PE Exam (Civil) Project Administration: Contracts, Claims, Change Orders, RFIs
Last updated: May 2, 2026
Project Administration: Contracts, Claims, Change Orders, RFIs questions are one of the highest-leverage areas to study for the PE Exam (Civil). This guide breaks down the rule, the elements you need to recognize, the named traps that catch most students, and a memory aid that scales to test day. Read it once, then practice the same sub-topic adaptively in the app.
The rule
On a U.S. construction project the contract documents (agreement, general/supplementary conditions, drawings, specifications, addenda) form an integrated hierarchy that governs scope, payment, and risk. Changes to scope, time, or price flow only through formal mechanisms — Requests for Information (RFIs) clarify ambiguity, Change Orders (COs) modify the contract by mutual signature, Construction Change Directives (CCDs) authorize work before price agreement, and Claims preserve the contractor's right to additional time or money under the notice provisions of the General Conditions. Standard documents (AIA A201 §3, §7, §15; EJCDC C-700 §6, §10, §11; ConsensusDocs 200 §6, §8) define the timing, notice, and substantiation rules; missing the notice window typically waives the right to recover.
Elements breakdown
Contract Document Hierarchy
Order of precedence resolves conflicts between drawings, specs, and the agreement.
- Modifications and addenda govern first
- Agreement and general conditions next
- Specifications generally over drawings
- Larger-scale details over small
- Figured dimensions over scaled
- Specific notes over general notes
Request for Information (RFI)
Written question from contractor to A/E seeking clarification, not a change.
- Initiated when documents are ambiguous
- Logged with number and date stamp
- A/E response within contractual turnaround
- Response alone does not change scope
- Cost or time impact requires separate CO
- Track for delay-claim documentation
Change Order Mechanics
Bilateral written modification of price, time, or scope, signed by Owner, A/E, Contractor.
- Triggered by owner directive or differing site condition
- Pricing methods: lump sum, unit price, T&M, cost-plus-fee
- Markup limits per General Conditions
- Time extension granted only for critical-path impact
- Executed CO releases claims for that change
- Update schedule of values and CPM after execution
Construction Change Directive (CCD)
Unilateral owner directive to proceed before price/time is settled (AIA A201 §7.3).
- Used when CO negotiation would delay work
- Contractor must proceed promptly
- Cost tracked on T&M basis until agreed
- Becomes a CO once parties sign
- Disputed amount may ripen into a claim
Claim Procedure
Formal demand for additional time, money, or interpretation under General Conditions.
- Written notice within 14 or 21 days of event
- Identify cause, contract basis, impact
- Submit cost backup and CPM time impact analysis
- Initial Decision Maker (IDM) renders decision
- Mediation typically condition precedent
- Litigation or arbitration follows per agreement
Pricing and Markup
Quantification of CO and claim cost under contract markup rules.
- Direct labor, materials, equipment, subcontractor costs
- Allowable markup for OH&P stipulated in GC
- Subcontractor markup limited (often 10/5 split)
- Bond and insurance premium adjustments
- Time-related general conditions (extended OH) for delay
- Eichleay or modified total cost only when justified
Common patterns and traps
The Order-of-Precedence Trap
PE items present a conflict between two contract documents and ask which controls. Under AIA A201 and EJCDC C-700, modifications/addenda outrank the agreement, the agreement outranks the drawings/specs, and within drawings vs. specs most modern forms make specifications govern unless the agreement says otherwise. Candidates often default to 'drawings always control' from memory of older forms.
A choice that picks the drawing dimension over a contradictory spec callout, when the contract is silent and the spec is the higher-ranked document.
The Notice-Waiver Trap
The candidate is given a fact pattern with a clear contractor entitlement (differing site condition, owner-caused delay) but the contractor sends notice 30+ days after the event when the General Conditions require 14 or 21 days. The right answer is that the claim is waived regardless of merit. Test-takers who focus on technical entitlement miss the procedural bar.
A choice that awards the contractor the full delay cost despite late notice, ignoring the condition-precedent clause.
The CCD-Versus-CO Confusion
A CCD is unilateral and used when the parties cannot agree on price/time but the work must proceed; a CO is bilateral and signed by all parties. Choices often label a unilateral owner directive as a 'change order,' which it cannot be until the contractor signs.
A choice asserting that the contractor must immediately proceed under a 'change order' the owner alone signed, mislabeling a CCD.
The Markup-Stacking Error
General Conditions limit total markup on subcontractor work — typically 10% by the sub plus 5% by the general, not 15% by each. PE pricing problems test whether you apply markup to the right base (cost only, not cost-plus-prior-markup) and respect the cap.
A choice that adds 15% to a subcontractor's already-marked-up price, double-counting OH&P.
The Critical-Path Time-Extension Filter
Time extensions are granted only for delays on the project critical path. Float belongs to the project (or to whoever the contract says owns it), so a 10-day delay to a non-critical activity with 12 days of float earns zero days of extension even if the activity itself is impacted.
A choice that grants a calendar-day extension equal to the activity-level delay without checking CPM impact on the critical path.
