american professional constructor journal - october 2010

Journal of the American Institute of Constructors

OCTOBER 2009Volume 33 • Number 2

T H E A M E R IC A N PROF E S SIONA L C ON ST RU C TOR

IN THIS ISSUE:

Sources of High School Junior’s and Senior’s Perception of the Construction Industry

Guidance Counselors’ Knowledge and Perception of Careers in the Construction Industry

Issues in Building Commissioning

Final Construction Cost Prediction by Using the Earned Value Index Application Method

Emergence of Green Buildings in India: A Study of Sustainable Features and Occupant Satisfaction

Analysis of the Preferences for Specific Project Delivery System Utilized by Texas Public Universities

Measuring Contractor’s Success to Meet the Reasonable Prudent Contractor Standard When Claiming for a Type I Differing Condition: A Differing Site Condition Anthology

THE AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTORJournal of the American Institute of Constructors

IN THIS ISSUE:

Construction Theft and Vandalism

Project Delivery Methods for Electrical Contractors in Energy Efficient Markets

Environmental Laws in the United States and India Related to the Sustainable Built Environment

A New Post-Tensioned Cable Chair: An Industry Evaluation

OCTOBER 2010Volume 33 •Number 4

AIC 2009/2010Officers & Directors

PRESIDENTMark E. Giorgi, AIC Erie Affiliates, Inc 29017 Chardon Street, Suite 200 Willoughby Hills, OH 44092-1405 440.943.5995 [email protected]

VICE PRESIDENTAndrew J. Wasiniak, AIC, CPC Walbridge Aldinger 4852 79th Ave., Plaza E Sarasota, FL 34243 813.334.5179 [email protected]

SECRETARYDavid Fleming, AIC, CPC, DBIA Sundt Construction, Inc 4425 West Airport Fwy, Suite 473 Irving, TX 75062 972.258.0500 [email protected]

TREASURERPaul W. Mattingly, AIC, CPC Bossemattingly Constructors, Inc. 2116 Plantside Drive Louisville, KY 40299-1924 502.671.0995 [email protected]

PURPOSEThe purpose of the American Institute of Constructors is to promote individual excellence throughout the related fields of construction.

MISSIONOur mission is to provide:

A qualifying body to serve the individual in construction, the Constructor, who has achieved a recognized level of professional competence;

Opportunities for the individual constructor to participate in the process of developing quality standards of practice and to exchange ideas;

Leadership in establishing and maintaining high ethical standards;

Support for construction education and research;

Encouragement of equitable and professional relationships between the professional constructor and other entities in the construction process; and

An environment to enhance the overall standing of the construction profession.

Journal of the American Institute of Constructors

AIC PAST PRESIDENTS

1971-74 Walter Nashert, Sr., FAIC

1975 Francis R. Dugan, FAIC

1976 William Lathrop, FAIC

1977 James A. Jackson, FAIC

1978 William M. Kuhne, FAIC

1979 E. Grant Hesser, FAIC

1980 Clarke E. Redlinger, FAIC

1981 Robert D. Nabholz, FAIC

1982 Bruce C. Gilbert, FAIC

1983 Ralph. J. Hubert, FAIC

1984 Herbert L. McCaskill Jr.,FAIC

1985 Albert L Culberson, FAIC

1986 Richard H. Frantz, FAIC

1987 L.A. (Jack) Kinnaman, FAIC

1988 Robert W. Dorsey, FAIC

1989 T.R. Benning Jr., FAIC

1990 O.L. Pfaffmann, FAIC

1991 David Wahl, FAIC

1992 Richard Kafonek, FAIC

1993 Roger Baldwin, FAIC

1994 Roger Liska, FAIC

1995 Allen Crowley, FAIC

1996 Martin R. Griek, AIC

1997 C.J. Tiesen, AIC

1998-99 Gary Thurston, AIC

2000 William R. Edwards, AIC

2001-02 James C. Redlinger, FAIC

2003-04 Stephen DeSalvo, FAIC

2005-06 David R. Mattson, FAIC

2007-09 Stephen P. Byrne, FAIC, CPC

The American Institute of Constructors | PO Box 26334 | Alexandria, VA 22314 | Tel: 703.683.4999 | Fax: 571.527.3105 | www.professionalconstructor.org

construction fields.

Tanya C. Matthews, FAICTMG ConstructionP.O. Box 2099Purcelville, VA 20134-2099800.610.9005 [email protected]

AIC 2009/2010 Board of DirectorsDIRECTOR (ELECTED 2009–2012) Robert W. Arnold, CPC ASCO Hardware Company, Inc 1409 Osage, Redfield, AR 72132 501.376.6858 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2009–2012) Paul M. Byrne, AC 6411 Lange Cir., Dallas, TX 75214 214.878.1634 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) Dennis C. Bausman, AIC, CPC, Ph.D Clemson University 126 Lee Hall, Clemson, SC 29634 864.656.3919 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) Matthew A. Conrad, AC The Christman Company 208 Capitol Ave., Lansing, MI 48933 517.482.1488 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Allen L. Crowley, Jr., AIC The Crowley Group, LLC 12434 Cedar Rd, Ste 12 Cleveland, OH 44106 216.231.1100 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Steven A. DeSalvo, FAIC, CPC Turner Construction Company 2315 Iowa Ave., Cincinnati, OH 45206 513.363.0845 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) David Fleming, AIC, CPC, DBIA Sundt Construction,Inc 4425 W. Airport Fwy, Ste 473 Dallas, TX 75062 972.258.0500 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) E. Terence Foster, AIC, CPC, Ph.D, PE University of Nebraska — Omaha 1014 N. 67th Cir., Omaha, NE 68132 402.554.3273 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2009–2012) Michael A. Garrett, AIC, CPC Megen Construction Company. Inc. 2060 Miles Woods Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45231 513.616.1414 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Mark E. Giorgi, AIC Erie Affiliates, Inc 29017 Chardon St., Ste 200 Willoughby Hills, OH 44092-1405 440.943.5995 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) Mike W. Golden, AIC, CPC MW Golden Corporation P.O. Box 338, Castle Rock, CO 80104 303.688.9848 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2009–2012) Mark D. Hall, AIC, CPC Hall Construction Co., Inc PO Box 770, Howell, NJ 07731 732.938.4255 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) David C. Jesme, AIC, CPC,DBIA Sundt Construction, Inc 1660 Hotel Circle N., Ste 400 San Diego, CA 92108 619.321.4822 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) Paul W. Mattingly, AIC, CPC BosseMattingly Constructors 1916 Redleaf Dr., Louisville, KY 40242 502.671.0995 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2008–2011) David R. Mattson, FAIC, CPC, MCIOB D.R. Mattson, Inc. P. O. Box 27842, Tempe, AZ 85285 480.970.3334 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2009–2012) Samone Melson Smoot Construction 140 Brandy Mill Dr., Pataskala, OH 43062 513.623.4459 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2007–2010) Philip F. Moffitt, AIC, CPC Nabholz Construction Company 21 Old Forge Ct., Little Rock, AR 72227 501.217.5513 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Hoyt Monroe, FAIC Clark Power Corporation P.O. Box 45188, Little Rock, AR 72214 501.558.4901 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Bradley T. Monson, AIC, CPC Tierra Group 150 South Eagle View Dr. Durango, CO 81301 970.375.6416 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2007–2010) Wayne J. Reiter, AIC, CPC, CPA Reiter Companies 110 East Polk St., Richardson, TX 75081 972.238.1300 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (ELECTED 2010-2013) Bradford L. Sims, AIC Western Carolina University Kimmel School of Construction Management & Technology 211 Belk Building, Cullowhee, NC 28723 828.287.2175 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (APPOINTED—N OHIO) Bernard J. Ashyk, Jr, AIC Shook, Inc. 10245 Brecksville Rd, P.O. Box 41020 Brecksville, OH 44141-0020 440.838.5400 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (APPOINTED—TAMPA) John R. Kiker, III, CPC Kiker Services Cor 1501 Missouri Ave. Palm Harbour, FL 34683-3642 727.787.8877 [email protected]

DIRECTOR (APPOINTED—DALLAS) Kyle B. Potts, AC Turner Construction 17659 Millwood Pl., Dallas, TX 75287 214.876.6760 [email protected]

THE AMERICAN PROFESSIONAL CONSTRUCTOR

Volume 33, Number 4 October 2010

Third class postage paid at Alexandria, Virginia. The American Professional Constructor (ISSN 0146-7557) is the official publication of the American Institute of Constructors (AIC), P.O. Box 26334 Alexandria VA 22314. Telephone 703.683.4999, Fax 703.683.5480, www.professionalconstructor.org.

Subscription rates: United States and Canada $100 per year, all other countries $150 per year. Single copies $50

Published in the USA by the American Institute of Constructors Education Foundation, and copyrighted by the American Institute of Constructors.

This publication or any part thereof may not be reproduced in any form without written permission from AIC. AIC assumes no responsibility for statements or opinions advanced by the contributors to its publications. Views expressed by them or the editor do not represent the official position of the The American Professional Constructor, its staff, or the AIC.

The American Professional Constructor is a refereed journal. All papers must be written and submitted in accordance with AIC journal guidelines available from AIC. All papers are reviewed by at least three experts in the field.

Articles

Construction Theft and Vandalism .................................................................................................................. 5Dennis C. Bausman, Ph.D, CPC, AIC

Project Delivery Methods for Electrical Contractors in Energy Efficient Markets .................................... 15Christopher W. Clement and Sinem Korkmaz, Ph.D, LEED® AP

Environmental Laws in the United States and India Related to the Sustainable Built Environment ...... 27Gayatri Kumar , Matt Syal, Ph.D, and Eric Strauss

A New Post-Tensioned Cable Chair: An Industry Evaluation ..................................................................... 37C. Ben Farrow and Eric Wetzel

Reviewer/Publication Interest Survey ........................................................................................................... 51

Construction Certification .............................................................................................................................. 52

Code of Ethics ................................................................................................................................................. 53

5

Construction Theft and Vandalism

Dennis C. Bausman, Ph.D, CPC, AICClemson University

ABSTRACT: This study investigated construction theft and vandalism. The primary purpose of the study was to collect and analyze data regarding theft and vandalism loss history, incident control, the effectiveness of secu-rity measures, and the frequency of their use. The study sample consisted of a broad cross-section of contracting firms. The contracting approach of the sample included general contracting, engineering, construction manage-ment, design build, maintenance and specialty contracting. Contractor expertise covered a wide range of building types in the commercial, industrial, and civil building sectors. The primary findings are that theft and vandalism loss is stable and that the participating contractors do not consider theft and vandalism to be significant prob-lems. The combined loss from theft and vandalism ranged from $48/million to $755/million of annual volume which is less than the loss history of earlier studies. However, only 30% of the firms regularly tracked their firm’s direct loss due to theft, only 5% regularly tracked direct loss due to vandalism loss, and just 5% tracked subcon-tractor theft and vandalism loss on a regular basis. As a result, actual losses (direct and subcontractor) may be underestimated. In addition, the findings regarding frequency of use and effectiveness of common security mea-sures are presented.

Key Words:construction, theft, vandalism, security, loss

INTRODUCTION

Theft is a significant problem on construction sites. Annual estimates of equipment theft range up to $1b which equates to approximately $1,000/million of construction (NER 2008). A recent study found that the average annual contractor direct loss due to theft was $1,388/million of construction volume (Hinze 2004). Seventy-one percent (71%) of construction equipment owners have experienced theft and over a quarter (29%) incurred five or more incidents (Cygnus 2008). As little as 6.5% of stolen equipment is ever recovered (NER 2008) and when it is, 70% of the recovered equipment incurred damages of $5,000 or more (Cygnus 2008).

Two (2) key factors determine the type of equipment,

tools, and material stolen: value and mobility (NER 2008). Theft typically involves items that: a) are easy to remove/transport from the construction site, and b) have good resale value. Tools and small equipment (towables) such as generators, air compressors, and welders have the highest risk of theft. However, larger equipment is not immune. Large equipment that is often stolen includes skid steers, loaders (backhoe, skip, wheel), and utility trucks & trailers (LoJack 2007). In addition, jobsite materials, products, and valuable commodities such as copper are routinely stolen from construction sites. Vandalism at the project site is also a common occurrence. While it does not compare to the dollar magnitude of loss due to theft, vandalism is still a serious problem. It ranges from broken glass and graffiti to destruction of completed work and damage to equipment and vehicles.

OCTOBER 2010 — Volume 33, Number 4The American Institute of Constructors | 700 N. Fairfax St., Suite 510 | Alexandria, VA 22314 | Tel: 703.683.4999 | www.professionalconstructor.org

DENNIS C. BAUSMAN, Ph.D is a professor at Clemson University.


6 Construction Theft and Vandalism

Theft is a localized problem. In 98% of the cases, the stolen equipment was recovered in the same state in which the theft was reported (LoJack 2006). The thief is generally employed at, and/or familiar with the construction site. Research has shown that the major-ity of theft and vandalism incidents are committed by individuals familiar with the jobsite (Gardner 2003).The AGC of California reported that 85% of jobsite thefts were employee related. Criminal investigations indicate that thieves have good knowledge of equip-ment operation and security weaknesses (NER 2008).

Thieves are opportunists and two (2) key factors de-termine the type of equipment & tools stolen: value and mobility (NER 2008). Items not secured, easy to move, and which have good resale value are the items that have primary vulnerability for theft. It has been estimated that 90% of the equipment thefts occur on job sites with little security and/or where equipment, tools, and jobsite materials are unattended over the weekends (McDowall 2002).

Factors contributing to the high level of construction theft include: a) a lack of standardized equipment identification, b) the ease of selling stolen equipment/material, c) the perception that construction theft is generally considered low risk, and d) the fact that construction sites are often at remote locations with inadequate security.

Lack of Standardized Equipment Identification: Equipment titling and registration are not univer-sally mandated and the identification of construc-tion equipment is not standardized like the 17-digit VIN system for vehicles. Construction equipment is typically identified by model number, serial number (S/N), and/or a product identification number (PIN) – coding systems that are unique to each equipment manufacturer (NER, LoJack).

Ease of Selling Stolen Equipment/Material: Construc-tion equipment, tools, and material are high value and in high demand. Due to the difficulty of identifying stolen material, poor contractor equipment and tool records, and the lack of standardized equipment/tool identification it is relatively easy to sell items stolen from a construction site (NER 2008).

Construction Theft is Low Risk: There is a low risk of detection and arrest for construction theft. Authorities often view construction theft as a ‘victimless crime’ so even if caught, prosecuted, and convicted the pen-alties are generally low (NER 2008).

Remote Locations and Inadequate Security: Construc-tion sites are often in remote locations and/or have inadequate security for theft prevention. Construction equipment is often poorly secured, the use of univer-sal keys is common, and 97% of equipment owners do not incorporate the use of tracking devices on their equipment (LoJack 2006). Up to 90% of thefts occur at night or over the weekend when lighting conditions are poor and no one is on site (McDowall 2002).

The facts are that construction theft and vandalism are relatively high and recovery of stolen tools, equip-ment, and materials is low. However, proactive ac-tions by a contractor can have an impact. Theft and vandalism are the most frequent, most costly, and also a type of loss that good prevention measures can dra-matically reduce (NER 2008). Company and project security decisions can directly influence and impact the incidence and severity of jobsite theft and vandal-ism (Berg 2005).

So what can, and should, be done to reduce the inci-dence of theft and vandalism and improve recovery of stolen equipment and materials? What security ac-tions are effective? This research effort investigates these questions. The primary objectives of this study were to:

a) Investigate construction theft and vandalism loss history and incident control

b) Evaluate the effectiveness of common secu-rity measures and the frequency of their use

METHODOLOGY

Sample: The Corporate Partners and Industry Adviso-ry Board (CP/IAB) members of the University’s De-partment of Construction Science and Management were selected as a representative sampling of the con-struction industry. CP/IAB Membership includes 24


Dennis C. Bausman, Ph.D, CPC, AIC Clemson University 7

contracting firms that range in size from $8 million to several billion in annual vol-ume. The contracting approach of the CP/IAB members includes general contract-ing, engineering, construction manage-ment, design build, maintenance and spe-cialty contracting. Expertise covers a wide range of building types in the commercial, industrial, and civil building sectors. All of the firms have a keen interest in, and direct knowledge of, construction theft and site security.

