Should construction administration be included in engineering pricing?

Construction administration should be identified explicitly in engineering pricing because it is different from design and permit documentation. The scope may include submittal review, responses to contractor questions, site observations, payment or progress input, substitution review, record-document support, or closeout assistance, each with its own limits and triggers. The engineer should state what is included, who requests the service, and how added visits or redesign are handled. Construction administration does not make the engineer the contractor or inspector, and neither role overrides the AHJ's inspection and approval authority.

The correct application of construction administration pricing starts with the actual project, not a generic promise. Confirm the jurisdiction, adopted code, design scope, existing conditions, required deliverables, and professional responsibility before relying on a conclusion. A responsible engineer documents assumptions and identifies information that still needs verification.

Project type, occupancy, existing construction, site conditions, code edition, agency requirements, and changes made after the original design can change the work. A concise answer is useful for orientation, but the signed or sealed project record must reflect the current scope and the authority's process.

• Confirm the authority having jurisdiction and current checklist
• Use current drawings, calculations, field evidence, and equipment information
• Separate engineering decisions from owner, architect, contractor, utility, and agency decisions
• Record assumptions, limitations, and questions requiring direct AHJ confirmation