Our contract with the GC states "anticipated start date" because at the time of signing we did not yet have permits nor notice to proceed from the airport so we couldn't put in a firm commencement date. The permits and NTP were received and the actual construction started two months from the "anticipated start date" and five weeks later I receive a $140K PCCO for a start date that was not known when the contract was signed. Their justification is that buried in the GCGR is their Staff Plan which shows starting on the "anticipated start date". The actual work (anticipated) is in the contract only once. Commencement of work is defined as being after permits and NTP are obtained. Is this a legitimate PCCO for lost time I should approve?
James, Levelset described you as "a contractor in Colorado" but I assume from your question that Principle Global is the construction manager / owners representative on the project and that Principle contracted with the GC. Is that correct?
You are correct
James, It's difficult to provide a definitive answer without having the entire contract to review. However, regarding their staff plan, did the contractor actually have a physical presence on the project site, i.e. jobsite office and jobsite staff? If so, what were they doing for two months while waiting for the permits and notice to proceed from the airport? Since their staffing plan was an estimate, I would ask them to document their actual costs, i.e. payroll, office rental and utilities expense, office supplies, etc.
Who was responsible for obtaining the permits?
Did the contract with the general reference and obligate the GC to comply with the provisions of the your contract with the owner?