November 2010 Addenda #35 American Society of Professional Estimators Great Plains Chapter #35
Addenda #35 Volume 1 Number 5
Mar 16, 2016
November 2010
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
November 2010
Addenda #35 American Society of Professional Estimators
Great Plains Chapter #35
Member
Benefits
include Industry
Recognition and
Career
Enhancement
Page 2 V O L U M E 1 , I S S U E 5
M E M B E R C O M P A N I E S
Ahern Fire Protection
Bldg Cost Consultants, Inc.
Davis Erection Co., Inc.
Drake-Williams Steel Inc.
Essex Corporation
Heartland Scenic Studio, Inc.
Interstates Const. Srvcs. Inc.
Kidwell Inc.
Kiewit Building Group, Inc.
L & L Builders Co.
MCM Services
New Steel Inc.
Omaha Electric Service Inc.
Sampson Construction Co., Inc.
Tempest Company
U P C O M I N G E V E N T S
Social Activities and Chapter Meetings
December 8, 2010—Panel Discussion on Estimating Errors
Join us for a panel discussion regarding estimating errors.
Panel members to include:
Ben Huck, Sampson Construction Rod Gygax, Ray Martin Company
Ron Boyce, RW Boyce Construction Estimating Consulting
Tim Wurtele, HDR Inc Rick Geiler, Altus Architectural Studios
Moderated by Jason Prebyl, Keiwit Building Group
January 12, 2011—Radio Personality Tom Becka
February 9, 2011—Legal Issues in Constructino
D E C E M B E R M E E T I N G D E T A I L S
Lunch Meeting
Date: December 8, 2010, January 12, 2011, & February 9, 2011
Time: 11:30 am
Location: Grisanti’s Italian Restaurant
10875 W Dodge Road, Omaha
Lunch Fee: $25
PLEASE RSVP for at least one day in advance
RSVP by email to [email protected]
online at sites.google.com/site/aspe35
or by SMS or telephone to 402-522-6016
November 2010
The cover art is a ground shot of the First
National Bank Tower from flickr.com
user jthj.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
File:New_York_Land_Ventilation_Buildin
g_south_side_119149pv.jpg
FE
AT
UR
ES
M E S S A G E F R O M T H E P R E S I D E N T
R E V I E W O F L A S T M E E T I N G
B O A R D M E E T I N G M I N U T E S & H I G H L I G H T S
C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T S
M E M B E R B E N E F I T S
M E M B E R C O M P A N I E S
A S P E C A N O N S
C R I T I C A L C A L E N D A R I T E M S
S P O N S O R S
U P C O M I N G M E E T I N G S
A R E C O N S T R U C T I O N B I D E R R O R S
U P I N A D O W N E C O N O M Y ?
B R I A N M . F A L C O N & D E A N R .
B R A C K E N R I D G E
F R O M T H E T E M P E S T C O M P A N Y B L O G
B Y M A R K M E N T E L E A N D D O N S H O R T
AR
TIC
LE
S C O N S T R U C T I O N E S T I M A T I N G E R R O R S
F R O M M A S O N R Y W O R K T O O L S . C O M
American Society of Professional Estimators
Great Plains Chapter #35
Page 4 T H E G R E A T P L A I N S A D D E N D A # 3 5
F I N D U S O N :
S E A R C H F O R
A S P E C H A P T E R 3 5
I N T H E G R O U P S S E C T I O N
A S P E C H A P T E R 3 5
O F F I C E R S
President
Chris Ahrenholtz
First Vice President
Mark Mentele
Second Vice President
David Hansen
Third Vice President
Jonathan Hatcher
Secretary
Jerry Onik
Treasurer
Steve Rice
Directors
Isaac Davidson
Jason Prebyl
Justin Short
F R O M T H E T E M P E S T C O M P A N Y B L O G
B Y M A R K M E N T E L E
I recently came across an interesting school
project. Only half of the project was Davis-
Bacon.
