Change event — risk resolution

ILLUSTRATIVE · SAMPLE DATA

A synthetic negotiation fixture, not the governed record. No figure here is filed, and none of it is aggregated with the filed instruments.

Risk resolution

The continuity chain, in order. No separate change-order risk framework.

Linked risk allocation

Differing site conditions §6.7 · Owner

Original position

Owner · 20 d · $1.20M direct RECORD

Trigger: Subsurface condition encountered that materially differs from the geotechnical report

Event observed

2026-06-04

Abandoned concrete-encased duct bank encountered on the inverter pad alignment, not shown on the geotechnical report

Initial exposure

21–35 d · $900k direct · $378k–$630k time economics

COUNTERFACTUALCOUNTERFACTUALCOUNTERFACTUAL

Time economics = observed days × $18,000.00/day delay economics.

Proposed resolution

Reroute plus removal, 28 days and $860,000 claimed under §6.7

Executed change order

CO-014 · $740,000.00 · 18 days · executed 2026-07-01 RECORD

Residual risk

PARTIALLY RESOLVED · 3–17 days open · $160k direct open

3–17 days of the observed duration remain unresolved, and the remaining time economics stay COUNTERFACTUAL.

Closes on: a further change order or a released claim covering the remaining days

Change-order risk resolution

What risk the change order actually resolved — not merely a price and a day count.

Risk	Original position	Event exposure	CO resolution	Residual
Differing site conditions Unexpected underground duct bank	Owner	21–35 d / $900k	+18 d / $740k	3–17 d open · partially resolved
Utility delay Utility relocation of the distribution tap	Owner	15 d / $0	+10 d / time relief only	5 d open · partially resolved

A change order does not automatically close a risk. Remaining uncertainty stays on the record until an act closes it.

What the change order changed — object matrix

Scope, money, risk and schedule move together against the same objects. A change order that has been executed but not decomposed shows as a GAP, never as a balanced set of rows.

Unexpected underground duct bank — proposed decomposition COUNTERFACTUAL

Object	Engineering	Procurement	Construction	Object total	Days	Risk	Provenance
Feeder B	$18k	$122k	$345k	$485k	11	Differing site conditions	COUNTERFACTUAL
Feeder C	$16k	$108k	$306k	$430k	9	Differing site conditions	COUNTERFACTUAL
Road crossing 07	$41k	$80k	$164k	$285k	8	Differing site conditions	COUNTERFACTUAL
Claimed decomposition, summed	$75k	$310k	$815k	$1,200,000.00	28	The filed total and the summed lines agree.

Money state	Amount
Claimed (proposed decomposition)	$1,200,000.00
Executed under CO-014 (governed)	$740,000.00
Claimed less executed	$460,000.00 COUNTERFACTUAL
Executed money decomposed onto objects	GAP — no object mapping filed for the executed instrument

SOV effect (claimed)	Delta
2300 Collection system	$915,000.00
2100 Roads and site civil	$285,000.00

The claimed decomposition below totals $1,200,000. The governed change order CO-014 executed $740,000 and has not been decomposed across objects — that mapping is a GAP, not a pro-rata split.

A claimed decomposition and an executed change order are two separate figures. The difference is stated only where the change order was executed in settlement of the claim. The change order was executed in settlement of this claim.

Illustrative object graph. The object effect, the SOV effect, the risk effect and the schedule effect are four separate columns because they are four separate facts.