# Terminal Float Post Contract

**URL:** <https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/terminal-float-post-contract/15025>\
**Category:** Time\
**Created:** [17 June 2021 12:24 UTC](https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/terminal-float-post-contract/15025 "2021-06-17T12:24:40Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![WatersideSurveyor](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/reachback.builtintelligence.com/watersidesurveyor/32/153_2.png) [@WatersideSurveyor](https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/u/WatersideSurveyor)\
**Post date:** [17 June 2021 12:24 UTC](https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/terminal-float-post-contract/15025/1 "2021-06-17T12:24:40Z")

</div>

Our original Contract Programme has Planned Completion and Contract Completion as the same date therefore no terminal float. TRA has been included against risky items. First programme for acceptance has been updated and some of the TRA was not required and has been reduced bringing the Planned Completion in ahead of Contract Completion. Can this then be converted to Terminal Float post Contract?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jon\_Broome](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/reachback.builtintelligence.com/jon_broome/32/192_2.png) [@Jon\_Broome](https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/u/Jon_Broome)\
**Post date:** [17 June 2021 12:51 UTC](https://reachback.builtintelligence.com/t/terminal-float-post-contract/15025/2 "2021-06-17T12:51:33Z")

</div>

Yes, absolutely. And you can argue it does not matter as the _Contractor_ ‘owns’ both terminal float and time risk allowance.