For those of you that don’t know what Davis
Bacon is, it’s officially the Davis-Bacon Act
which requires paying prevailing wages on all
federal government construction contracts and
most contracts for federally assisted construction. The act includes provisions for
paying the construction workers the prevailing wages and benefits for the area.
My first thought when told about this partial Davis-Bacon was that the project
actually had more than one building. After seeing the plans, this was not the
case. On the drawings, there is a demarcation line that zigzags through the build-
ing. The line even goes down a hallway at one point.
The project is actually split into two different bids, but I will address that in my
next blog. Assuming the same contractor is awarded the entire building, they are
going to have a mess on their hands. Depending on where the worker is standing
will depend on what rate they will be paid. Two crews could be literally two feet
away from each other making two different wages. I see all sorts of problems
that this situation could cause with the labor force – from trying to keep busy on
the Davis-Bacon portion to tension between crews at two different rates on the
same project.
The accounting can also be messy. Even if two different job numbers are issued,
I’m sure there will be overlap throughout the day for some of the field work-
ers. How do you try to keep their time separate?
If I was a betting man, I would bet the Davis-Bacon portion will always be further
along and have a lower productivity based on the hours submitted to payroll. The
only thing they are accomplishing with all of this garbage is more headaches for
the Owner in the long run and higher overall cost.
O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E
P O S T E D A T :
B L O G . T E M P E S T C O M
P A N Y . C O M
In the advertisement to bid it states,
―The Owner prefers to award all
work in each category for both Pro-
jects to a single bidder.‖ What does
this sentence really mean? Noth-
ing! Since each area has its own bid
form, the Owner is able to select the
cheapest possible combina-
tion. Even in the Instructions to Bid-
ders section under Consideration of
Bids it reads ―It is the intent of the
Owner to award a contract to the
lowest responsible bidder…‖ talking
about each individual bid, not a
summation of both bids for each
work category. If they really wanted
one contractor, there would have
been one bid form with breakouts
for each area, not two bid forms.
These ―two‖ bids should either be
one bid or split into two real sepa-
rate projects. As it stands now, this
is truly one project. This is one
building without phased construc-
tion, one specification and one set
of drawings. As with most blue-
prints, the floor plan did not fit on
just one drawing so the A/E split the
floor plan onto multiple sheets. It
would make sense to me to have
the drawing breaks match the de-
marcation line between the two (Continued on page 5)
Page 5
[Mark discusses] a pro-
ject that split one build-
ing into two bids even
though there was only
one set of plans and
specifications. I decided
to go into more detail [on
the] last statement of
―The only thing they are
accomplishing with all of this garbage is more headaches
for the Owner in the long run and higher overall cost‖.
It appears to me that the Owner or the architect is not sat-
isfied with the already dirt cheap prices and is trying to
beat the contractors down a little more. Unfortunately,
they will achieve beating down the contractors but it will
not save the Owner any money. Splitting this project into
two contracts will actually cost more in the long run.
First off, there is no clear demarcation point, just a line
drawn on the drawings between rooms and down hall-
ways. I’m predicting change orders because neither con-
tractor included in their bid the tie-ins for the two pro-
jects. Chances are both contractors will be reluctant to tie-
in to the other contractor’s work since this can affect the
warranty so the Owner is going to pay a premium for these
change orders.
Another cost increase will be on the material. The project
lost the quantity discount on vendor quotes since it’s now
two contractors purchasing the construction material. Also
with the material, there is a good chance that the project
will not have continuity of construction material used in
the project. Sinks, water closets, lights, door hardware for
a few examples will proba-
bly be by two different
manufactures and will be
a maintenance nightmare
after the job is complete. I
suppose the A/E could sole source all vendor quoted items
and really send the prices through the roof!