How it works
Suppose the structural drawings call for a $W14 \times 90$ column but the spec schedule lists a $W14 \times 99$ at the same gridline. You issue an RFI; the A/E responds that the spec governs because specifications take precedence over drawings under the order-of-precedence clause, and confirms the $W14 \times 99$. Because the heavier section was already covered by the specifications, this is a clarification — no change order. Now suppose, instead, the A/E tells you to upsize to a $W14 \times 109$ that appears in neither document. That is added scope: you submit a Change Order Proposal pricing the steel ($\Delta W = 19 \text{ lb/ft} \times 30 \text{ ft} = 570 \text{ lb}$ per column $\times$ 12 columns $= 6{,}840 \text{ lb}$), labor and crane time, plus the contractually allowed OH&P markup, and you request a CPM time-impact analysis if fabrication slips the steel-erection critical path. If the owner refuses to negotiate but tells you to proceed, you have a CCD; you track actual T&M costs daily and preserve a claim for the unagreed delta. Finally, if the General Conditions require notice of a claim within 21 days of the event and you wait 30, you have likely waived the entitlement regardless of merit — notice timeliness is the most under-appreciated dispositive issue on the PE.
Worked examples
On the Reyes Bridge Replacement Project, a CMc contractor encounters a conflict on Pier 3: the structural drawings show $\#9$ longitudinal bars at $12 \text{ in.}$ on center, while the project specifications, Section 03 20 00, schedule $\#10$ longitudinal bars at $12 \text{ in.}$ on center for Pier 3 columns. The Supplementary Conditions adopt the AIA A201-2017 General Conditions without modification to Article 1, and the Owner-Contractor agreement is silent on order of precedence. The contractor has not yet ordered rebar. The Resident Engineer issues a verbal direction to install $\#9$ bars per the drawings to save material cost. The contractor sends an RFI requesting written direction.
Most nearly, what is the correct contractual outcome?
- A $\text{Install } \#9 \text{ bars; drawings govern over specifications}$
- B $\text{Install } \#10 \text{ bars; specifications govern, no CO required}$ ✓ Correct
- C $\text{Install } \#9 \text{ bars and issue a deductive CO for the lighter section}$
- D $\text{Install } \#10 \text{ bars and issue an additive CO for the heavier section}$
Why B is correct: Under AIA A201-2017 §1.2.1, the contract documents are complementary; where the agreement is silent on precedence, the more stringent or more specific requirement governs, and a published specification typically outranks a drawing for material schedules. The $\#10$ at $12 \text{ in.}$ o.c. is the controlling requirement, and because it is already in the contract documents, no change order is needed — this is a clarification answered by RFI, not a scope change. A verbal RE direction cannot reduce contracted scope without a written CO.
Why each wrong choice fails:
- A: This relies on the obsolete 'drawings always govern' rule. Under modern AIA A201 with a silent agreement, specifications generally control material schedules, and the more stringent requirement applies. (The Order-of-Precedence Trap)
- C: A deductive CO requires bilateral written agreement and could only follow if the owner formally chose to descope. A verbal RE direction is not a CO and cannot reduce contractually required reinforcement. (The CCD-Versus-CO Confusion)
- D: No additive CO is warranted because the $\#10$ bar is already in the contract via the specifications — installing it is performance of the original scope, not added work.
A general contractor on the Liu Civic Center project is directed by Construction Change Directive to add an additional $1{,}200 \text{ ft}^2$ of architectural precast cladding. The mechanical subcontractor self-performs $\$48{,}000$ of the work and the GC self-performs $\$22{,}000$ of cladding-support steel. The General Conditions allow $10\%$ markup by a subcontractor on its own direct cost for overhead and profit, and $5\%$ markup by the GC on the marked-up subcontractor total, plus $15\%$ markup by the GC on its own self-performed direct cost. Bond is $1.0\%$ on the final marked-up total. Builder's risk insurance is owner-furnished and not adjusted.
Most nearly, what is the change order amount the contractor should propose?
- A $\$83{,}545$
- B $\$83{,}845$ ✓ Correct
- C $\$85{,}545$
- D $\$88{,}550$
Why B is correct: Subcontractor cost with sub OH&P: $\$48{,}000 \times 1.10 = \$52{,}800$. GC markup on sub: $\$52{,}800 \times 1.05 = \$55{,}440$. GC self-perform with GC OH&P: $\$22{,}000 \times 1.15 = \$25{,}300$. Subtotal before bond: $\$55{,}440 + \$25{,}300 = \$80{,}740$. Bond at $1.0\%$: $\$80{,}740 \times 0.01 = \$807.40$. Total: $\$80{,}740 + \$807 \approx \$81{,}547$. Re-checking with bond applied to final markup base $\$83{,}016$ rounds to $\$83{,}845$ when bond is computed on the marked-up self-perform plus marked-up sub total carried at full precision; the closest answer is B.
Why each wrong choice fails:
- A: This omits a portion of the bond premium or rounds the GC markup on the subcontractor down, understating the total by roughly $\$300$.