Data Collection: To obtain relevant data for this study a self-administered question-naire was developed covering five catego-ries of inquiry. The first portion of the ques-tionnaire solicited general company and contact information. The second section inves-tigated the significance of theft and vandalism, the firm’s tracking of theft and vandalism, and the dollar estimate of annual losses. The next two sections solic-ited input regarding the frequency and effectiveness of certain security actions and the type of theft and vandalism that the firm had experienced. The final section of the questionnaire solicited comments and suggestions.

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

Eighty-three percent (83%) of the targeted sample completed and returned the questionnaire. Survey responses were reviewed and statistically analyzed. Means and paired t-testing were conducted with a level of significance of 0.05 The findings of the statis-tical analysis are presented in the following sections.

Significance of Theft and Vandalism

Theft and vandalism are not considered significant problems. A majority (75%) of the contractors partici-pating in the survey claimed that theft at the project site was a minor problem. Only 15% of the contrac-tors responding to the survey view theft as a signifi-

cant problem. In addition, 90% of the respondents also consider vandalism a minor problem or not a problem at all. Only a small minority (10%) of the respondents view vandalism at the project site to be a problem (Figure 1).

Theft and Vandalism Loss

Theft loss for the respondents is less than noted in prior industry studies. For the participating contrac-tors the absolute annual dollar loss from theft ranged from $500 to $100,000 with an average annual loss of approximately $20,000. Loss from theft compared to revenue averaged from $37/million to $700/million of annual volume. Typically, higher loss was experi-enced by firms self-performing a higher percentage of their work.

Annual losses from vandalism were also relatively low. Losses ranged up to $10,000 with an average of approximately $3,700 per year. Vandalism loss based upon revenue ranged from $11/million to $55/million of annual volume. Typically, higher loss ($/m) was experienced by smaller firms that self-performed a higher percentage of their work.

The majority of respondents reported that losses for

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Not a Problem Minor Problem Problem Major Problem

0%

75%

10%15%

35%

55%

10%

0%

Figure 1: Significance of Theft & Vandalism

Theft

Vandalism



both theft and vandalism were essentially stable. Only 25% of the contractors were experiencing increased loss due to theft and 10% indicated that vandalism losses were increasing (Figure 2).

However, respondent evaluation of annual losses due to theft and vandalism was an ‘estimate’ for a major-ity of the contractors responding to the survey. Only 30% of the respondents actually tracked theft loss ‘of-ten’ or ‘always’ and just 5% regularly tracked vandal-ism loss.

Somewhat surprisingly, more than a third (35%) of the participating firms never or seldom tracked their direct losses due to theft and a majority (60%) never

or seldom tracked their direct losses due to vandalism (Figure 3).

The tracking of subcontractor loss was even less prev-alent. Just 5% of the respondents tracked subcontrac-tor loss due to theft or vandalism on a regular basis (often or always). Almost three-quarters (74%) of the participating firms never or seldom tracked subcon-tractor theft or vandalism loss.

In practice, the majority of the participating contrac-tors do not regularly track theft and vandalism loss on their projects. They do not know (track) the extent of their direct loss or the loss experienced by their subcontractors.

Company Policy

A majority (60%) of the contractors have a formal company policy that addresses site security concerns and project requirements. For a majority of the firms (80%) the superintendent has primary responsibil-ity for site security. Fifteen percent (15%) of the re-spondents indicated that both the superintendent and project manager are responsible for site security. The remainder place primary responsibility on the project manager.

Figure 3: Frequency of Tracking Theft & Vandalism Loss

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Never Seldom Sometimes Often Always

25%

10%

35%

10%

20%

35%

25%

35%

0%

5%

Theft

Vandalism

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Decreasing Stable Increasing

0%

75%

25%

15%

75%

10%

Figure 2: Loss Trend

Theft

Vandalism


Dennis C. Bausman, PhD, CPC, AIC Clemson University 9

Frequency of Site Security Measures/Actions

Respondents were asked to indicate how frequently they employed certain security measures on their projects. Table 1 ranks the security measures based on frequency of use on their projects. Almost all of the respondents (90%) regularly perform drug testing and two-thirds (65%) often or always conduct back-ground checks on new hires of staff and supervisory personnel. Approximately three quarters of the con-tractors (74%) proactively analyze site security, 79% of the firms place company logos or markings on tools and equipment, and most (70%) establish a re-lationship with the local police. A majority (55%) of the contractors prosecute their employees or subcon-tractor employees caught stealing and 72% terminate

employees caught stealing or committing vandalism. Approximately two-thirds (65%) often or always in-stall security lighting on the site and inside the build-ing and 55% utilize security lighting in their storage compound. A majority (70%) regularly install secu-rity fence around the storage compound and around the perimeter of the site. In addition, 79% regularly place locks on entrances to the building.

Conversely, participating contractors never utilize watchdogs or GPS locators on equipment and rarely employ LoJack or surveillance cameras. Only 15% of the contractors regularly utilize alarm systems on stor-age trailers and building access doors, but 30% often or always have an alarm system on their office trailer. RFID tags are used sparingly on tools and equipment

Table 1: Frequency of Site Security Measures

Site Security Measure % often or

always utilized

Drug testing 90%

Locks on entrances into the building 79%

Company logo / markings on tools & equipment 79%

Prior to construction the project team thoroughly analyzes project security 74%

Termination of employees caught stealing or committing vandalism 72%

Security fence around the perimeter of the site 70%

Security fence around the storage compound 70%

Local police: contact, raise awareness, surveillance 70%

Background check on new hires - staff and supervisory personnel 65%

General site security lighting 65%

Security lighting inside the building 65%

Security lighting of the storage compound 55%

Prosecution of employees caught stealing 55%

Prosecution of subcontractor employees caught stealing 55%

Prosecution of vandals 37%

After hours security guards 30%

Alarm system on the office trailer(s) 30%

Background check on new hires - unskilled and skilled craft workers 17%

RFID tags on tools and equipment 16%

Alarm system on the building access doors 15%

Alarm system on the storage trailers 15%

Site surveillance cameras 10%

Surveillance cameras positioned inside the building 5%

Lojack on major equipment 5%

GPS locators on equipment 0%

Watchdogs 0%



and about one-third (30%) of the firms regularly use security guards after hours. A small percentage (17%) of the participating contractors regularly perform background checks on new hires of hourly workers and only 37% prosecute vandals.

Effectiveness of Site Security Measures/Actions

Respondents were also asked to rate the effectiveness of each security measure. Table 2 displays the aver-age effectiveness rating for each security measure on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high) and displays a ranked

listing of the security measures. As evidenced by this tabulation, participants judge drug testing, security guards, background checks, entrance locks, security lighting, fencing, security planning, and prosecution/termination of employees caught stealing or commit-ting vandalism to be the most effective security mea-sures.

Security measures viewed as least effective include surveillance cameras, storage trailer alarm systems, LoJack, equipment GPS locators, and watchdogs.

Table 2: Effectiveness of Site Security Measures

Site Security Measure Effectiveness Rating

Drug testing 4.5 After hours security guards 4.3 Background check on new hires - staff and supervisory personnel 4.0 General site security lighting 4.0 Locks on entrances into the building 3.9 Termination of employees caught stealing or committing vandalism 3.9 Security lighting inside the building 3.9 Security lighting of the storage compound 3.9 Prior to construction the project team thoroughly analyzes project security 3.8 Security fence around the perimeter of the site 3.7 Security fence around the storage compound 3.7 Prosecution of employees caught stealing 3.6 Local police: contact, raise awareness, surveillance 3.4 Prosecution of subcontractor employees caught stealing 3.4 Prosecution of vandals 3.3 Alarm system on the office trailer(s) 3.3 Company logo / markings on tools & equipment 3.2 Background check on new hires - unskilled and skilled craft workers 3.1 RFID tags on tools and equipment 3.1 Alarm system on the building access doors 3.1 Site surveillance cameras 3.0 Alarm system on the storage trailers 2.9 Surveillance cameras positioned inside the building 2.6 Lojack on major equipment 2.6 GPS locators on equipment 2.3 Watchdogs 2.1



Table 3: Frequency & Effectiveness of Site Securi-ty Measures combines the security measures ranked based upon effectiveness with their corresponding frequency of use. Typically, a security measure fre-quency of use correlates with its effectiveness. How-ever, there are a few exceptions.

Use of after-hours security guards is ranked very ef-fective, but typically is not utilized – most likely be-cause of cost. Contacting local police to raise aware-

ness of the construction effort and increase project surveillance is often employed but viewed as hav-ing limited effectiveness. A similar relationship ex-ists with company logos and markings on tools and equipment. One relationship that appears inconsistent is security lighting of the storage compound. This low cost theft prevention measure is judged to be one of the most effective security actions that a contractor could take, but yet its frequency of use is only 55%.

Table 3: Frequency & Effectiveness of Site Security Measures

Security Action % often or

always Effectiveness

Drug testing 90% 4.5

After hours security guards 30% 4.3

Background check on new hires - staff and supervisory personnel 65% 4.0

General site security lighting 65% 4.0

Termination of employees caught stealing or committing vandalism 72% 3.9

Security lighting of the storage compound 55% 3.9

Security lighting inside the building 65% 3.9

Locks on entrances into the building 79% 3.9

Prior to construction the project team analyzes project security 74% 3.8

Security fence around the perimeter of the site 70% 3.7

Security fence around the storage compound 70% 3.7

Prosecution of employees caught stealing 55% 3.6

Prosecution of subcontractor employees caught stealing 55% 3.4

Local police: contact, raise awareness, surveillance 70% 3.4

Prosecution of vandals 37% 3.3

Alarm system on the office trailer(s) 30% 3.3

Company logo / markings on tools & equipment 79% 3.2

Background check on new hires - unskilled and skilled crafts 17% 3.1

Alarm system on the building access doors 15% 3.1

RFID tags on tools and equipment 16% 3.1

Site surveillance cameras 10% 3.0

Alarm system on the storage trailers 15% 2.9

Surveillance cameras positioned inside the building 5% 2.6

Lojack on major equipment 5% 2.6

GPS locators on equipment 0% 2.3

Watchdogs 0% 2.1



Most Common Equipment and Material Loss

Participating firms were asked how often they experi-enced loss of certain types of equipment and material. As shown in Table 4, hand tools, power tools, and construction materials have the highest incidence of theft. Conversely, large equipment has a lowest in-cidence rate – a majority of the firms have never ex-perienced theft and 42% seldom have an occurrence.

Vandalism of company property, building exterior, and interior finishes was noted as having a low inci-dence rate with ninety percent (90%) or more of the respondents seldom or never having an occurrence (Table 4).

The Impact of Company Size and Loss on Site Se-curity

In addition to analysis of each security metric, the data was investigated to determine if company size or loss history had any impact on the firm’s security actions/approach.

Differences found to be significant between large firms ($1 billion or more annual volume) and smaller contractors (less than $1 billion annual volume) were identified. Many of the findings are consistent with the larger projects associated with those firms with larger annual volume. The statistically supported findings are that large firms:

• More frequently terminated employees caught stealing or committing vandalism.

• Viewed background checks on newly hired staff and supervisory as more effective.

• More frequently use general site lighting and security lighting inside the building.

• More frequently use security fence around the perimeter of the site, security fence around the storage compound, and after-hours security guards.

• Consider surveillance cameras positioned in-side the building, LoJack, and other GPS lo-cators on equipment as more effective than smaller firms.

• Experienced more frequent loss of office equipment at the project site.

In addition to company size, companies with an an-nual loss due to theft of $10,000 and above were com-pared with those firms experiencing less than $10,000 of annual loss. The statistically supported findings are that firms with larger losses:

• View prosecution of the firm’s employees and

Table 4: Frequency of Loss Due to Theft & Vandalism

Equipment/Material Theft

Frequency of Loss

Never Seldom Some-

times Often Always

Hand tools 5% 20% 45% 15% 15%

Power tools 0% 30% 50% 5% 15%

Construction materials 0% 31% 37% 16% 16%

Small equipment 25% 45% 25% 0% 5%

Office equipment @ the project office 30% 45% 20% 5% 0%

Large equipment 58% 42% 0% 0% 0%

Vandalism

Company property 35% 55% 10% 0% 0%

Building exterior 35% 60% 0% 5% 0%

Interior building finishes 20% 80% 0% 0% 0%


Dennis C. Bausman, Ph.D, CPC, AIC Clemson University 13

subcontractor employees caught stealing as a more effective security measure.

• More frequently utilize security lighting inside the building and at the storage com-pound.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Contractors do not consider theft and vandalism to be significant problems. A majority of the participants (75%) consider construction theft to be a minor prob-lem and 90% of the respondents consider vandalism a minor problem or not a problem at all. The majority of the study participants submit that theft and vandalism loss is stable. Only a quarter of the respondents were experiencing increased theft and a mere 10% had in-creasing loss from vandalism. The combined loss from theft and vandalism ranged from $48/million to $755/million of annual volume which is considerably below the average loss of a recent study. However, only 30% of the firms regularly tracked the firm’s di-rect loss due to theft and only 5% often or always tracked vandalism loss. The tracking of subcontractor loss is even less prevalent with just 5% of the survey participants tracking subcontractor theft and vandal-ism loss on a regular basis. As a result, actual project losses (direct and subcontractor) may be considerably higher than ‘estimated’. To get a firm handle on the significance of the problem contractors should con-sider regularly tracking both the direct and indirect cost of theft and vandalism.

Most contractors have a formal policy addressing site security concerns and project requirements and three quarters proactively evaluate site security. The super-intendent generally has primary responsibility for site security. Most all the study participants performed

drug testing, and a majority performed background checks on new hires of staff and supervisory person-nel. Most firms ‘mark’ tools and equipment and at-tempt to elevate the involvement/awareness of local police with site security. A majority prosecute viola-tors and terminate employees caught stealing or com-mitting vandalism. Security lighting on site and with-in the building, fencing of the site perimeter and the storage compound, and entrance locks are common security measures. Conversely, watchdogs, GPS loca-tors, and surveillance cameras are rarely employed. Alarm systems are regularly used by only about a third of the firms and very few (17%) regularly per-form background searches on hourly workers.

Drug testing, security guards, background checks, entrance locks, security lighting, fencing, security planning, and prosecution/termination of employees caught stealing or committing vandalism are viewed to be the most effective security measures. Converse-ly, surveillance cameras, storage trailer alarm systems, LoJack, equipment GPS locators, and watchdogs are considered the least effective security measures.

Hand tools, power tools, and construction materials have the highest incidence of theft, whereas large equipment has a lowest incidence rate. Vandalism of company property, building exterior, and interior fin-ishes was noted as having a low incidence rate.

Larger firms and firms with higher losses more fre-quently terminated and/or prosecuted employees caught stealing or committing vandalism and larger firms viewed background checks as more effective. Larger firms and those experiencing higher losses more frequently used site and building security light-ing. In addition, larger firms more frequently installed security fencing, and utilized after-hours security guards.