Another headache after the project is complete will be
warranty issues. Who does the Owner call for a warranty
issue? The Owner will have a heck of a time figuring out
who they need to call and I’m sure there will be finger
pointing between contractors when a warranty issue
arises. I have seen Owner’s on similar issues get fed up
with the games and decide to bite the bullet and just pay
for someone to fix the problems which should have been
covered under the warranty.
Another cost increase is overhead on the projects. There
will be duplications in the indirect costs that have to be
included in each bid. There will be double the project
managers for each division and each company has to pay
someone in their accounting department to cut the checks
and pay the invoices on the project for a couple of exam-
ples. End result – higher costs!
In the long run, who really wins? The construction man-
ager and the A/E that have based their price on the total
construction cost. They are the only ones who win with
this junk. The contractors and the Owner both end up with
the short end of the stick.
F R O M T H E T E M P E S T C O M P N A B L O G
B Y D O N S H O R T
V O L U M E 1 , I S S U E 5
bids, but the A/E for one reason or another didn’t follow this
logic. Instead, they chose to have random breaks independ-
ent of the demarcation line. I find this is completely absurd!
To me, it looks like they are concerned that the project will be
over budget but they are tackling the problem completely
wrong. If they need to ensure the project will be within their
budget, then they need to do a better job of estimating the
costs during the design period and designing a project within
the budget.
(Continued from page 4)
O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E
P O S T E D A T :
B L O G . T E M P E S T C O M
P A N Y . C O M
Construction Estimating Errors can be
very expensive and embarrassing. The
worst type of error in construction cost
estimating is leaving out an item of work.
On a lump sum bid and contract, the
contractor is obligated to do all of the
work, even if costs for part of the project
are omitted in the estimate bid and con-
tract to build.
Ensuring that all items have been in-
cluded in the takeoff portion of the esti-
mate is perhaps the most difficult part of
the estimate thus it requires careful at-
tention. Any items that may be difficult or
unusual in any way should be under-
lined, checked or circled. Planswift has
many tools that help eliminate errors.
But most people still do it the old fashion
way.
Here are some common Construction
Estimating Errors.
1. Mistakes in arithmetic are one of the
most common Construction Estimating
Errors: Estimates made on construction
projects that require arithmetical calcula-
tions of quantities and cost of materials
and labor costs to install materials or
perform various operations. In order to
avoid errors in arithmetic, the estimator
should use an electronic calculator with
a recording tape, have the calculations
checked by another person, and attach
the tape to the estimate sheet for
backup with plenty of notes and dates of
those notes. Construction Estimating
Software can eliminate this problem.
2. Wrong Measurements from Plans and
Specs: Construction Estimating Errors in
measurements and dimensions taken
from plans, drawings, and specs result in
corresponding mistakes in the cost of
construction items based on those
measurements.
3. Using the Wrong Wage Rates for La-
bor: Hourly labor wages for construction
workers vary countrywide. You should
consistently verify current wage rates
and fringe benefits for the building
trades involved through local union of-
fices, other contractors, supply yards,
and other reliable sources. Overtime
rates are generally 1-1/2 to 2 times
regular rates depending on labor agree-
ments and or union rules. If a job has a
high labor demand, higher wages may
have to be calculated in order to quickly
find enough employees to complete the
job on schedule.
4. Insufficient or Excessive Allowances
for Labor: Frequent Construction Esti-
mating Errors are allowing too much or
too little for labor to do the job. Thus
loosing the job, or accidentally getting
the job.
5. Materials Improperly Priced: Always be
sure that building materials and supplies
are correctly described as to kind, qual-
ity, size, and dimensions. Also confirm
that they are priced competitively. Split
corner block can easily be miscalculated
as the usually come with a special setup
fee.
6. Using Incorrect Units of Measure: Us-
ing a wrong unit of measure can result in
substantial cost increases or decreases.
For example, be careful not to record
lineal feet for lineal yards, square feet for
square yards or cubic feet for cubic
yards, and so forth.
