PRACTICAL RECORDS GUIDE · E1 Trace
How to organise construction project records for an EOT claim
Build a reviewable account of what happened, where the evidence comes from and which programme activities may be affected.
Extension of time (EOT) review starts with organised records. A document match or a sequence of dates does not establish entitlement, causation or critical delay. This guide covers records preparation; project-specific contract and delay assessments remain separate professional tasks.
1. Define the issue and preserve the source records
Give each issue a stable event reference. Record its description, location, relevant dates and the questions to investigate. Retain original files and attachments, identify the source system and record the collection date. Keep working notes separate from original evidence.
2. Create an evidence register
For each record capture: evidence ID, original filename, record date, sender or author, source location, revision, page or passage reference, related event ID, reviewer and review status. Distinguish a document date from an event date or an import date. Flag uncertain dates instead of silently resolving them.
3. Search beyond a single keyword
Start with the event, location, activity and parties. Search exact wording, then controlled synonyms and related terms. For an access issue, review terms such as access, handover, permit and workfront where relevant. Read surrounding passages and attachments before treating a result as supporting evidence.
4. Build a chronology that can be checked
Keep each entry tied to its evidence ID and precise source passage. Separate the recorded fact, the author’s assertion and the reviewer’s interpretation. Include conflicting records and gaps. Record notices and responses as evidence without assuming that filing a notice settles its contractual validity.
5. Connect events to the correct programme revision
Identify the programme revision, data date, baseline or comparison programme, activity IDs and relevant calendars. Explain why an event is linked to an activity. Distinguish an observed interruption from an assessed effect on completion; that assessment needs an appropriate analysis and professional review.
6. Prepare a review package
Bring together the issue summary, evidence register, source-linked chronology, programme references and unresolved questions. Assign a reviewer and preserve the version of the package reviewed. Records may also inform a liquidated damages dispute, but a records package does not decide liability or calculate entitlement by itself.
A fictional worked example: delayed access to a work area
Illustrative only: the dates and identifiers below are invented. They demonstrate record organisation, not a client outcome or a completed delay assessment.
| Record | What it records | Review action |
|---|---|---|
| EV-001 · 3 March · email | The contractor requests access to Zone B. | Check the stated requirement against the planned work and retain the full email chain. |
| EV-002 · 5 March · site diary | The diary reports that the area is unavailable. | Check location, author, attachments and whether other work continued. |
| EV-003 · 8 March · handover record | A record states that access was handed over. | Check qualifications, signatures and whether the area was ready for the intended activity. |
Link all three records to event ACCESS-01 and the relevant activity in the identified programme revision. Record the apparent access issue and the outstanding questions. Do not convert the interval between these dates directly into an EOT allowance.
Where E1 Trace fits
E1 Trace by FPEP Enterprise supports searching project records, checking highlighted source passages, preparing traceable chronologies and reviewing programme information. Use the evidence-search workflow to locate material and the programme-reporting workflow to retain the context for review.
Explore construction document search · Explore chronologies and programme reports
Common questions
Is this a replacement for document control?
This guide concerns the preparation and review of claims evidence. Keep the project’s document-control arrangements for issuing, approving and retaining controlled documents.
Does finding a document prove an EOT claim?
No. Relevance, authenticity, source context, programme effects and the applicable contract still need review.
Can SharePoint or Teams records be included?
The website describes controlled local snapshots from Microsoft libraries, subject to account permissions and connection setup. Confirm representative file types and access requirements in a demonstration.