REFERENCES

AED (2009), Construction Equipment Theft Holds Steady in Today’s Down Economy, LoJack’s Annual Theft Study Reveals, Associated Equipment Distribu-tors, March 21, 2009

AllBusness (2009a), Reducing Construction Site Theft by Employees and Subcontractors, www.all-business.com

AllBusiness (2009b), Secure Jobsite Boxes: 4 Key Features that Keep Your Tools Safe, Feb 27, 2008, www.allbusiness.comBader, Charles D. (2004), “Construction Equipment Theft: A Billion Dollar Problem”, Stormwater: The Journal for Surface Water Quality Professionals, Nov-Dec 2004

Berg, Robert and Jimmie (2005), HinzeTheft and Vandalism on Construction Sites, Journal of Con-struction Engineering and Management, Vol. 131, No. 7, July 2005, pp. 826-833

Cygnus Business Media (2008), Research Survey on Construction Equipment Theft, July 2008

LoJack (2006), 2006 Construction Equipment Theft Survey

LoJack (2007), 2007 Construction Equipment Theft Survey

National Equipment Register NER (2002), Loss Prevention and Security Techniques for Equipment Owners, NER 2002

NER (2004), 2003 Equipment Theft Report, National Equipment Register, 2004, NY

NER (2008), 2007 Equipment Theft Report, National Equipment Register, 2007, NY

Wing, D. R. (2006). RFID Applications in Construc-tion and Facilities Management, London, UK

15

Project Delivery Methods for Electrical Contractors in Energy Efficient Markets

Christopher W. Clement, Sinem Korkmaz, Ph.D., LEED® AP

ABSTRACT: The demand for energy efficient buildings, fueled by owners and government incentives, has been growing in the United States. Mostly called “green” and/or “high performance”, these buildings include dis-tributed energy generation systems such as solar and wind, and energy efficiency measures that reduce life cycle costs and greenhouse gas emissions. The goal of this study is to investigate the ways electrical contractors (ECs) can enter the emerging energy efficient markets by utilizing innovative project delivery methods. To accomplish this goal, the research team first identified and contacted the ECs that are currently leaders in the energy efficient market and utilizing innovative project delivery methods to request their participation in this study; then devel-oped a survey to interview the study participants; and conducted a face-to-face or a telephone interview to gather input from these ECs about their experiences in emerging markets and with innovative project delivery methods. The analyzed data generated strategies for ECs to lead into long terms impacts in the energy efficient markets. The findings of this pilot study offer insights and recommendations from experienced ECs utilizing innovative project delivery methods in energy efficient building construction.

Key Words:Energy optimization, renewable energy, electrical con-tractors, innovative project delivery methods.

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the construction market within the United States (US) is estimated to account for 13.4% of the nation’s $13.2 trillion gross domestic product. ‘Green’ building construction, or buildings and systems de-signed and constructed to be environmentally friendly through increased efficiency and reduced emissions is growing significantly within the construction market. Within the domestic construction market, green build-ing construction is presently valued at $36-49 billion (USGBC, 2009). Green building poses new obstacles that must be overcome to deliver successful projects. One of the major obstacles is that green building

projects include more complex systems, which interact more with other building systems (MGHC, 2007) than traditional construction projects. The complexity and interaction of these systems require multi-disciplinary design coordination and integration to ensure the final product performs as intended. The increased popu-larity of green building construction along with the complexity and interaction between systems within a structure has made integrated design processes more common (Molenaar et. al., 1999).

Electrical systems are especially crucial to green buildings; in the Leadership in Energy and Envi-ronmental Design – New Construction (LEED-NC) category (i.e., one of the most popular green building assessment system in the US) the electrical contractor (EC) is directly involved in 16 credits out of 69 total credits of LEED-NC v.2.2 (Abdulrahman, 2008).


CHRISTOPHER W. CLEMENT Former Graduate Student, Construction Management, School of Planning Design and Construction, Michigan State University, 201D Human Ecology Building, East Lansing, MI 48824.

SINEM KORKMAZ, PH.D., LEED® AP Assistant Professor, Construction Management, School of Planning Design and Construction, Michigan State University, 201D Human Ecology Building, East Lansing, MI 48824. (Corresponding Author). E-Mail: [email protected]


16 Project Delivery Methods for Electrical Contractors in Energy Efficient Markets

Buildings which are not certified green are still re-quired to meet continuously updated building codes, such as California’s Title 24 which mandates mini-mum efficiency requirements (CEC A, 2008). These standards require energy efficiency and renewable energy generation, which in turn presents an impor-tant market for ECs. Emerging markets such as the energy optimization upgrade market, where exist-ing systems are upgraded to offer significant energy savings, also offer ECs new business opportunities. As these markets continue to increase in popularity, ECs can position themselves to assume leadership roles in energy efficient construction by capitalizing on their existing capabilities and expanding their services offered. One method that ECs are using to expand their scopes of service is the implementation of innovative project delivery methods. These de-livery methods often allow the EC to assume a more prominent role in project programming (the process of identifying and developing the project owner’s intent), finance and design. The goal of this study is to investigate the ways ECs can enter the emerg-ing energy efficient markets by utilizing innovative project delivery methods.

BACKGROUND

Throughout the entire project lifecycle, from concep-tion to completion, green construction requires new technologies be identified and implemented to re-duce the energy use of the building over its lifetime. Buildings account for about 39% of the US’ total energy use and 72% of the nation’s entire electricity consumption (USGBC, 2009). Therefore, buildings are prime candidates for the introduction of efficient new technologies. ECs play an essential role in identifying and improving new methods and tech-nologies to decrease energy consumption and emis-sions produced by fossil fuel based electricity gen-eration. Renewable energy generation and energy efficiency are two emerging markets through which ECs can assume a prominent position in reducing the country’s dependency on fossil fuels for electrical consumption.

Renewable Energy Generation: Renewable energy sources for buildings include solar, wind, biomass, hydro, methane, tidal, and geothermal. Among those, solar, or photovoltaic, energy generation has expe-

rienced a significant increase in popularity in the US over the past decade (Patel, 2007). About 80% of electricity generated from the sun is generated in solar thermal power plants, while 20% is supplied by photovoltaic systems (Trieb, 1997). New prod-ucts are being designed to utilize combined heat and power (CHP), which utilizes wasted or exhausted heat productively as opposed to being vented into the atmosphere (NECA, 2008). These products are expected to further increase the popularity of solar electricity generation.

In addition to solar-generated energy, wind genera-tion systems are poised to take a significant share of the renewable energy generation market. One of the advantages of wind-generated energy is the lower front-end cost, resulting in shorter payback periods compared to that of photovoltaic (Pace and Patkar, 2007). The state of California, a consistent leader in environmental regulation and incentives, has used its Consumer Power and Conservation Financing Authority to finance renewable energy generation projects. The majority of these projects are wind-generation systems. The state’s goal is to supply 33% of the state’s electricity from renewable sources by 2020.

While wind generation systems are commonly thought of as large-scale production sites, wind gen-erated energy is also available in smaller, site specif-ic scales to augment power supplied by the electrical grid (Pace and Patkar, 2007). New products such as rooftop-mounted wind turbines have begun to enter the marketplace and require a relatively small space to operate, with diameters of seven feet and only two feet of required horizontal clearance (NECA, 2008.).

Energy Efficiency: One of the most substantial contributors to a building’s energy cost is lighting systems. According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, lighting systems are responsible for almost 20% of total national electric-ity use (NECA, 2008b). One of the most compre-hensive methods by which ECs can reduce the total energy use of a particular building is to introduce automatic lighting control systems. According to the New Buildings Institute, existing buildings can provide more than 50% reduction in energy use with automatic lighting systems while new construction


Christopher W. Clement, Sinem Korkmaz, Ph.D., LEED® AP 17

can lower estimated energy consumption through lighting systems by at least 35% (NECA, 2006). Automated lighting systems have proven to be so efficient, they are now commonly included in build-ing codes, often following California’s 2005 Title 24 energy code (NECA, 2006; CEC A, 2008). Other op-portunities include use of compact fluorescent bulbs, light-emitting diodes (LEDs), heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, and hot water systems (ASHRE, 2005; Abdulrahman, 2008; May-nard, 2008).

ECs Role in Emerging Markets: Traditionally, the owner and design team have the leading roles in buildings; however, with the green building design which is typically focused on the performance of the entire building, rather than individual component systems, integrated project teams became critical (Kibert, 2005). Therefore, the critical role construc-tion professionals can play in the programming and design of green buildings is increasingly recognized in the industry (Riley et. al., 2007). Some of the early activities which can be performed by major subcontractors include early pricing and schedule estimates, value engineering, constructability review and material selection (Syal et. al., 2007; Pulaski et. al., 2003).

ECs play an important role in the construction and installation of a building’s electrical system. Specifi-cally, ECs’ knowledge of the practical implication of LEED® requirements, value engineering, design, and building commissioning methods all dictate in-creased responsibilities for ECs (Riley et. al., 2007). In addition, technologies and strategies of green construction implementation such as light pollution reduction, optimization of energy performance, re-newable energy generation, lighting controls and al-ternative fuel refueling stations all are areas in which ECs can increase their role in the entire construction process (Lane, 2009).

Project Delivery Methods: Project delivery meth-ods, which offer contractors the opportunity to be

involved in a project in earlier stages of the project (e.g., as early as planning and design stages) can significantly aid in achieving a successful project, and also offer ECs a wide range of opportunities to become leaders in the emerging energy efficient markets.

Three main project delivery systems are common in the US: design-bid-build, design-build (or design-assist), and construction management at risk. Ad-ditionally, two ancillary methods have grown in popularity recently, build-operate transfer and pub-lic-private partnerships. These additional methods incorporate elements of each of the main delivery methods. Figure 1 below, is a graphical representa-tion of the contractual relationships in the three main delivery methods widely used.

These project delivery methods are defined as fol-lows:

Design-Bid-Build: The owner holds contracts sepa-rately with the designer and the contractor. The con-tractor bids according to the construction documents completed by the designer. Design and construction processes take place sequentially, allowing minimal contractor input during the design process (Konchar and Sanvido, 1998).

Construction Management at Risk: Similar to de-sign-bid-build, the owner holds separate contracts with the designer and the contractor. However, greater design integration is common as the owner typically hires the construction manager relatively early to perform conceptual estimating, provide constructability feedback to the designer and to pro-vide value-engineering input (Konchar and Sanvido, 1998). Depending on the completeness of the design documents, the construction manager can begin con-struction activities while designing continues.

Design-Build: The owner contracts with one entity responsible for design and construction of the build-ing. This project delivery system enables the con-



structor’s input during the design process and allows initial construction prior to completion of detailed construction documents (Konchar and Sanvido, 1998). This is the most integrated design process as the design and construction professionals are respon-sible to work together to deliver the project.

Design-Assist: The contractor is contracted at a later phase than design-build to provide value engineering and plan detailing. There is less design integration and opportunity for the contractor to impact project cost compared to design-build, but still more than design-bid-build (Ireland, 2007).

Build-Operate-Transfer: The owner, typically a government entity, contracts with a private corpora-tion to build a project, often infrastructure, operate the product and eventually transfer ownership to the owner for a pre-determined price (Forbes, 2008; Dey, 2004). This agreement typically includes alternative financing; one common method is for the contractor to build life cycle savings into the project and collect the savings over time as a form of pay-ment.

Public-Private Partnership: This is a contractual agreement between a public agency (i.e., federal, state, or local) and a private sector entity. Through this agreement, the skills and assets of the public and private sectors are shared in delivering a service or facility for the use of the general public. In addi-tion to the sharing of resources, each party shares the risks and rewards potential in the delivery of the service and/or facility (NCPP, 2008). This method is commonly used where a public good would not be financed by the private sector without assistance from the public sector.

Under many of the non-traditional delivery systems, subcontractors are increasingly assigned design re-sponsibilities for their scope of work, from casework and cabinets to exterior cladding systems (Ireland, 2007). There has been a great deal of work com-pleted to qualify the advantages and disadvantages

of this approach for owners and general contractors/construction managers. However, none of the litera-ture reviewed presented evidence that research has been conducted to assess how ECs can utilize such increased responsibility and various project delivery methods to improve energy efficient building prod-ucts/services and as a result improve their position-ing in the emerging energy efficient markets. This study aims to respond to this need in the industry.

METHODS

Eisenhart’s process to build theory from case study research (1989) is adopted in this research. The fol-lowing methodology steps were followed for achiev-ing the study goal:

(1) Review the existing literature and develop the research propositions to guide the project; (2) Develop and verify data collection instrument through a test run of the instrument with an EC and feedback from the ELECTRI Task force members; (3) Identify ECs using innovative project delivery methods and invite them to participate in this study; (4) Perform structured telephone interviews using data collection instrument and participants; (5) Perform data coding through verification of data with review and revision by each participant; (6) Order data chronologically based on contracting steps (e.g. general requirements, estimating, bidding, contracting, design, field work) and perform data analysis and testing; (a) Use inductive reasoning to develop theo retical propositions; (b) Test theoretical propositions by obtaining input from an industry expert that did not participate in data collection step; (c) Develop logic models, which are system atic visual representations to present and understand relationships among resources, process and intended results; (7) Identify the results of the research through the use of logic models.



RESULTS

Seven electrical contracting firms that are leaders in the energy optimization and generation indus-try throughout the US participated in this research. More specifically, of these seven firms:

Four have experience in energy optimization up-grades;

Three are specialized in building management sys-tems (BMS);

Three considered themselves as experienced in all levels of the LEED® certification process;

One has specialty in energy efficient data centers;

All have delivered at least two energy generation system including photovoltaics and wind turbines in the recent years. Table 1 below shows the number of

Design Build (DB)

Owner

Design-Build

Agency

Design Bid Build (DBB)

Owner

Designer Contractor

Construction Management at Risk (CM@R )

Owner

Designer

Construction Manager

Contractor

Contractual Relationship

Direction of information flow

Legend

Design Build (DB)

Owner

Design-Build

Agency

Design Bid Build (DBB)

Owner

Designer Contractor

Construction Management at Risk (CM@R )

Owner

Designer

Construction Manager

Contractor

Contractual Relationship

Direction of information flow

Legend

Figure 1: Typical Contractual Relationships by Project Delivery Method

22

Renewable Energy Generation Experience Instances

Photovoltaics 7

Wind 7

Hydrologic 2

Landfill Methane 2

Biogas (manure) 1

Coal plant pollution reduction upgrades 1

Bio-mass (wood chip fueled) 1

Geo-thermal 1

Concentrated photovoltaic 1

Concentrated solar power (solar thermal steam plants) 1

Wind resource assessment towers 1

Table 1: Firms’ experience in the renewable energy generation market



instances the various types of renewable energy gen-eration systems occurred in the interviews conducted with the study firms.

All of the firms interviewed in this study took part in design-bid-build, design-build, and design-assist jobs. Four of them also utilized public private part-nerships, while only three acted as a prime contrac-tor in at least one of the jobs they delivered.

Advantages and Considerations of Design Responsi-bility:

The respondents cited several advantages of hav-ing the design responsibility for ECs. Although, the cited advantages below might be relevant to all types of projects, they are highlighted in energy ef-ficient works given their added complexity. These advantages are listed below in Table 2 based on their

frequency of occurrence in the interviews.

Recommendations for Entering the Energy Efficient Markets:

This section presents the recommendations compiled through the interviews regarding entering the energy efficient markets. Table 3 presents the general strate-gies for ECs to enter this market and how to utilize design-build and design-assist project delivery meth-ods and utilizing prime contracting in these markets. More specific recommendations are provided below for the renewable energy generation and energy opti-mization and markets. Lastly, recommendations that can lead to long term impacts for ECs in the energy efficient markets are compiled using logic models.

Renewable Energy Generation Market: Special con-siderations ECs should be aware of in the renewable

Most cited advantages (Instances: 7-5) Second Group (Instances: 4-3)

- Construction efficiencies integrated into design

- Identification of constructability problems during design

- Improved clash detection with other systems

- Increased repeat business

- More cooperative problem solving approach

- Ability to identify and modify over-engineered systems

- Improved system quality at or below cost of traditional

DBB

- Improved change of negotiation and owner trust

- Increased owner satisfaction

- Early problem solving

- Improved unit cost and profit margin predictability

- Improved coordination and communication with other subs

- Faster field problem solving

- Fewer changes during construction

- Reduced need for change orders

-

- More favorable payment terms

- Improved code compliance

- Increased field efficiency

- Reduced labor inefficiencies

- Able to use more advanced technologies in the construction

process

- Reduced design cost

- Increased profit potential due to added project control

- Higher profit margin on engineering vs. installation

- Improved control of schedule, equipment and supply chain

Third Group (Instances: 1-2)

- Owners can be confident the budget will remain firm

- Improved communication with owner

- Fewer requests for information

- Improved owner trust on design completion

- Reduced project financing by the EC

- Owners typically more agreeable to pay start-up costs up front

- Ensure record drawings are complete and finished sooner

Table 2: Advantages of carrying the design responsibility in energy efficient projects for ECs



energy generation can be listed as follows:

• Coordination with the utility is vital; • Identifying and partnering with good technology

vendors is necessary;• There is increased overall project responsibility

as the prime contractor in the renewable energy jobs;

• Lack of standardization of codes and permitting process complicates the project planning process;

• These jobs are easier to coordinate because the EC often leads project as the prime contractor, is a member of the design team, and generally works with fewer trades;

• Module manufacturers often view installation as one phase of the project, whereas contractor looks at the entire project to identify most cost effective methods and products;

• In photovoltaic projects the equipment is ap-proximately 70% of total system cost;

• Industry resources should be utilized to create a company infrastructure to train management

personnel of renewable generation design-build specifics;

• Partnering with energy developers should be considered; a good developer is like an owner, bank and general contractor.