7. Including Poorly Maintained Machin-
ery or Equipment: Machinery or equip-
ment to be used in construction, and
included in the estimate or bid, must
always be checked for efficient service-
ability. Preparing an estimate on a con-
struction project and contemplating the
use of poorly maintained machinery or
equipment is unwise. Forklifts are prone
for leaking oil on concrete floors or slabs.
Breakdown, repairs, and idle time can be
costly, delayed completion of the project
can invite penalties, or liquidated dam-
ages.
8. Failure to Visit the Project Site: This
error might well be number one on the
list because of its importance in the early
stages of cost estimating. Visiting the
proposed site of the project enables the
cost estimator to inspect topography,
check for overhead power lines, inacces-
sible areas etc. If existing structures
have to be demolished or removed from
the premises, the estimator is able to
properly determine the probable cost, if
needing to work around these kinds of
other trades such as demolition etc.
9. Overlooking or Miscalculating Trans-
porting Costs: The cost of hauling materi-
als, supplies, machinery, and equipment
to a project can be a very expensive item
in an estimate. Access to the job site
may be difficult because of poor roads or
no roads, heavy traffic to and from sup-
ply sources, or the requirement to obtain
permits, and so forth.
10. Failure to Review Building Codes,
Permits, and Inspections: Cost estimates
and bids on construction projects are
subject to local, state and federal build-
ing codes, permits, and inspections.
11. Failure to Consider Quality of Work-
manship Required: A contractor who is
accustomed to working on projects that
require high quality workmanship may
not be set up to bid or estimate projects
of mediocre, low grade workmanship.
Conversely, a contractor who usually
works on cheap structures is frequently
at a disadvantage when it comes to bid-
ding on the construction of upscale resi-
dences or commercial buildings where
only the finest quality of workmanship is
acceptable. Failure to give proper consid-
eration to the quality of workmanship a
project warrants can lead to overestimat-
ing or underestimating.
12. Omitting Items the Cost Estimator
Considers to be Minor: Sometimes items
such as scaffolding, ramps, and guard-
(Continued on page 8)
C O N S T R U C T I O N E S T I M A T I N G E R R O R S
F R O M M A S O N R Y W O R K T O O L S . C O M
Page 6 N E W S L E T T E R T I T L E
www.masonryworkstools.com/constructionestimatingerrors.html
August 10, 2010, from
www.reedconstructiondata.com/
news/2010/08/are-construction-bid-
errors-up-in-a-down-economy/?nid=2816
USA - July 31, 2010 - Difficult economic
times obviously can place tremendous
pressure on contractors to obtain work.
Adding the pressing need for a contrac-
tor to get something in the door when
work is scarce to fast approaching bid
deadlines for an increased number of
bids, and the routine pressure of compe-
tition for contracts, may result in in-
creased mistakes in the preparation of
construction bids.
But if an error occurs, when can an Indi-
ana contractor obtain relief once the
error is discovered? The answer will de-
pend upon when the error is discovered
and whether the error arose from a
mathematical or clerical error by the con-
tractor, or from the contractor's error in
judgment.
A contractor may one day find itself in
the following situation: After spending
weeks carefully reviewing and analyzing
the plans and specifications, preparing
take-offs and estimates, gathering antici-
pated labor and material costs, seeking
information and bids from prospective
subcontractors, and putting its bid in
writing, a bid is submitted. When the
bids are opened, the contractor’s excite-
ment in learning that the $5,000,000
bid it so carefully prepared is accepted is
quickly tempered by discovering that the
next closest bid was $7,000,000.
A contractor which suspects a bid error
has occurred obviously is well advised to
determine what in fact happened as
quickly as possible. General contract
formation principles of offer, acceptance
and consideration apply to the bid proc-
ess. The contractor's bid constitutes an
offer, which the owner may accept or
reject. Once accepted, a contract has
been formed. Therefore, if the contractor
discovers its error prior to acceptance by
the owner, it is entitled to revoke its bid.