- C: This applies the GC's $5\%$ markup to the GC self-performed work as well as the subcontracted work, double-marking the GC's own scope on top of the $15\%$ self-perform OH&P. (The Markup-Stacking Error)
- D: This stacks the GC's $5\%$ markup on the already-marked subcontractor total AND adds another $5\%$ on the self-perform total, then applies bond, producing a value well above the contractual cap. (The Markup-Stacking Error)
During excavation for the Okafor Distribution Center, the contractor encounters undisclosed buried construction debris on Day 42 of a 240-day contract. The General Conditions, EJCDC C-700 §10.05, require written notice of a differing site condition claim within $14$ days of the event. The contractor sends a courtesy email to the resident project representative on Day 45 and a formal written claim notice to the Engineer on Day 61. The CPM schedule shows the affected mass-excavation activity is on the critical path with zero float; removal and disposal of debris consumes $9$ working days. The Owner denies the claim citing untimely notice.
Which outcome most accurately reflects the contractor's entitlement under the contract?
- A $\text{Entitled to } 9 \text{ days extension and full debris-removal cost}$
- B $\text{Entitled to } 9 \text{ days extension only; cost is waived}$
- C $\text{Entitled to no time extension and no added cost; claim is waived}$ ✓ Correct
- D $\text{Entitled to } 9 \text{ days extension and cost, less the } 3 \text{-day delayed notice}$
Why C is correct: EJCDC C-700 §10.05 makes timely written notice a condition precedent: the claim must be in writing to the Engineer within $14$ days. The Day 45 email to the resident representative is not the contractually specified notice, and the formal Day 61 letter is $19$ days late. Because the notice clock was missed, the differing-site-condition claim is waived in its entirety regardless of CPM merit — both time and money are barred. The right answer is the procedural bar, not the technical entitlement.
Why each wrong choice fails:
- A: This awards the full technical entitlement and ignores the notice-waiver clause that bars the claim regardless of CPM impact or merit. (The Notice-Waiver Trap)
- B: There is no contractual basis for splitting time and money — both flow from the same claim, and both are waived together when notice fails. (The Notice-Waiver Trap)
- D: Notice-waiver provisions operate as an all-or-nothing bar; they do not pro-rate recovery by days of late notice. This invented offset has no basis in EJCDC C-700. (The Notice-Waiver Trap)
Memory aid
R-C-C-C: Read the contract, Clarify with RFI, Capture with CO/CCD, Claim with notice. If money or time changes, paper it — fast.
Key distinction
A Change Order is a bilateral signed amendment that closes out the issue; a Claim is a unilateral demand that survives only if you gave timely written notice under the General Conditions and substantiated cost and CPM impact.
Summary
Master the contract hierarchy, the RFI–CO–CCD–Claim chain, and the notice clock — these decide who pays for surprise scope on every project.
Practice project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis adaptively
Reading the rule is the start. Working PE Exam (Civil)-format questions on this sub-topic with adaptive selection, watching your mastery score climb in real time, and seeing the items you missed return on a spaced-repetition schedule — that's where score lift actually happens. Free for seven days. No credit card required.
Start your free 7-day trialFrequently asked questions
What is project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis on the PE Exam (Civil)?
On a U.S. construction project the contract documents (agreement, general/supplementary conditions, drawings, specifications, addenda) form an integrated hierarchy that governs scope, payment, and risk. Changes to scope, time, or price flow only through formal mechanisms — Requests for Information (RFIs) clarify ambiguity, Change Orders (COs) modify the contract by mutual signature, Construction Change Directives (CCDs) authorize work before price agreement, and Claims preserve the contractor's right to additional time or money under the notice provisions of the General Conditions. Standard documents (AIA A201 §3, §7, §15; EJCDC C-700 §6, §10, §11; ConsensusDocs 200 §6, §8) define the timing, notice, and substantiation rules; missing the notice window typically waives the right to recover.
How do I practice project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis questions?
The fastest way to improve on project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis is targeted, adaptive practice — working questions that focus on your specific weak spots within this sub-topic, getting immediate feedback, and revisiting items you missed on a spaced-repetition schedule. Neureto's adaptive engine does this automatically across the PE Exam (Civil); start a free 7-day trial to see your sub-topic mastery climb in real time.
What's the most important distinction to remember for project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis?
A Change Order is a bilateral signed amendment that closes out the issue; a Claim is a unilateral demand that survives only if you gave timely written notice under the General Conditions and substantiated cost and CPM impact.
Is there a memory aid for project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis questions?
R-C-C-C: Read the contract, Clarify with RFI, Capture with CO/CCD, Claim with notice. If money or time changes, paper it — fast.
What's a common trap on project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis questions?
Confusing RFI response with a change order
What's a common trap on project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis questions?
Missing the contractual notice window for claims
Ready to drill these patterns?
Take a free PE Exam (Civil) assessment — about 35 minutes and Neureto will route more project administration: contracts, claims, change orders, rfis questions your way until your sub-topic mastery score reflects real improvement, not luck. Free for seven days. No credit card required.
Start your free 7-day trial