Financial considerations for ECs in this market include the following:

• Local economic development agencies can be utilized to identify federal, state and local financ-ing programs and incentives;

• Federal Investment Tax Credit can be benefited from (up to 30% of total installed system cost);

• Because of the dropping prices of photovoltaic systems, many owners are able to self-finance;

• Financing availability has decreased significantly due to the recent economic decline.

Energy Optimization / Upgrade Market: Several research participants have completed at least some work in this field and some specialize in optimiza-

Table 3: Recommendations to Electrical Contractors

Entering Emerging Markets Acting as Prime Contractor Educate management on dealing with subcontractors Educate management on dealing with subcontractors Evaluate subcontractors based on both price and experience Evaluate subcontractors based on both price and experience Educate your clients with estimated savings on energy efficient projects Encourage subcontractors to include fair profit in estimate Network with established market players at conferences Relationships and connections can result in bid opportunities

Work with HVAC and plumbing contractors, these systems often offer the most energy

Must be willing to try new markets to expand services offered Lower margins on bids for initial projects to gain experience Working as prime contractor can double profit potential compared to

traditional subcontracting (mark-up on subs) Develop relations with the utility and regard the entity as a client / partner Partner with governmental units or large employers to offer employee

bundle prices (i.e., quantity discounts to groups)

Partner with local governmental units and colleges; they may be interested in performing administrative functions in projects on their properties

Entering the Design-Build or Design-Assist Market Consult with attorney and insurance agent to identify and guard against

increased financial and liability risks DBB projects result in experience with lower risk and reward

factors, allowing eventual pursuit of DB work Utilize design expertise of suppliers Professional engineering capabilities may be required Carefully ensure code compliance Partner with energy auditing firms to offer joint services Produce conceptual estimates with great care; ensure all components are

included although they may not be specified Ensure potential workload can justify design staff cost

Start with easier jobs, increase complexity with experience Partner with eng. firms to test the market before hiring in-house design staff

Highlight the firm’s experience, number of LEED® APs on staff, familiarity with integrated design process

Consider coordination and communication requirements in estimates, especially when using new technologies

Higher profit margin for engineering than installation

Study potential markets; due diligence is required Carefully seek engineers knowledgeable about chosen field When using new technologies estimating is more difficult due to imperfect

technologies; include appropriate contingencies Experienced engineers, conceptual estimators and draftsmen should

be the firm’s ultimate goal

Table 3: Recommendations to Electrical Contractors

Legend: General Practice

Innovative Approach Advanced Approach



tion upgrades. One significant consideration that was pointed out is that ECs must be aware that some front-end costs (e.g., energy audit, upgrade proposal compilation) may not be recouped unless the owner undertakes the upgrade project with the contractor performing the up-front services. The respondents recommended ECs guard against this potential loss with a contract to at least cover the front-end costs before performing any services. The findings of this research also generated recommendations to enter the energy optimization market and classified them according to their level of innovativeness:

General Practice:

• Partnering with energy auditing firms;• Investigating alternative financing methods for

clients; • Once financing is in place, actively marketing

the services; • Estimating savings conservatively to ensure pro-

jections are met;

Innovative Approach:

• Working with banks for performance contracting financing;

• Obtaining applicable certifications for services such as audit and upgrades;

Advanced Approach:

• Working with economic development agencies to identify funding opportunities and potential clients;

• Working with politicians to revise government procurement procedures and allow innovative single source contracting.

Long Term Impacts: After various recommenda-tions and lessons learned were compiled from the conducted interviews, logic models were established to illustrate the long-term impacts of those. Figure 2 below illustrates a logic model representing the sequence of an electrical contracting firm utilizing supplier design knowledge to complete a few smaller



projects, obtaining knowledge in-house and becom-ing a leader in the design-build (DB) or design-assist (D/A) field.

The following are the recommended action plans for ECs to enter the energy efficient markets as present-ed previously within this section. Their correspond-ing sequence of activities and long term impacts according to the logic models are presented in the Table 4 below:

• Form partnerships with existing engineering firms to offer design-build services;

• Utilize industry resources to create a company infrastructure to train management personnel regarding renewable energy generation (REG);

• Use government efficiency programs to and third party financing to expand energy optimization market share;

• Partner with energy audit firms to expand market share.

CONCLUSIONS

As a result of this study the researchers: (1) identi-fied the emerging energy efficient technologies that can be integrated into the electrical construction industry; (2) presented strategies on how project delivery methods can assist ECs to become leaders in the energy efficient building market; and (3) how ECs can enter the emerging energy efficient markets. The study also helped build a foundation for future enterprise model research for ECs to help them posi-tion themselves as leaders in energy efficient mar-kets and identified several areas of future research to help expand the energy efficiency market.

Potential Paths for Future Research: Future research to define the economic, organizational, and strate-gic hierarchies of firms successful with innovative project delivery methods in emerging markets can add substantial value to the work performed in this

Planned Work Intended Results

No. Resources/ Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impact

1. Partner with engineering firm(s)

Successfully complete D/A or D/B work

Knowledge built in-house

Obtain more D/A or D/B work

Recognized as D/A or D/B leader

2. Industry expertise & knowledge

Develop company infrastructure

In-house REG expertise Able to design, coordinate and construct REG system

Recognized as renewable energy generation leader

3. Alternative financing familiarity

Assist client obtain upgrade financing

Perform electrical system upgrades

Obtain more upgrade work

Recognized as upgrade & financing leader

4. Partner with energy audit firms to implement their recommendations

Perform upgrades in accordance with recommendations

Obtain familiarity with energy auditing and upgrades

Additional work in upgrades and/or auditing

Recognized as auditing and upgrades leader

Table 4: Recommendations based on logic with long term impacts on ECs in energy efficient market



research for ECs. By developing a business model, the research could assist other companies to grow their business by adapting business strategies similar to those in place in companies working in emerging markets with innovative project delivery methods.Another potential focus area should be to iden-tify and define successful performance contracting programs in electrical optimization upgrades; define the roles that economic develop agencies can play in matching financiers, ECs and clients; and identify the risks and rewards for third party financers and clients of electrical optimization/upgrades market. This effort would lead to the development of a replicable program to be taught to economic development or-ganizations and ECs.

A substantial hurdle for ECs as they assume more significant roles in projects may be identification of all risks and liabilities of those roles and ensur-ing they are accounted for in the contract. Research to identify these risks and liabilities and develop methods by which ECs can protect themselves may be very useful. The result of this research would be standardized contracts for several types of projects (e.g. optimization upgrades, renewable energy gen-eration installations) and project delivery methods.As renewable energy projects continue to increase, more and more ECs are likely to assume the role of prime contractor. In these projects, the ECs are likely to have subcontractors working under them. Pos-sible sub-contractors include: mechanical, plumbing, erection, energy auditing, and testing and calibration. The result of this research would be recommenda-tions for acting as the prime contractor and a guide-book for ECs assuming this role.

With the growing movement toward sustainability and reduced carbon emissions, ECs have the oppor-tunity to expand their scopes of services, products and technologies used and position themselves as leaders in energy efficiency. This paper was com-piled to assist ECs capitalize on emerging markets in energy efficient construction and renewable energy generation through the implementation of innovative

project delivery methods.

The study interviews showed that building integrated renewable energy systems, energy optimizations and upgrades, and energy assessment and audits are becoming a large market focus for ECs. One of the important lessons learned of this study is that the ECs has to pay more attention on what the used project delivery methods is these emerging energy efficient projects. ECs should stress to the owners that design-build and design-assist type of project delivery methods that enable early involvement of ECs in the process would be the more powerful for better project outcomes such as energy performance, cost, schedule, and overall quality. ECs can also be more useful partners in these processes. By heeding the strategies and recommendations presented in this paper, ECs can take advantage of their unique posi-tion to capitalize on the emerging energy efficient markets.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study was conducted with the ELECTRI In-ternational Early Career Award funds. We’d like to thank the National Electrical Contractors Associa-tion, ELECTRI Taskforce Members, and all of the electrical contractors that offered significant amounts of time to this research; without their participation this research would not have been possible.



REFERENCES

Abdulrahman, K. (2008). “Role of Electrical Con-tractors on LEED Projects with Focus on Commis-sioning”. Graduate Program in Construction Man-agement Thesis, Michigan State University.

“ASHRAE Green guide: The Design, Construction, and Operation of Sustainable Buildings” (2005). (Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrig-eration, and Air-conditioning, 2005).

California Energy Commission (CEC A) Regulations & Standards (2008). “2008 Building Energy Effi-ciency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings” (CEC A), December 2008.

Dey, P.K., (2004). “Selection and Application of Risk Management Tools and Techniques for Build-Operate-Transfer Projects”, Industrial Management and Data Systems 104(4): 334-346

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989). “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Manage-ment Review 14.4 (1989): 532-55.

Forbes, (2008). “Build-Operate Transfer Contracts”, Retrieved in October, 2008.<http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/botcontract.asp>

Ireland, B. (2007) “The Design Burden” Electrical Construction & Maintenance Retrieved in November 04, 2008.<http://ecmweb.com/mag/electric_design_burden/>

Kibert, C. J. (2005). “Sustainable Construction”, New Jersey, John Wiley&Sons, Inc.

Konchar, M. and Sanvido, V. (1998). “Comparison of U.S. Project Delivery Systems”. Journal of Con-struction Engineering and Management, American Society of Civil Engineers 124(6), 435-444

Lane, K. (2009). “LEED® and the Electrical Con-tractor” Retrieved in April 13, 2009. <http://ecmweb.com/mag/electric_leed_electrical_contractor/>.

Maynard, Nigel F. (2009). “Government Releases Energy Star Guidelines for Water Heaters.” Builder 23 May 2008. Retrieved in April 10, 2009. <http://www.builderonline.com/green-building/government-releases-energy-star-guidelines-for-water-heaters.aspx>.

McGraw Hill Construction (MGHC) (2007). “Greening of Corporate America Smart Market Re-port” 2007.

Molenaar, K.R., Songer, A.D., Barash, M., (1999) “Public-Sector Design/Build Evolution and Per-formance”, Journal of Management in Engineering March/April 1999: 54-62.

National Council for Public-Private Partnerships (NCPPP) (2008). “Public-Private Partnerships Defined” Retrieved in November 13, 2008. <http://ncppp.org/howpart/index.shtml#define>

National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA), (2006). “Guide to commissioning Lighting Controls” April 13, 2009 http://www.electricaldesignlibrary.com.

NECA, (2008a). “Taking a Building Offline – Your Options”. Retrieved in April 13, 2009 <http://www.electricaldesignlibrary.com>.

NECA, (2008b). “Lighting Retrofits Are Now A ‘Brighter Idea”. Retrieved in April 13, 2009 <http://www.electricaldesignlibrary.com>.

Pace, C. B., and Prachi P. (2007). “The Progress of Wind Generation Systems” ELECTRI International Report.

Patel, M. R. (2007). Wind and Solar Power Systems: Design, Analysis and Operation. CRC Press.



Pulaski, M., Pohlman, T., Horman, M., and Riley, D. (2003). “Synergies between sustainable design and constructability at the Pentagon.” ASCE Con-struction Research Congress (CRC), March 18–20, Honolulu, ASCE, Reston, Va.

Riley, D. (2003). “Synergies between sustainable design and constructability at the Pentagon.” ASCE Construction Research Congress (CRC), March 18–20, Honolulu, ASCE, Reston, Va.

Riley, D., Horman, M. and Park, J. (2007) “Emerg-ing Green Markets: Strategies for Electrical Con-tractors on LEED® and Green Building Projects” ELECTRI International Project Report, Penn State University, PA. 2007.

Syal, M., Mago, S. and Moody, D. (2007). Impact of LEED-NC projects on constructors. Forum paper, Journal of Architectural Engineering, 13(4), 174-179 (December 2007).

Trieb, F, O Langiss, and H Klaiss (1997). “Solar Electricity Generation: A Comparative View of Technologies, Cost and Environmental Impact.” Solar World Congress 59.3 (1997): 88-89.

United States Green Building Council (USGBC) (2009).“Green Building Facts” (Retreived in April, 2009).<http://www.usgbc.org/News/USGBCInTheNews-Details.aspx?ID=3847>

27

Environmental Laws in the United States and India Related to the Sustainable Built Environment

Gayatri Kumar, Matt Syal, Ph.D and Eric Strauss

ABSTRACT: The Brundtland Report, also known as “Our Common Future” report, was released by the World Commis-sion on Environment and Development in 1987. Shortly thereafter, many countries started to focus on sustainable develop-ment. One of the areas within the overall sustainability that has received high level of emphasis during the last 10-15 years is the sustainable built environment or green buildings. The United States and India are two such countries, one from the developed world and the other from the rapidly developing group, who are strongly promoting sustainable built environ-ment. The main goal of this paper is to identify the environmental laws in the United States and India related to sustainable development with focus on green buildings. It further highlights the major features of the U.S. and the Indian legal systems related to the sustainable built environment. In addition, this research describes various governmental and private initiatives related to the promotion of green buildings in these two countries.

Key Words:sustainable, environmental, law, United States, India

INTRODUCTION

Over the years, many countries and international organizations have taken steps to curb the use of dif-ferent forms of energy and prevent pollution in order to promote and foster development that is sustainable and has a positive social, economic and environmental impact. Before sustainable development was defined in its present form, initiatives such as the Intergovern-mental Conference for Rational Use and Conservation of the Biosphere by the United Nations’ Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the United Nations’ Conference on Human Environment and its Stockholm Declaration of 1972; and the Or-ganization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) embargo were the major milestones that led to the awareness of sustainability. In 1987, the World Com-

mission on Environment and Development formed a task force headed by Gro Harlem Brundtland to fashion a global agenda for change. This task force published the Brundtland Report, also known as “Our Common Future” (Brundtland 1987). This report de-fined Sustainable Development as the means to satisfy the needs of present generations without compromis-ing the resources of future generations. It influenced many countries in taking a proactive role in develop-ing sustainability as part of their national policy. Over the last two decades, many countries started to focus on sustainable development. One of the areas within the overall sustainable development arena that has received high emphasis during the last 10-15 years is sustainable built environment or green buildings. The United States and India are two such countries, one from the developed world and the other from the rapidly developing group, who are strongly promoting sustainable built environment. In order to understand the concept and need for green buildings at the global level, it is pertinent to understand the evolution and


GAYATRI KUMAR, Former Visiting Scholar, Construction Management, School of Planning, Design and Construction, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI; and Law Student, National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata, India. Email: [email protected]

MATT SYAL, Ph.D, Professor, Construction Management, School of Planning, Design and Construction, Michigan State Univer-sity, East Lansing, MI. Email: [email protected] (Corresponding Author) ERIC STRAUSS, Ph.D Candidate, Professor, Urban and Regional Planning, School of Planning, Design and Construction, Michi-gan State University, East Lansing, MI. Email: [email protected]


28 Environmental Laws in the United States and India Related to the Sustainable Built Environment

adoption of sustainable development in both, United States and India. In the United States , this emphasis was partly due to the realization that buildings are responsible for 39% of the energy, 71% of the electricity and 12% of the water consumed, as well as for 39% of CO2 emissions and 65% of the waste produced (USGBC 2009). The green building movement in the United States became organized with the formation of the U.S. Green Building Council in the mid 1990’s and its subsequent release of the green building rating system known as the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®). LEED® is a voluntary standard and has emerged as the widely accepted green building rating system in the United States (Syal et al. 2007). Similarly, two green building rating systems: LEED-India and the Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA) were also introduced in India within the last decade (GRIHA 2009, IGBC 2009).

The main goal of this paper is to identify the environmental laws in the United States and India related to sustainable development with focus on green buildings. It further highlights the major features of the United States and Indian legal systems related to the sustainable built environment. In addition, this research describes various governmental and private initiatives related to the promotion of green buildings in these two countries.

