agreement

+1 vote
249 views
I'm new to PSC. My understanding is that Task Orders carry the body of work under a PSC. I have a PSC where the Completion Date is way in the future. As Task Orders are added, is the Completion held? As the Consultant is entitled to manage terminal float within each TO (leading to a Key Date), how does he manage the planned Completion vs the Completion for the entire Delivery Agreement?

I'm guessing that the terminal float for the entire delivery agreement, isn't moved with every new TO?

Sorry if question is a bit clumsy, difficult without drawing it!
asked Aug 1, 2018 in Time by Gridscape (570 points)  

1 Answer

+1 vote
 
Best answer
I think one of the reasons fro dropping the Task Order option from NEC4 was that it is relatively light in terms of the contractual provisions it has to cover Task Orders with the details of operation often being sorted out by professional goodwill and the nature of being a repeat order client.

But, as you say, it is very commonly used, so what I would have done - and co-incidentally this afternoon am doing is - is doing an NEC4 TSC with our own option G clauses !

To answer your query, in brief, each Task Order is given a Task Completion Date which MAY BE put back by compensation events, but only  if it delays planned Task Completion.

Likewise the contract Completion Date may only be put back by if a compensation event delays planned Completion. The introduction of a new Task does not do this.
answered Aug 1, 2018 by Jon Broome (51,860 points)  
selected Aug 2, 2018 by Gridscape
Jon, you've answered my fairly clumsy question very well, and luckily for me, that's how I thought it worked.

I must catch up with NEC4 sometime, I haven't come across a client using it yet though.