Open AccessInterdisciplinary Forensic Engineering As a Result of Substantial Completion Request: A Case Study
Author(s) -
Edward L. Fronapfel
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of the national academy of forensic engineers
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.102
H-Index - 1
eISSN - 2379-3252
pISSN - 2379-3244
DOI - 10.51501/jotnafe.v38i1.117
Subject(s) - work (physics) , process (computing) , computer science , forensic science , action (physics) , operations management , risk analysis (engineering) , business , engineering , medicine , mechanical engineering , physics , quantum mechanics , veterinary medicine , operating system
A project owner commonly relies on the contractor and design professional to determine substantial completion of a construction project. If the need arises, the owner may engage independent reviewers. The potential for forensic consulting arises when the contractor fails to provide construction in conformance with the contract documents or when the designer errantly designs, observes, approves, or omits work during the process. If a forensic consultant is engaged near or at completion of the work and reports substantial deviation from the contract documents, the owner must determine how to handle the need for corrective action. The deviations must be categorized and allocated to the responsible parties, and a means and cost to cure such defects are necessary. This paper provides a case study of the forensic review process under Colorado Rules of Evidence, although the rules are substantially similar in other states and on the federal level.