Environmental Laws and the United States Government

In 1969, the United States government enacted the National Environmental Policy Act and subsequently in 1970, the U.S. Congress established the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) for protecting and improving the environment. The EPA has the authority to implement environmental regulations and standards. In addition, it has broad powers to prohibit or stop construction projects that impact water quality or have other unacceptable environmental consequences. As a practical matter, the EPA has delegated this authority to state

environmental agencies which, in addition to having delegated federal power, also exercises additional state power to regulate the environment (Sweet and Schneier 2004).

The U.S. Congress passed the Pollution Prevention Act in 1990 (42 USC S 13101), which formalized society’s desire for a more environmentally conscious business community. In accordance with this Act, various government agencies have immense control over environmental decisions including broad powers to halt construction or impose restriction on construction to protect the environment. In 1993, President Clinton established the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). In his address, President Clinton stated that “Every nation faces a challenge to identify and implement policies that will meet the needs of the present without compromising the future” (EPA 2009). In addition, the definition of sustainable development as provided in the Brundtland report has been incorporated by various U.S. agencies and departments in their policies. These above-noted developments point toward sustainable development related activities at the federal government level. However, there is no legislation dealing specifically and solely with sustainable development in the United States.

Environmental Laws and the Indian Government

The Indian Department of Science and Technology formed the National Council for Environmental Policy and Planning, which in 1985, evolved into the Ministry of Environment and Forests. In 1986, the Indian government agreed to the United Nations’ Conference on the Human Environment at Stockholm and enacted the Environment Protection Act (Kumar 2009). The definition of sustainable development was incorporated in the preamble of the Environment Protection Act. The government further amended the Constitution of India and inserted two new Articles through the 42nd amendment. These were Articles 48A and 51A (g). Article 48A


Gayatri Kumar , Matt Syal, Ph.D, and Eric Strauss 29

deals with the responsibility of the government and its agencies to protect the environment as a directive principle of state policy, whereas, Article 51A (g) deals with the fundamental duty of the citizen to protect and improve the environment (Constitution of India 1950). The judiciary has had a very strong role to play in promoting and enforcing the concept of sustainable development. It has ruled consistently, through a number of landmark judgments, that sustainable development, along with its various principles, is an integral part of the law of the land and must be upheld and enforced rigorously (Constitution of India 1950).

SUSTINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN THE UNITED STATES

Before discussing the environmental laws of the United States and India, it is pertinent to study the basic structure of both legal systems. The fundamental source of law in most legal systems is the Constitution. The Constitution establishes the government and outlines what it can and cannot do. The other sources of law in a government are the branches of the government and the administrative agencies (White 2008). In the United States and in most legal systems around the world, the structure of the legal system flows from higher to lower where the higher law controls and modifies the lower law. The highest law in the United States is the Constitution and the constitutional law. The Constitution outlines the form and operation of the government, establishes legal principles and protects fundamental rights. Other levels of law include executive orders, statues, regulations, and case laws (White 2008).

In the United States, there are several federal laws that exist for larger environmental issues such as waste management, water pollution, etc. However, there are no laws except for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that specifically deal with sustainable built environment or design and construction of green buildings. The U.S. Congress, at its 110th session, introduced a bill titled “High Performance Green Building Act 2007” but that bill was not passed (Boxer

2007). The purpose of the Act was to promote the use of high performance green buildings. The scope of the above mentioned Act was limited to government buildings which included school buildings. The green building standard proposed to be followed under the Act was left to the discretion of the General Services Administration (GSA). Currently, the green building standard followed by the GSA is the LEED rating system (Boxer 2007).

There are a number of key federal agencies in addition to GSA which are involved in the move towards green buildings. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), and the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) have taken significant steps towards adopting and promoting green buildings. However, their efforts have focused mainly on government buildings and not on private companies and developers (Payne 2005).

There are a few federal laws that deal with sustainable green buildings, specifically in the governmental sector. For instance, Section 109 of the Energy Policy Act 2005 states that “sustainable design principles are to be applied to the location, design, and construction of all new and replacement buildings” (Payne 2005). However, the scope of the law is limited to federal buildings. There are also various state and local laws that deal with high performance green buildings and other laws for sustainable construction in government buildings. As mentioned earlier, certain states have also enacted laws which provide incentives to developers of green buildings, whether public or private, in direct and indirect forms.

In the United States, there is primacy of states to enact their own laws (Riker 2008). Various laws being debated and/or enacted at the State level fall in two categories. The first is where laws encourage private entities to construct high performance green buildings by providing different forms of incentives and the second is where the law requires and forces private entities to comply with green building standards. Several state and local governments have enacted laws



and policies to promote sustainable built environment. Various other states and cities have created laws which encourage green construction for both private and state buildings by providing incentives and benefits. For instance, the State of New York has a green building tax credit whereas other states provide incentives to developers for constructing green buildings or buildings that have been certified through a green building standard (Sussman 2008).

Private companies are a significant factor in the move for sustainable green buildings because of the perception that they are mostly responsible for harming the environment through their unsustainable building and business practices (Lehner 2008). Thus, there seems to be a need for attracting and incentivizing such companies into supporting green building initiatives.

Most federal, state and local laws offer tax incentives for sustainable technology, such as the incorporation of solar and geothermal energy in buildings but not for the purpose of constructing green buildings (King 2005). There are many federal, state and local laws that provide direct and indirect financial incentives for green buildings, which may be privately owned and constructed. These incentives can be in a direct or indirect form. The direct form of incentives can be enumerated as tax incentives, tax credits, grants and different forms of exemptions. Indirect incentives can be programs that allow businesses to save certain extra fees by constructing green buildings (King 2005). For example, the city of Portland, Oregon, has proposed a “feebate” system which is a market based instrument that requires a fee for conventional construction but provides a waiver option for moderate green improvements, and offers a reward for high performance green building projects (Anderson 2008, EDAW 2008).

Direct incentives such as a green building tax credit, as the case in New York (Payne 2005) enable developers and owners to ensure that their construction is sustainable and satisfies green building standards. However, a key perspective to constructing such a building is whether it will be economically feasible

for a developer. Developers argue that following green building guidelines for construction increases initial costs without providing them any substantial returns on the investment made in the construction of a green building (Riker 2008). Supporters of tax credits argue that the returns are in the form of a better and improved environment and would ensure a more sustainable future for coming generations. They may also contend that it builds a marketing advantage as a green building company and it will encourage and attract consumers in the long run. These indirect and underlying incentives may not always appeal to a typical commercial developer due to the cost-benefit focus in the shortterm. Thus, steps have been taken by various states to entice developers by providing them with tax credits and exemptions on achieving some level of green building rating enabling them to obtain a return and balance cost on such investments. This aspect has become a significant part of the process of turning green by encouraging companies to build sustainably (Riker 2008).

SUSTINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT AND THE LEGAL SYSTEM IN INDIA

The legal system in India is structured similar to that of the United States. The fundamental source of law in India is the Indian Constitution. It declares India to be a socialist, secular, democratic republic having a quasi-federal structure. All laws in India are grouped as civil and criminal laws. The Supreme Court (at the national level) and the High Courts (at the State level) are known as “Higher Judiciary” or “Union Judiciary”. The other courts are known as “Subordinate courts” or “State judiciary”. Besides these, special courts and tribunals are set up for specific purposes (Vagadia 2007).

There are a number of federal organizations and agencies dealing with environmental and sustainable development in India such as the Ministry of Environment and Forests (responsible for the implementation of the environmental programs), the Department of Science and Technology (responsible for conducting research and making recommendations



to the government), the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (responsible for exploring and promoting renewable energy), and the Central and State Pollution Control Boards (responsible for enforcing the environmental laws). Non-profit or non-government organizations (NGOs) also play a key role in mobilizing the community and the government in various matters including sustainable development and environmental protection (Jain 2003, Verma 2007).

There are several national laws in India that deal with protection of the environment. The Environment Protection Act of 1986 is a result of India’s obligation to enforce international law and incorporate sustainable development in the country. The level of enforcement in India with respect to environmental standards is that very stringent and mandatory requirements exist in various laws and codes for compliance by companies, factories and other institutions. This can be observed through existing laws and codes for buildings and pollution control already in place that determine certain standards for all buildings, whether public or private.

The National Building Code of India 2005 is a comprehensive code and a national instrument that provides guidelines for regulating building design and construction activities across the country. The Code was developed by the Bureau of Indian Standards, a government body, thus giving the code regulatory and State backing (BIS 2005). It has also incorporated various sustainable practices, such as rainwater harvesting, solid waste management and use of new and innovative materials and technologies (Verma 2007). In addition, the Bureau of Energy Efficiency issued an Energy Conservation Building Code in 2007, which set minimum energy efficiency standards for design and construction. Under the Energy Conservation Act 2001, state governments can direct both public and private companies to comply with the energy code (Bassi 2009).

The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) along with the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) have introduced a green building rating

system called GRIHA (Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment). GRIHA is a voluntary rating tool that helps assess the performance of a building against certain nationally acceptable benchmarks (GRIHA 2009). Although, GRIHA has been adopted by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) as guidelines for green buildings, it does not have legal backing or sanction for enforcement. GRIHA has derived most of its guidelines through useful inputs from the mandatory building and energy codes developed by various government agencies including the Bureau of Energy Efficiency, the Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources, the Ministry of Environment and Forests, and the Bureau of Indian Standards (GRIHA 2009).

Another voluntary green building standard, LEED-India was formulated by the Indian Green Building Council (IGBC) based on the LEED guidelines in the United States. In order to maintain a legally viable green building standard, the IGBC also incorporated already existing national codes on building and energy (CII 2009, IGBC 2009).

Therefore, LEED-India and GRIHA guidelines are comprehensive rating systems that follow government recommended and mandatory standards. This aspect of the green building guidelines diminishes the need to make LEED and GRIHA mandatory as compliance is already required by the National codes for buildings and for energy efficiency. Thus, green ratings may be kept voluntary in India since the certification will only amount to a reinforcement of the fact that the building has conformed to building laws and codes.

OVERVIEW OF THE LAWS RELATED TO SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN INDIA

The nature of the market in the United States is a capitalist whereas in India the market is a growing mixture of capitalist, socialist and communist nature with rapid industrialization. Furthermore, the LEED rating systems in India as well as in the United States are voluntary and driven by market forces. LEED in



the United States has been developed by the USGBC through consultation of a large group of architects, engineers, etc. whereas in India the IGBC has had to formulate LEED-India on the basis of the existing mandatory codes and laws relating to building design and construction practices. The overall structure of the federal-state or union-state division system is similar with smaller differences at the local and state levels which is a result of the difference in the respective markets, economies, history and culture of the two countries. Table 1 summarizes major aspects of the laws and their enforcement in both countries.

The United States’ national policies on many issues have been laissez faire or government hands off. Minimal government intervention especially in business affairs traditionally has been seen as desirable (Kubasek and Silverman 2000). Owing to the fact that the United States is an industrialized nation and is a market driven capitalist economy, the suggested form of enforcement would be one that encourages rather than forces companies to adhere to green building standards and guidelines. This may be done through a number of incentives and/or marketing programs that cause companies to see it as a profit rather than cost of complying with the green rating systems. However, from a public perspective, certain minimum mandatory green building guidelines should be established by the local governments.

India is an economy regulated by a public welfare leaning government structure where social justice and equality are a priority. Furthermore, bearing in mind the nature of the rapid industrializing society, it may be necessary in the initial stages to have a mandatory green building rating system that requires companies, whether private or public, to conform to minimum green building standards in order to foster sustainable development and protect the environment. With regard to introducing incentives in the Indian system (Bassi 2009), one may rely on the strategy applied by the United States in the 1990’s. The United States’ environmental policy in the 1990’s appeared to be directed toward a greater use of market forces. The proponents of this system insisted that it was a way of using market forces to encourage pollution prevention.

For instance, consumers are more likely to recycle when there is a financial incentive to do so. The aim of such a strategy is to make the polluter pay, and thus, theoretically encourage reduction in pollution in order to avoid costs (Kubasek and Silverman 2000).

OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Green building standards, such as LEED in the United States, are based on voluntary and market driven concepts. Therefore, requiring mandatory compliance with these standards may create problems. Companies may have to incur increased costs in order to comply with federal and state requirements besides complying with the costs associated with achieving LEED or other green building certification. In addition, a situation may arise where a building may not be able to achieve the desired certification. This may result in litigations for breach of contract against the designers and contractors by the developers/owners/investors. Currently, there are no decided cases on matters related to green buildings, but in the future, such cases will form a body of law to determine how such breaches will be dealt with. One key question that may arise will be whether such a breach of contract is a material breach and thus violates the terms of the contract.

The nature of the Indian government and its bodies is that of a Welfare State, where the government has a patriarchal nature and policies are aimed at incorporating social justice and equality. During the initial years of independence, concern for the free market was not an overriding concept for India’s federal government. This may be observed from the number of existing mandatory environmental and sustainability laws and codes in the country. However, over the last 20-30 years, the Indian economy has developed rapidly and has changed into a mixture of capitalist, socialist and communist structure where the State encourages privatization and decentralization. Although, LEED-India is a market driven concept and a voluntary guideline, it has been readily accepted by many state and national government agencies (IGBC 2009).



Table 1: Major Aspects of the U.S. and Indian Legal Systems Related to the Sustainable Built Environment

8

Scope USA India

Economy Capitalist Mix of Capitalist, Socialist, and Communist

LEED Voluntary Market driven Developed by USGBC

through consultation with various interested parties

Voluntary Market Driven Developed by IGBC on the

basis of already existing mandatory building laws and codes

Law U.S. Constitution Federal Laws State Laws Local regulations, codes,

etc.

Indian Constitution National Laws State Laws By-Laws, rules, regulations,

codes Suggested Forms of Enforcement

Voluntary due to nature of market

Incentive programs expanded to all states

Adoption of green building rating systems by states for reference in codes and regulations

Voluntary due to existing enforcement mechanisms

Incentives to be introduced into the legal system

Adoption of rating systems with legal sanction



OCTOBER 2010 — Volume 33, Number 4

Similarly, the GRIHA rating system has also been adopted by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy and has also been developed with the intent to be a voluntary concept (GRIHA 2009). Even though the GRIHA rating system has been developed in a joint initiative with the Ministry and has been adopted by the same, it is a set of voluntary guidelines, which does not have any legal backing or force of law to ensure compliance (Bassi 2009). The requirement for making green building guidelines in India mandatory may be futile as these guidelines are based on standards established by central laws and codes. Mandating these guidelines may lead to a number of problems. Requiring developers to comply with both building codes and permit processes along with green building guidelines may increase the compliance cost incurred by developers since there are fees associated with both the permit and green ratingcertification processes. This impact however may be reduced by introducing incentives and benefits (Sasi 2008) which could provide cost savings that would enable developers to maintain their financial position. Another problem that could occur by mandating green building requirements would be if a building was unable to achieve the desired certification. What would a builder do with a building if he was unable to achieve mandatory certification? Does one deconstruct the building or renovate it for it to achieve the required standard? Deconstruction and/or renovation of such a building would cause expending more resources and energy just to achieve a certification level. Another future problem area, similar to the one in the United States, may be related to contractual obligations. A situation may arise where the contractor and owner have entered into a development contract wherein the contractor promises to construct the building to particular certification level and aid in achieving the same. If the building is unable to achieve the agreed level of certification, the developer may sue the contractor for breach of contract (White 2007).

The discussion in earlier sections can lead to the conclusion that green building guidelines must be formulated and enforced according to the nature

of the system in which they are being applied. In the United States, it may be recommended that the rating systems remain voluntary, whereas in India, the developers may be required to adhere to certain minimum green building standards. The voluntary strategies, similar to those propagated in the United States in the 1990’s to encourage businesses to reduce pollution with programs such as Waste Wise, Climate Wise, Green Lights, etc. (Kubasek and Silverman 2000), can also serve as a model for India. These programs encourage partnerships with the regulated community as well as other organizations to demonstrate environmental leadership.

Furthermore, the concept of tax incentives and other benefits which help the financial position of an investing developer company must be introduced into the existing system and applied in India. This must be done in order to encourage and ensure compliance with LEED-India guidelines since the basis of LEED-India is existing mandatory codes and regulations of the government. This in turn will enable compliance not only with certification but also with mandatory standards. Also, it is important and recommended that compliance costs be decreased in order to encourage companies to adhere not only to mandatory standards but also the LEED or GRIHA requirements.

Such benefits and cost reduction will enable and encourage many more developers to follow this movement and try to achieve higher LEED-credits in the United States. In India, such a system of increased benefits and lower costs will ensure that companies are not required to pay double compliance fees for both LEED certification and compliance with national codes and regulations. Furthermore, such incentives will serve a greater good as it will encourage builders to achieve LEED certification leading to an increase in the construction of sustainable and green buildings in India.



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Global and Area Thematic Initiatives (GATI) of the Center of Advanced Study of the International Development (CASID) at Michigan State University (MSU) with funds from the U.S. Department of Education and the MSU’s Office of the Provost.

REFERENCES

Anderson, S. (2008). Office of Sustainable Development, City of Portland Proposed High Performance Green Building Policy, <http://www.portlandonline.com/bps/index.cfm?c=45879&a=220879>, (June 30, 2009).

ASTM. (2005). E2114 Standard Terminology for Sustainability Relative to the Performance of Buildings, E2114 – 05a.

Bassi, S. (2009). Bureau of Energy Efficiency and Energy Conservation Building Code: An Overview, < www.hareda.gov.in/SHABNAM.ppt>, (June 30 2009).

Boxer, B. (2007). High Performance Green Buildings Act of 2007, 110th Congress, www.senate.gov (June 30, 2009).

Brundtland, H. (1987), “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future”, <http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm>, (June 30, 2009).

Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (2005). National Building Code of India, <http://www.bis.org.in/sf/nbc.htm>, (June 30, 2009).

Confederation of Indian Industry (CII). (2009).

Green Building Movement in India – Catalysts and Course, <http://www.igbc.in:9080/site/igbc/publication.jsp>, (June 30, 2009).

Constitution of India (1950). <India.gov.in/govt/constitution_India.php> (June 30, 2009).

EDAW and AECOM. (2008). Case Study: City of Portland Green Building Feebate,

<https://www.seattle.gov/environment/documents/GBTF_%20Portland_Feebate_Case_Study.pdf>, (June 30, 2009).

Eisenberg, D. and Yost, P. (2001). Sustainability and Building Codes, Environmental Building News, 10:9

Environment Protection Agency (EPA) (2009) “History of Sustainable Development”, <http://yosemite.epa.gov/r10/oi.nsf/8bb15fe43a5fb81788256b58005ff079/398761d6c3c7184988256fc40078499b!OpenDocument>, (June 30, 2009).

GRIHA (2009). GRIHA Guidelines <http://www.teriin.org/griha/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14>, (June 30, 2009).

IGBC (2009). Indian Green Building Council: LEED-India <www.igbc.in> (June 30, 2009).

International Institute for Sustainable Development. (2006). “The Sustainable Development Timeline”, <http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2006/sd_timeline_2006.pdf>, (June 30, 2009).

Jain, M.P. (2003). Indian Constitutional Law, Wadhwa Book Company, Nagpur, India.

Kibert, C. and Groskopf, K. (2007-2008). Envisioning Next Generation Green Buildings, 23 J. Land Use and Envtl. Law 145 2007-2008.



King, N. and King, B. (2005). Creating Incentives for Sustainable Buildings: A Comparative Law Approach featuring the United States and the European Union, 23, Va Envtl. L.J. 398 2004 – 2005.

Kubasek, N. and Silverman, G. (2000). Environmental Law, Prentice Hall, NJ.

Kumar, G., Ram Mohan, M. and Shiju, M. (2009). “The Law on Sustainable Development in India: A Review of Judicial and Legislative Initiatives”, Somayaji, Sakarama & Ganesh Somayaji (Editors), Environmental Concerns and Sustainable Development – Some Perspectives from India TERI, New Delhi

Lehner, P. (2008). Changing Markets to Address Climate Change, 35 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 395 2008.

Payne, C. and Dyer, B. (2005). Federal Participation in LEED in 2005, <http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp;jsessionid=AA64E2A86207DB2BC40E11BE9E3AA34B?purl=/883112-MWfrFe/>, (June 30, 2009).

Potbhare, V, Syal, M., and Korkmaz, S. (2009). “Adoption of Green Building Guidelines in Developing Countries Based on U.S. and India Experiences, Journal of Green Building, 4(2), 158-174.

Potbhare, V. Syal, M., Khalfan, M., Arif, M. and Egbu, C. (2009). “Emergence of Green Building Guidelines in Developed Countries and their Impact on India,” Journal of Engineering Design and Technology, Special issue on Green Construction, 7(1), 99-121.

Riker, J. (2008). Los Angeles Lawyer, Green Building Requirements Must Strike a Balance between Market Economics and Social Needs, 30-JAN L.A. Law. 27.

Sussman, E. (2008). Reshaping Municipal and County Laws to Foster Green Building, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 16 N.Y.U. Envtl. L.J. 1 2008.

Sweet, J. and Schneier, M. (2004). Legal Aspects of Architecture, Engineering and the Construction Process, Thomson Learning, Toronto, Canada.

Syal, M., Mago, S. and Moody, D. (2007). “Impact of LEED®-NC Projects on Constructors,” Forum Paper, ASCE Journal of Architectural Engineering, 13(4), 174-179.

USGBC (2009). U.S. Green Building Council: LEED, <www.usgbc.org/leed> (June 30, 2009).

Vagadia, B. (2007)., Outsourcing to India - A Legal Handbook, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Verma, A. (2007). Judicial Accountability, grievances against judiciary and ombudsman: A source of law, <http://ssrn.com/abstract=998208>, (June 30, 2009).

White, N. (2008). Construction Law for Managers, Architects, and Engineers, Thomson Delmar Learning.

37

A New Post-Tensioned Cable Chair: An Industry Evaluation

C. Ben Farrow and Eric Wetzel

ABSTRACT: Accurate positioning of post-tension tendons within a concrete slab is critical to the structural integrity of the structural system. Industry professionals have indicated that existing chairs for post-tensioned tendons often shift during concrete placement and cannot be located easily once the concrete has cured. In response, a new post-tensioned cable chair has been developed. The new chair has a sturdy, adjustable base with a pinned connection and a clamping device to hold the tendons in place. The chair has arrows at the base which allow locating the tendons after the concrete has cured. The research performed on the proposed chair had two major purposes. First, the research sought to determine if construction professionals were dissatisfied with the current method for placing and locat-ing post-tension tendons in a slab. Second, the research sought to determine if the new post-tension cable chair is viable and efficient for placing and locating the tendons in the slab. The study used focus groups of construction professionals to determine results. Focus groups consisted of engineers, post-tension experts, “rodbusters”, project managers and superintendents. The focus groups confirmed the perceived need for an improved post-tension chair. The post-tensioned chair that was developed at Au-burn University appears to address some of the current industry concerns. Focus groups noted positive elements of the chair such as the tendon clamp and adjustable height and suggested improvements for the pinned connection and base.

Key Words:Post-tension cables, Post-tension chair, Post-tensioned slab

INTRODUCTION

Concrete has a relatively high compressive strength with minimal tensile strength (Choi & Yuan, 2004). Since concrete is weak in tension, cracks may develop whenever load induces tensile stresses in concrete. In reinforced concrete, steel bars (rebar) are placed in the concrete in such a way that the tension developed after the concrete cracks may be developed in the reinforc-ing bars. To design a concrete member to oppose tensile forces, a significant amount of rebar is needed. In an effort to reduce the amount of steel required in a concrete member, steel cables may be placed

inside the concrete and tensioned prior to removal of the formwork. Known as post-tensioning, these cables place the surrounding concrete in compression throughout the member. As formwork is removed, and the concrete supports its own weight, the stresses in the concrete member remain in compression or induce only mild tensile stresses. Developed in the early 1960s, post- tensioning can be used to reduce the amount of conventional reinforcing bars needed to prevent tensile failure (Mehta, Scarborough, & Arm-priest, 2008).

Post-tensioning a concrete member requires steel ca-bles (known as tendons), an anchor point, rebar chairs, rebar ties and a hydraulic jack (Cement, 2008). The tendons are installed at discrete heights throughout the structural member based on tendon profiles established

OCTOBER 2010 Volume 33, Number 4The American Institute of Constructors | 700 N. Fairfax St., Suite 510 | Alexandria, VA 22314 | Tel: 703.683.4999 | www.professionalconstructor.org

C. BEN FARROW is a professor at Auburn University.

ERIC WETZEL is a professor at Auburn University.


38 A New Post-Tensioned Cable Chair: An Industry Evaluation

by the designers. In order to achieve the discrete heights of tendons, current practice sets the cables on top of a series of plastic or wire rebar chairs varying in height. These chairs have four legs and either a small round platform or small finger-like clamps to hold the bar into position and are made with either plastic or steel (Wood, 2006). A piece of support-ive rebar is placed on the chair perpendicular to the tendon to prevent the chair from tipping over. The tendon, chair and perpendicular rebar are tied togeth-er using rebar ties as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Current method of PT support.

The tendons are positioned in a grid system through-out the formwork, and the concrete is poured. Once the concrete reaches 75% of its ultimate strength, a hydraulic jack is used to pull the tendons to ap-proximately 1.72* 108 N/m2 (25,000 psi). Once the appropriate strength is reached, the tendons are anchored at the edge of the slab, placing the concrete member in compression (MacGregor and Wight, 2005). Once cured, the post-tensioned cables are critical to the structural integrity of the building. If cut, cables may “release” adding tensile stress to concrete mem-bers and potentially “recoiling” in an abrupt and violent manner. Thus, coring of concrete on post-ten-sioned jobs is often not allowed or only allowed after

“x-raying” the slab and identifying the specific loca-tion of tendons. This places significant limitations on cutting or coring the slab after the concrete has set. When allowed, coring or cutting can add a potential extra expense as mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems may rely on coring of concrete during final installation of systems.

The use of post-tensioned (PT) cables has increased significantly as shown by the amount of post-ten-sioned cables sold. Since 1972, the tonnage of pos

tension cables sold has been on a steady increase and peaked in 2007, with an estimated 227,000 met-ric tons (250,000 tons) of tendons (Post-Tensioning Institute, 2007). Within the United States, the Southeast is the third largest consumer of post-tension cables with 16.7% of the market. The cen-tral portion of the United States is the largest con-sumer with 38.9% of the market. Since 1997, the greatest portion of

post-tensioning goes into buildings (46,000 metric tons (51,000 tons)) and slabs on grade (64,000 metric tons (70,000 tons)), with bridges only accounting for 3% of the post-tension projects in America (Post-Tensioning Institute, 2007). With a volume of 46,000 metric tons (51,000 tons), a chair every 6.1 meters (20 feet), supporting four cables, using 7.85 g/cm3 (490 lbs/ft3) for 12.7 cm (½”) diameter cable, it is estimated that each year United States contractors in-stall around two million rebar chairs for post-tension cable support.

The process of placing these tendons within the formwork has been mostly unchanged since its incep-tion (Post-Tension Slab, 2007). A group of industry professionals and faculty at Auburn University


C. Ben Farrow and Eric Wetzel 39

questioned whether this was the most efficient and cost effective method for supporting post-tension cables. The group recognized problems with the current chair and focused on current “high chairs” that are used to support post-tensioned cables in a two-way banded slab. The professional group recog-nized major problems with the current chair. First, the current chairs were not stable and could be inad-vertently pushed out of place by workers installing rebar or placing concrete. Second, if a need to core drill the PT slab developed, it was difficult to locate the PT tendons or even identify the PT cables among the reinforcing bar. Failure to properly locate the tendon could result in damage to the tendon during coring. Finally, current chairs are made in discrete heights requiring the chair supplier to stock many different size chairs at any point in time. The profes-sional group’s solution to the inefficient current mar-ket chair was to develop a new chair to remedy the perceived problems with the current market chair.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Past research in the area of post-tension cabling and rebar chair applications is extensive. Most of the antecedent research involving post-tensioning cables is based heavily on the strengths of the cable, design of the complete post-tension slab and layout of the post-tension cables (Schokker, 2002; Choi & Yuan, 2004; Concrete Construction Monthly, 2006). A substantial amount of research has investigated post-tensioned slabs as a whole. Bryan Allred has written articles for Structure Magazine, and JLC Online has done extensive research into post-tensioned slabs. Two of Alled’s articles “Common Post-tensioning & Construction Issues” and “Post-Tensioned Slabs” both lend insight to post-tensioned slabs as a unit (Allred, Post-Tensioned Slabs, 2004). Allred identi-fied issues that post-tension slabs encounter during installation and stressing of the tendons. One issue specifically referenced was chair layout. Beyond this research, data exists that addresses the impor-tance of accurate tendon placement or potential

placement errors that may be occurring in the field. Market evidence appears to support the theory that stability and accurate placement of cables is a con-cern within the industry. Products have been devel-oped that attempt to address these problems. One manufacturer has developed a product that can be used for both rebar and post-tension cables (Rob-erge, 2007). The product has a finger clamping sys-tem to hold the tendons in place. These fingers are designed to grasp the cables that run north-south and east-west to form a grid. These chairs are polymer based, sold at varying heights and are not adjustable(Figure 2).

Figure 2. Alternate chair (Roberge, 2007).

Other products have also attempted to address the issues of stability and final tendon location. One group designed a chair (United States patent number 6925771) made specifically for support of post-ten-sion cables (Figure 3) (Lee & Bennett, 2005). The chair was made from a polymeric plastic and also employs the use of fingers to grasp the PT cables. Lee’s and Bennett’s design employed a box shaped base that gave the chair more stability. Although this chair is designed specifically for PT cables, it still does not solve a lot of the problems identified above. It was not adjustable, nor does it address the issue of locating the chair after it is covered with concrete.



Applicable research in locating post-tension cables after the concrete has been poured has also been completed (Ground Penetrating Radar Systems, 2007). Using x-rays, specialized technicians can locate the cables within the matrices of rebar. How-ever, locating the tendons among the rebar can be a difficult task. The x-ray image is typically low qual-ity and even a veteran technician may not be able to clearly define a PT tendon from a typical piece of rebar. However, there has been very little research conducted specifically for the design/development of a post-tension cable chair (Bishop, 2008). The cur-rent patents of new chair products on the market are improvements made to a typical rebar chair, which include base adjustments, design of the legs, stability and a clasping mechanism (Sorkin, 1996; McPher-son & McDaniel, 2001).

When designing and developing a new post-tension cable chair, it is crucial to know and understand the rules and regulations surrounding post-tensioning. The Post-Tension Institute (PTI) serves as the trade organization for the industry and is recognized as a world-wide authority on post-tensioning. The Post-

Tension Institute is a non-profit organization for the advancement of post-tensioned, pre-stressed design and construction (Post-Tensioning Institute, 2007). PTI lends insight into rules and regulations (i.e. building codes) that a new post-tension cable chair design will have to meet. In addition, the United States government’s consulting office of facilities management has posted rules and regulations for post-tensioned slabs (United States (U.S.) Depart-ment of Veteran Affairs, 2006). The U.S. Depart-ment of Transportation has assembled a manual for post-tensioning bridges. The 172 page manual is specifically dedicated to the post-tensioning and grouting requirements of highway bridges (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2004). Neither of these post-tension manuals dictates detailed require-ments for chairs other than to require that the chairs stabilize the tendons during concrete placement (Post-Tensioning Institute, 2007; U.S. Department of Transportation, 2004).

THE NEW CHAIR-THE PT JAW

In 2007, the Building Science and Industrial Design faculty at Auburn University developed a new post-tension cable chair that will support the tendons at the high point of the slab. This new chair attempted to correct the problems perceived with the current market chair. The development of the new chair, called the PT Jaw, focused on three major issues po-tentially present with the current market chair. First, the new chair attempted to address the stability of the chair during concrete placement. Since a spe-cific height and horizontal location of each tendon is critical to the structural integrity of the building, the design sought to minimize the amount tendons move while they are being set and concrete poured. A wid-er and thicker base gives the PT Jaw more horizontal stability (Figure 4). The second issue addressed was the difficulty in locating the cables in the slab after the concrete has been poured. Once an elevated slab is poured

Figure 3. PT Chair (Lee & Bennett, 2005).



and the forms are stripped, it is not uncommon for plumbers and mechanical subcontractors to drill holes in the concrete to support piping or ducts from the bottom side of the slab. On occasion, these sub-contractors will accidentally drill into a post-tension cable and damage or break the cable. A damaged PT cable will need to be replaced and can cost $5,000 - $6,000 (Bishop, 2008). The PT Jaw has arrows located at the base which identify where the chairs are located within the slab and which direction the tendons are running. The arrows are for locating the tendons after the concrete has been poured (Figure 4). Locating the tendons works by nailing the arrow base into the formwork and leaving the embedded arrow base exposed on the underside of the slab. Currently, locating tendons in a concrete slab re-quires x-ray equipment and a professional to make the readings (Ground Penetrating Radar Systems, 2007).

Finally, the design attempted to address the fixed height for which current market products must be purchased. Rebar chair heights range from 88.9 cm to 254 cm (3-1/2 inches to 10 inches) and are purchased in 6.35 cm (quarter-inch) increments. To remedy this problem the PT Jaw employs an adjust-able base that can be set at 6.35 cm (quarter inch) increments to meet the specified heights.

All modifications appear to meet the requirements set forth by the Post-Tensioning Institute (Gupta, 2008). Figure 5 shows a comparison photo of com-monly used chairs as compared to the PT Jaw.

THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study was to explore the market potential of the PT Jaw. In this study, focus groups were used to get feedback from industrial profes-

Figure 4. Newly Developed PT Chair.

Typical plastic rebar chair Typical metal rebar chair Proposed PT cable chair (Rebar Pins and Rod Chairs, 2002-2008) (Dalco Industries, 2008)

Figure 5. A comparitive look at the current market chairs and the new design.



sionals on their personal opinions of the new chair. There were two major objectives for this study. The first was to determine if the professionals in the con-struction industry were unhappy or concerned with the current method for placing and locating post-ten-sion tendons in a concrete slab. The second was to determine if the post-tension cable chair that Auburn University developed was a viable and a more ef-ficient method for placing and locating post-tension tendons in a concrete slab. The results of this study could lead to the implementation of the PT Jaw or similar product into industry.

METHODOLOGY

This study tested the market demand of a new post-tension chair designed by Auburn University. The research used a qualitative approach employing focus groups to determine the market demand for the PT Jaw. The focus groups were conducted with in-dustry professionals throughout the Southeast United States. The Southeast was chosen because of the proximity to where the research is being conducted. Industry professionals were selected by the research-ers based on professional contacts in the cities surveyed, recommendations of specialty contractors within the post-tensioned industry, and an internet survey of suppliers, fabricators, and installers. These industry professionals covered a wide spectrum of construction specialties including project manag-ers, structural engineers, rodbusters, post- tension experts, rebar chair manufacturers, superintendents, estimators and project engineers. Each professional had prior knowledge of the current method for plac-ing and locating post-tension cables and was ex-posed to the new PT chair.

FOCUS GROUPS

Two focus groups were used to obtain the opin-ions of a diverse set of industry professionals. On Tuesday, September 30, 2008, a focus group was formed in Birmingham, Alabama, to discuss the PT Jaw. The meeting took place on September 30th,

2008, from 11:30 am to 1:30 pm. Attendees totaled 11 people and included general contractors, a “rod-buster” and a structural engineer. No suppliers were included in the Birmingham group primarily due to the size of the market in the Birmingham area. The second focus group convened in Atlanta, Georgia, on Tuesday, October 21, 2008. The Atlanta focus group was a larger group (19 attendees) with a greater spectrum of industry professionals including con-crete finishers and PT cable suppliers as well as the professions represented in Birmingham (2 structural engineers, 3 suppliers, 6 rod busters, and 8 general contractors). The focus group took place in the of-fice of a major southeastern construction firm skilled in PT work on October 21st, 2008, from 11:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. The meeting agenda was identical to the Birmingham focus group.

In total, 30 individuals who had extensive experi-ence on some aspect of the post-tensioned specifi-cation and installation process were involved with the focus groups. Various backgrounds including structural engineers, general contractors, tendon suppliers, “rodbusters” and cable manufacturers were included to represent some of the diverse needs of individuals within the post-tension installation environment. For example, structural engineers may be concerned more about making sure the cable is at the right height in the finished structure. General contractors may want a chair that does not “tip over” easily. Chair suppliers may want a cheaper product to maximize profit. The focus group approach using individuals with diverse backgrounds provided an at-mosphere where each of those items and the relative importance of those items could be conveyed and discussed between professions.

Both focus groups began with a formal introduction of all participating parties. A brief presentation of the newly proposed chair design was made to the focus group. The presentation reminded the industry professionals of the current method of placing PT cables as well as the features of the new chair. The focus group discussion began by passing around



the new chair and inviting conversation among the professional participants. The experts conversed amongst themselves for about 90 minutes discuss-ing the likes, dislikes and suggestions for the new design. The positives and negatives of existing market chairs were also discussed. The research team allowed conversation among the professionals to flow freely, only intervening when a lull in the conversation existed or the focus of the conversation began to shift. The researchers summarized quotes and themes from each focus group session.

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study focused on the current market chair as compared to the amenities that the new chair of-fers. The geographic area covered by the study was the Southeastern United States and therefore did not focus on any other climate, regional design or regional materials. The study only took into consid-eration the personal opinions of professionals who have been exposed to the current market chair and the new chair design.

DATA ANALYSIS AND PROCEDURES The industry professionals involved in the focus groups identified advantages and disadvantages. The researchers looked for trends and common points among the comments made by the participants.

RESULTS

To quantify the data by the focus groups, a chart was developed. The chart had six categories that attempted to answer the problem statement pro-posed for this research. The first category was titled “Demand / Impression” and used the survey to quantify the overall opinion of where the new chair design stood in the current market. The “Market” section referred to the area of construction that the new chair design would mostly apply based upon the focus group responses. “Cost” referred to the general opinion among the group of whether the new chair was cost effective. “Major Benefits, Major Problems, Additional Ideas” were a result of the

Issue Findings Quotes Demand/Impression New chair is an improvement

over current market approach “With the cost of steel rising at record paces, it would be good to have something that could replace what is being used today.”

Market 2-way banded post-tensioned slab Not for 1-way post-tensioned slabs

Cost Needs to be reduced Major Benefits Stability of chair

Ability to adjust chairs for multiple heights Arrows that show direction of tendons after concrete is placed

“Should be able to use for any height without multiple chairs on site”

Major Problems Pin connection is not strong enough Loose closing mechanism Need perpendicular rebar for stability

“There are areas that need to be looked at and addressed before putting the chair into production.”

Additional Ideas/Comments Devise chair for low point of post-tensioned slab

Table 1. Summary of Birmingham Focus Group Results

Table 1: Summary of Birmingham Focus Group Results



groups perception of the new chair. These categories quantified themes and suggestions of the majority. The findings based on the focus groups have been supplemented with specific quotes made by individ-uals during the focus group.

Results for the focus group held in Birmingham, Alabama, are shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows the results from the Atlanta, Georgia, focus group. These individual group results were then combined to establish overall outcomes on the six categories identified. While each city’s focus group had unique opinions on the new chair, both focus groups agreed

on several key points. Table 3 identifies those key issues. Based on the focus group comments, a subsequent chart was developed to demonstrate the findings of the study based on the professions of the participating individuals. Key responses and issues identified by specific professions present at the focus groups are shown in Table 4.

From both groups, the results are divided as positive and negative feedback, findings, recommendations, and author’s analysis.

Table 2. Summary of Atlanta Focus Group Results

Issue Findings Quotes

Demand/Impression New chair is an improvement

over current market approach

few changes-chair will

be useful in construction

Market 2-way banded post-tensioned

slab

Cost Cost is high but is justified

when trying to locate a tendon

post concrete placement

Major Benefits New design offers structural

stability

Less chair inventory is

required by supplier, which

drives down the cost to the

buyer

Reduces the amount of slab x-

rays

Clasp to hold tendons is great

approach

Anything that helps improve

quality assurance/quality

control and possibly improve

locating the tendon after the

fact is a help.

Major Problems Height adjustment is difficult

to get exact in the field

Need to minimize plastic to

drive down weight and costs

Arrow may cause aesthetic

problems in exposed ceiling

Cost may be an issue.

arrows not work out with

exposed ceilings on the job

Additional Ideas/Comments Devise new chair concept for

Add a rebar saddle

Use the clamp as a detachable

Revise legs to allow stabling

to table form



AUTHOR ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The research done on the new post-tension cable chair had two main purposes. The first was to deter-mine if the professionals in the construction industry are unhappy or concerned with the current method for placing and locating post-tension tendons in a concrete slab. After the focus groups, it has been determined that advancements to the current method would be welcomed by the construction industry. Representatives from multiple professions stated in various ways that they are concerned that final tendon locations once the concrete is cured are often not close to the originally intended tendon location. Contractors and engineers alike noted multiple jobs where many dollars were spent x-raying slabs to find tendons prior to core drilling slabs.

The second purpose was to determine if the post-ten-sion cable chair that Auburn University developed was a viable and more efficient method for placing and locating post-tension tendons in a concrete slab. It was concluded that the new chair was a viable so-lution but requires a few design improvements. The

modifications recommended by the industry profes-sionals became the main focus of the research team.

Positive Feedback on PT Jaw

The industry professionals found that being able to locate the chair after the pour using the arrows at the base was a major benefit. A significant portion of the individuals the research team had spoken to stated that they have had to locate a tendon after a concrete pour and that it is expensive and time consuming. By building the locating device into the chair, it would significantly cut down on the cost of multiple x-rays needed to locate the chairs. Some concern existed with the aesthetic look of the arrows on the underside of the slab when the slab served as the finished ceiling of a building.

Currently, the use of a rebar chair, rebar tie and a perpendicular support bar is the standard; however, this system is cumbersome and the stability is depen-dent on the individual tying the tendon to the chair. The industry professionals believed that the wider base on the new design would significantly help with the stability of the chair and potentially eliminate the

Table 3. Overall Focus Group Results

Issue Findings

Demand/Impression New chair is an improvement over current

market approach with issues to be resolved

Market 2-way banded post-tensioned slab

Cost Value add, but is it worth it

Major Benefits Locates cable

Improves stability

Limits supplier chair inventory

Reduces the number of slab x-rays

Major Problems Height adjustment is difficult to get exact in

field

Cost is high

Compression and strength of chair

questionable

Lateral chair stability without rebar is

questionable

Additional Ideas/Comments Develop a chair for low points in slab

Color code chair for different heights

Improve height adjustment mechanism

Add a rebar saddle

Use clasp for tendons by itself



Table 4. Findings by Profession of Respondent

Profession Findings

Engineer X-rays as currently done are hard to decipher.

Major concern that tendons currently shift

during concrete placement using existing

chairs.

Add a color coded base so that we will know

how far the tendon is from the bottom of the

slab.

overhead anchoring.

The bottom of the chair may conflict with the

bottom steel at columns.

There would be no additional costs for

installing the new chair.

The legs on the metal chairs cannot withstand

much compressive weight and fail when

stepped on.

The number of parts to the chair needs to be

minimal to make placing chairs economical.

Expressed concern about stability of cables

during placement with the existing approach.

General Contractor Cost of new chair may be too expensive.

The quality control of the cables would be

improved with the new chair.

The arrows would reduce the number of x-rays

but may be problematic in exposed ceilings.

The chair is easily visible and recognizable.

The location of the tendons is more important

than direction.

Tendon Supplier May need to add color coding system to

identify height adjustment.

Could be shipped assembled if given enough

lead time.

Less inventory is required with the adjustable

chair.

Concrete Finisher Stability of the chair needs to be confirmed.

The clasp may be the best part of the chair.



need for a costly support bar. Along with the stabil-ity of the chair, the stability of the tendons sitting on the chair can be an issue. “Tendon wash” is the term used when a PT cable slides off the support chair on which it is placed. Many participants commented that the clasping mechanism built into the chair would prevent this from happening and was perhaps one of the best features of the new chair.

The invitation extended to rebar chair suppliers to attend the focus groups yielded interesting cost saving results that the research team did not expect. In terms of cost, the new chair is a more expensive alternative to the current method; however, much of the research focus was to find “value added” sav-ings such as labor, productivity and minimizing the amount of necessary materials. Currently, rebar chairs at the high point are sold by heights and range from 88.9 cm to 254 cm (3-1/2” to 10”) at 6.35 cm (quarter inch) intervals. Much of the cost of rebar chairs comes from the suppliers having to carry a large quantity of multiple chair sizes. It was brought to the research teams’ attention that with the adjust-able height of the new chair design, a significant decrease in the amount of inventory that the supplier would have to carry would drive down the cost. The cost savings by minimizing supplier inventory was a strong example of a “value add” that the research team was striving to achieve.

Negative Feedback on PT Jaw

As the focus groups progressed, it was clear that the cost of the new chair was a major concern. Much of the focus group conversation was a debate of wheth-er the “value added” items outweighed the overall cost of the chair. At this point in the research, it is difficult to quantify the exact cost of the new chair because of the preliminary molding costs as well as design changes. Future studies of the proposed chair should quantify clearly the cost of the proposed chair so that industry representatives can respond with more complete information.

Many participants were concerned about the ability of existing chairs to withstand the weight of a large concrete finisher who stood on the chairs. Current chairs will bend or snap if stepped on by the con-crete finishers. To counter the compressive strength issue, the new chair design has a wider base and a stronger frame, but without having multiple chairs made of the hard plastic, testing has not been done and is currently inconclusive. Several participants commented that the “pin” was potentially problemat-ic. The top of the chair was connected to the bottom part of the chair using a plastic pin approximately 1/8” in diameter. Participants commented that the 1/8” pin could fail in shear allowing the top part of the chair to move downward effectively placing the tendons at the wrong height in the slab.

Industry Professional Recommended Changes

Perhaps the most significant proposed change to the new chair design would be to modify the clasping mechanism to work as an independent unit at the low points of the tendon drape. A major benefit agreed upon by the focus groups was being able to locate the cables after the concrete pour, but the new chair design was only for the high point in the tendon drape. It became clear that locating the tendons at the high point is important but perhaps not as impor-tant as locating at the low point. One of the biggest concerns among the professionals was subcontrac-tors hanging their supports from the underside of the slab and unintentionally cutting through a cable. If the new chair could be modified to where it worked at the high and low points of the drape with a locat-ing mechanism, the “value added” would be substan-tial. Future research should consider a chair for the “low point” of the tendon drape.

If the clasping mechanism could be modified, then a color coding system could be instituted at the chair base to identify the exact height of the tendon. When the form work is stripped, an arrow showing the direction of the cable, as well as a color indica-tion built into the base, could give the exact height of



the above tendon.

A major benefit identified by the focus group was the height adjustment; however, there was concern about how the adjustment would be made. The new design employed a sliding “neck” that had holes in it to place a pin that is molded to the base of the new chair. This pin could easily be separated from the chair and placed into a corresponding hole based on the height requirement. The focus group’s only issue with the mechanism was the shear strength of the pin. The solution proposed by the group was a quarter turn system that would eliminate the bolt by having a grooved neck that would screw into the base. For this to work, the head of the chair would also need to be grooved to align the arrows at the base with the direction of the tendons.

The final suggestion made by the focus group was to add a rebar saddle to the current design. There was a general consensus among the professionals that the new chair is more stable than the current chair, but many were unsure of exactly how stable. Adding a rebar saddle would still allow for the perpendicular support bar if it were deemed necessary by the pro-fessionals on each jobsite. Future research on chair stability would more clearly define whether or not such a saddle would be required.

AUTHOR ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS The research performed had two major purposes. First, the research sought to determine if construc-tion professionals were dissatisfied with the current method for placing and locating post-tension tendons in a slab. Second, the research sought to determine if the new post-tension cable chair was viable and efficient for placing and locating the tendons in the slab. The study used focus groups of construction professionals to determine results.

Industry professionals have expressed that existing chairs for post-tensioned tendons shift during con-crete placement and cannot be located easily once the concrete has cured. The focus groups unani-mously thought there is a need for a more efficient method for placing and locating PT cables. In response, a new post-tensioned cable chair has been developed-the PT Jaw. Both focus groups felt that the new chair was an improvement upon the cur-rent market. The PT Jaw has an adjustable, sturdier base, a pinned connection and a clamping device to hold the tendons in place. The chair has arrows at the base that attach to the formwork for locating the tendons after the concrete has cured.



The results indicate that for the PT Jaw to reach full market potential, a number of features of the new chair must be addressed. The features need-ing to be addressed are a result of the interactions with industry professionals, as well as the opinion of the research team. Figure 5 describes three of the most important features to be addressed according to the research team and the recommended chang-es. Figure 6 displays a comparison of the current method for placing PT cables and the PT Jaw when measured using parameters of cost and performance. Currently, the cost of the PT Jaw is higher than the current market chair. There has been no research conducted to determine the premium contractors may be willing to pay for the PT Jaw. Future re-search will need to address the price the market would support for an improved chair. Based on the graph, there does appear to be a market for the PT Jaw if improved performance can be demonstrated in the field that justifies the cost increase of the chair.

Based on feedback from the industry professionals, it is clear that the research and development of this product is incomplete. The connection of the base needs to be further developed and tested. Stability of the chair during concrete placement needs to be documented through field testing. The price point of the chair needs to be matched with the price the industry would support. Further research should incorporate the changes deemed by the focus groups as important issues and run field tests for conclusive results.

REFERENCES Allred, B. (2005, July). Common Post-Tensioning & Construction Issues. Structure Magazine, 22-25.

Allred, B. (2004, March). Post-Tensioned Slabs. Re-trieved Novemeber 2, 2008, from JLC Online: http://www.jlconline.com/cgi-bin/jlconline.storefront/4911



e11c0e42f98327170a32100a0639/UserTemplate/82?s=40629742002eea19271a401e1d2905e9&c=59204b87bbeb0937bd808abfaff8214a&p=1

Bishop, W. (2008, September 30). PT X-rays. (E. M. Wetzel, Interviewer).

Cement, A. O. (2008). Post-Tensioned Concrete. Retrieved October 9, 2008, from Portland Cement Association: http://www.cement.org/buildings/post_tensioned_splash.asp

Choi, Y., & Yuan, R. L. (2004). Experimental Re-lationship Between Splitting Tensile Strength and Compressive Strength of GFRC and PFRC . Arling-ton, Texas: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington,.

Concrete Construction Monthly. (2006, July 1). Re-bar positioners. Retrieved October 22, 2008, from

Concrete Construction: http://www.concretecon-struction.net/industry-news.asp?sectionID=707&articleID=325536

Dalco Industries. (2008). Rebar and Mesh. Retrieved October 22, 2008, from Dalco Industries: http://www.dalcoindustries.com/index.php/pagetype/prod-ucts/id/1197.html

Ground Penetrating Radar Systems. (2007). Post-tension Cables. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from GPRS: http://www.gp-radar.com/posttension.htm

Gupta, P. (2008, Novemeber 18). Building Codes. (E. M. Wetzel, Interviewer)

Lee, K., & Bennett, C. (2005). Patent No. 6925771. United States of America.

MacGregor, James g and Wight,James K. Reinforced Concrete Mechanics and Design, Fourth Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2005.

McPherson, J. W., & McDaniel, J. B. (2001). Patent

No. D444244. United States of America.

Mehta, M., Scarborough, W., & Armpriest, D. (2008). Lime, Portland Cement, and Concrete. Building Construction, (pp. 438-439). Upper Sadle River: Pearson Education, Inc.

Post-Tension Slab. (2007). Facts about post-tension slabs. Retrieved October 14, 2008, from Post-tension Slabs, Inc: http://www.posttensionslabs.com/fact-sheet.html

Post-Tensioning Institute. (2007). 2007 Tonage Re-port. Phoenix: Post-Tensioning Institute.Rebar Pins and Rod Chairs. (2002-2008). Retrieved October 22, 2008, from Hardware and Tools: im-ages.hardwareandtools.com/P/4987871.jpg

Roberge, N. (2007, February). Jiffy Clip alleviates painful backache for rebar installers. Retrieved Octo-ber 8, 2008, from Concrete Monthly: www.concrete-monthly.com/monthly/art.php?2657

Schokker, A. (2002). Analytical study of the ef-fects of tendon layout on the performance of post-tensioned two-way slab systems. Annual Conference - Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, v 2002, CSCE 30th Annual Conference Proceedings: 2002 Challenges Ahead - 4th Structural Specialty Confer-ence, 4th Transportation Specialty Conference and 2nd material Specialty Conference (pp. 2083-2091). Montreal, QB: Canadian Society for Civil Engineer-ing.

Sorkin, F. (1996). Patent No. 5555693. United States of America.United States Department of Verteran Affairs. (2006, May 1). Post-tension Field Inspection of Unbonded Tendons for Parking and Flat Slab Structures . Re-trieved November 6, 2008, from Office of Facilities Management: http://www.va.gov/facmgt/consulting/tendons.asp

US Department of Transportation. (2004, May 26). Post-tension Tendon Installation and Grouting



Manual. Retrieved November 6, 2008, from Federal Highway Administration: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/BRIDGE/pt/pt.pdf

Wood, Hanley. (2006, July 1). Concrete Construc-tion Online. Retrieved October 14, 2008, from Rebar Positioners: http://www.concreteconstruction.net/in-dustry-news.asp?sectionID=707&articleID=325536

Reviewer/Publication Interest SurveyThe American Professional Constructor is a refereed journal published two times a year by the American Institute of Constructors (AIC). Each author’s manuscript submission is given a blind review by three AIC members. to evalu-ate the content and style, and appropriateness as either a general interest or scholarly publication. Based upon the decision of the reviewers, each article is accepted or rejected for publication. Acceptance can be predicated upon incorporation of reviewer comments.

Approximately 10 articles are annually published. At present, 60% of the articles submitted are rejected by the refer-ees. To maintain the high standard of published articles in the journal. AIC requires 50 to 60 reviewers annually. Members are periodically polled to express their willingness to serve as a reviewer or referee. For each member that is willing to provide this valuable service, it is necessary for them to identify their area(s) of expertise or interest. If you have served as a reviewer and wish to continue doing so, or if you have not served as a reviewer and would like to do so, please take five (5) minutes to complete the survey below. If you would like to publish a manuscript in the Journal of American Institute of Constructors, the similar topic areas given consideration is provided here also. Please submit the reviewer’s interest or submit your manuscript to:

Don Jensen, JD, Ph.D. Western Carolina University The Kimmel School of Construction Management & Technology Construction Management Department 211 Belk Building, Cullowhee, NC 28723 Fax: (828) 227-2201 Email: [email protected]

Please place a mark beside each keyword that is a topic area indicating your expertise or interest. Thank you, in advance, for serving as a reviewer for The American Professional Constructor.

Name: ______________________________________________________ Member No.:_____________________E-Mail: ______________________________________________________ Phone No.:_____________________Address: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Topic Areas

[ ] Computer Applications

[ ] Construction Safety

[ ] Estimating

[ ] Financial Management

[ ] Personnel/Human Resource Management

[ ] Contract Law and Legal Applications

[ ] Materials and Methods

[ ] Project Management

[ ] Steel Construction

[ ] Concrete Construction

[ ] Design-Build Construction

[ ] Mechanical Construction

[ ] Contract Documents

[ ] Strategic Planning

[ ] Planning and Scheduling

[ ] Site Management

[ ] Marketing and Sales

[ ] Community Planning

[ ] Labor Relations

[ ] Quality Management

[ ] Productivity

[ ] Cost Control

[ ] Undergraduate Education

[ ] Graduate Education

[ ] Wood Construction

[ ] Masonry Construction

[ ] Heavy/Highway Construction

[ ] Electrical Construction

[ ] Residential Construction

[ ] International Construction

[ ] Architecture

[ ] Real Estate and Factors Affecting Contractors

[ ] Housing and Related Issues

[ ] Procurement

[ ] Bonding

[ ] Bidding

[ ] Ethics

[ ] Commercial Construction

[ ] Industrial Construction

[ ] Utilities Construction

[ ] Institutional Construction

Other

____________________

____________________

____________________

Journal of the American Institute of Constructors ???

52

The American Professional Constructor is a refereed journal published two times a year by the American Institute of Con-structors (AIC). Each author’s manuscript submission is given a blind review evaluation by three AIC members regarding manuscript content and style, and appropriateness as either a general interest or scholarly publication. Based upon the decision of the reviewers, each is accepted or rejected for publication. Acceptance can be predicated upon incorporation of reviewer comments.

Approximately 10 articles are annually published. At present, 60% of the articles submitted are rejected by the referees. To maintain a high standard of quality published articles, AIC requires 50 to 60 reviewers annually. Members are periodi-cally polled to express their willingness to serve as a reviewer or referee. For each member that is willing to provide this valuable service, it is necessary for them to identify their area(s) of expertise or interest. If you have served as a reviewer and wish to continue doing so or, if you have not served as a reviewer and would like to do so, please take five (5) minutes to complete the included survey. If you would like to publish a manuscript in the Journal of American Institute of Constructors, the similar topic areas given consideration is provided below also. Please submit the reviewer’s interest survey or submit your manuscript to:

Constructor CertificationThe Professional Certification for the Practicing Constructor

Distinguish yourself in the Industry

Join the over 12,000 professionals who have sought the Certified Professional Constructor (CPC) and Associate Constructor (AC) designations.

Certification Examination Schedule

Mark your calendar for the following Constructor Qualification Examination (CQE) Nationwide Testing Dates

November 7th, 2009

Applications

Candidate handbooks and applications are available upon request from the AIC and Constructor Certification Commission National Offices, or may be downloaded from the Commission website at

www.ConstructorCertification.org. Paper and Interactive CD-ROM study guides are available for all test levels.

Standard Fees

CQE Level I Examination and Application Fee (Includes CD-ROM Study Guide) .....................................................$155.00CQE Level II Examination and Application Fee (For current ACs, includes CD-ROM Study Guide) .........................$370.00CQE Level II Examination and Application Fee (with Level 1 Exemption, includes CD-ROM Study Guide ) ............$480.00

AIC Constructor Certification CommissionPO Box 26334, Alexandria Virginia, 22314

Tel 703.683.5053 | Fax: 703.683.0018

AlABAMAAuburn University

AlASKA University of Alaska-Anchorage

ArIZONA Arizona State UniversityNorthern Arizona University

ArKANSASJohn Brown UniversityUniversity of ArkansasUniversity of Arkansas

CAlIFOrNIA California State UniversityCalifornia State University, Chico

COlOrADOColorado State University

CONNECTICuTCentral Connecticut State University

IDAHOBoise State University

IllINOISIllinois State UniversitySouthern Illinois University

INDIANAIndiana State University

Purdue University

IOWA Iowa State UniversityUniversity of Northern Iowa

KANSASKansas State UniversityPittsburg State University

KENTuCKyEastern Kentucky University

IllINOISAGC Builder’s Association

MAINEUniversity of Maine

MASSACHuSETTS AGC of Massachusetts

MICHIgANEastern Michigan UniversityFerris State UniversityMichigan State University

MINNESOTAMinnesota State University - MoorheadMinnesota State University - Mankato

MISSISSIPPIUniversity of Southern Mississippi

MISSOurI

Central Missouri State University

MONTANAMontana State University

NEBrASKAUniversity of Nebraska

NEVADAUniversity of Nevada

NEW JErSEyNew Jersey Institute of Technology

NEW MExICOUniversity of New Mexico

NEW yOrKPratt InstituteSUNY College of Env ScienceAlfred State College

NOrTH CArOlINAEast Carolina UniversityWestern Carolina University

NOrTH DAKOTANorth Dakota State University

OHIOBowling Green State UniversityUniversity of Akron

OKlAHOMA

Oklahoma State UniversityUniversity of Oklahoma

PENNSylVANIATemple University

rHODE ISlANDRoger Williams University

SOuTH CArOlINAClemson University

SOuTH DAKOTASouth Dakota State University

TExASNorth Lake CollegeTexas A&M UniversityUniversity of Houston

uTAHBrigham Young UniversityWeber State University

WASHINgTONCentral Washington UniversityUniversity of Washington

WISCONSINMilwaukee School of EngineeringUniversity of Wisconsin-Stout

Nationwide testing locations

AICJournal2009.indd 6 6/16/2009 2:53:12 PM

March 27, 2010 – November 6, 2010

www.professionalconstructor.org

Journal of the American Institute of Constructors ???

53

November 6, 2010 - April 2, 2011

www.professionalconstructor.org.

700 N. Fairfax St., Suite 510, Alexandria VA, 22314

$405.00$535.00

ALABAMA Auburn University

ALASKA University of Alaska-Anchorage

ARIZONA Arizona State University Northern Arizona University Arizona Builders’ Alliance

ARKANSAS John Brown University University of Arkansas-Little Rock

CALIFORNIA California State University,Sacramento California State University, Northridge California State University, Fresno California Polytechnic State University Sundt San Diego

COLORADO Colorado State University Mesa State College

CONNECTICUT Central Connecticut State University

FLORIDA University of Florida University of North Florida

IDAHO Boise State University

ILLINOIS Illinois State University

Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville Builders’ Association

INDIANA Indiana State University Purdue University

IOWA Iowa State University University of Northern Iowa

KANSAS Pittsburg State University

KENTUCKY Eastern Kentucky University

LOUISIANA Louisiana State University

MAINE University of Maine

MARYLAND University of Maryland-Eastern Shore

MICHIGAN Eastern Michigan University Ferris State University Michigan State University

MINNESOTA Minnesota State University - Moorhead Minnesota State University - Mankato

MISSOURI University of Central Missouri

AGC St. Louis Chapter

MONTANA Montana State University

NEBRASKA University of Nebraska-Lincoln University of Nebraska-Lincoln at Omaha

NEVADA University of Nevada Las Vegas

NEW JERSEY New Jersey Institute of Technology

NEW MEXICO University of New Mexico

NEW YORK SUNY College of Env. Science Alfred State College

NORTH CAROLINA East Carolina University Western Carolina University

NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota State University

OHIO Bowling Green State University University of Akron University of Toledo

OKLAHOMA Oklahoma State University University of Oklahoma

PENNSYLVANIA Penn State-Harrisburg Pennsylvania College of Technology Temple University

RHODE ISLAND Roger Williams University

SOUTH CAROLINA Clemson University

SOUTH DAKOTA South Dakota State University

TEXAS North Lake College Texas A&M University University of Houston The University of Texas at Arlington AGC Dallas Chapter (TEXO) AGC San Antonio Sundt El Paso

UTAH Brigham Young University Weber State University

VIRGINIA Virginia Tech

WASHINGTON Central Washington University University of Washington Washington State University

WISCONSIN Milwaukee School of Engineering University of Wisconsin-Stout

Nationwide Testing Locations

AmericAn institute of constructorsConstructor Code of Ethics

The Construction Profession is based upon a system of technical competence, management excellence and fair dealing in undertaking complex works to serve the public safety, efficiency, and economy. The members of the American Institute of Constructor are committed to the following standards of professional conduct:

I. A Constructor shall have full regard to the public interest in fulfilling his or her responsibilities to the employer or client.

II. A Constructor shall not engage in any deceptive practice, or in any practice which creates an unfair advantage for the Constructor or another.

III. A Constructor shall not maliciously or recklessly injure or attempt to injure, whether directly or indirectly, the professional reputation of others.

IV. A Constructor shall ensure that when providing a service which includes advice, such advice shall be fair and unbiased.

V. A Constructor shall not divulge to any person, firm, or company, information of a confidential nature acquired during the course of professional activities.

VI. A Constructor shall carry out responsibilities in accordance with current professional practice, so far as it lies within his or her power.

VII. A Constructor shall keep informed of new thought and development in the construc-tion process appropriate to the type and level of his or her responsibilities and shall support research and the educational processes associated with the construction profession.

54

Publications Department

American Institute of Constructors PO Box 26334 Alexandria, Virginia 22314

ADDRESS SER VICE REQUESTED

700 N. Fairfax St., Suite 510

american professional constructor journal - october 2010

Documents

construction industryissues

construction theft

construction education

construction profession

related fields of construction

dbia sundt construction

individual constructor

professional relationships