However, under the more common sce-
nario discussed above, the contractor's
discovery does not occur until after ac-
ceptance and contract formation. Relief
from a bid error is then possible only if
the error can be attributed to a mathe-
matical or clerical error. The contractor
will be hard-pressed to obtain relief if the
error is caused by a misinterpretation of
the specifications by the contractor or a
mistake in judgment.
Mistakes of Fact
Indiana's courts long ago recognized that
a contractor who makes a clerical or
mathematical error may be entitled to
relief. In Board of School Commissioners
v. Bender, 72 N.E. 154 (Ind. Ct. App.
1904), the contractor was required to
submit his bid by 4:00 p.m.; however, it
did not receive bids from two of its sub-
contractors until 3:30 that same after-
noon. The contractor hastily finalized its
bid and in doing so miscalculated the
total bid by approximately $4,000 (which
was 25 percent of the total bid). The
Bender court held that the error was an
excusable, computational mistake and
allowed the contractor to rescind its bid.
See also Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Met-
ropolitan Development Commission, 641
N.E.2d 653 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994) (no ma-
terial variance in bid where numerical
amount on bid form provided that bid
was for $2,399,000, but bid was written
out as "Two Million Three Hundred Ninety
Nine Dollars" as deletion of the word
"Thousand" was merely a typographical
error).
Mistakes of Judgment
However, an Indiana court is unlikely to
grant a contractor relief where it has
made a mistake of judgment rather than
a mistake of fact. Mistakes of judgment
include instances where a contractor
misinterprets the plans and specifica-
tions provided by the owner, or where a
contractor understands the scope of the
project, but incorrectly estimates the
labor, materials or other costs necessary
for completion of the project. An unsuc-
cessful attempt by a contractor to obtain
relief from a mistake of judgment was
the subject of Mid-States General &
Mech. Contracting Corp. v. Town of Good-
land, 811 N.E.2d 425 (Ind. Ct. App.
2004). In Mid-States, the bid documents
required all bidders to "break down their
bid into one lump sum for the majority of
the work and four smaller optional alter-
nate projects that could be completed if
funding was available." All component
parts of the work and stated alternates
and allowances were clearly required to
be included in the stipulated sum
amount. Mid-States' $822,000 bid was
the low bid and was accepted by the
owner; however, Mid-States advised the
architect that its total contract price in-
cluding the stated allowances was actu-
ally $933,020. The owner ultimately
awarded the contract to the second low-
est bidder and sued Mid-States for the
difference between Mid-States’ bid and
the second lowest bid. Determining that
the "bid documents were unambiguous"
in requiring Mid-States to include the
alternates and allowances as part of the
stipulated sum amount, the court found
in favor of the owner.
The Mid-States decision serves notice
that a contractor's failure to understand
unambiguous contract provisions in pre-
paring its bid likely will not support relief
from a bid mistake. In such a case the
contractor's best and perhaps only hope
is that it realizes its mistake prior to bid
opening and acceptance by the owner so
that it may revoke the bid.
(Continued on page 8)
Page 7 V O L U M E 1 , I S S U E 5
A R E C O N S T R U C T I O N B I D E R R O R S
U P I N A D O W N E C O N O M Y ?
B R I A N M . F A L C O N A N D D E A N R . B R A C K E N R I D G E
A T T O R N E Y S A T L A W - F R O S T B R O W N T O D D L L C
rails, are left out of an estimate on the assumption that their
cost is relatively minor and can be absorbed in the overall bid.
On small projects a contractor may gamble on his workers
handling such items routinely. This can be a costly error.
13. Construction Estimating Errors Include Overlooking Items:
The typical causes of overlooking items when preparing an
estimate or bid.
1. Lack of attention to details.
2. In too great of a hurry to complete the cost estimate.
3. Too heavy a workload.
4. Basic lack of experience.
5. Delegating part of the estimate to others.
6. Failure to use a reliable checklist.
An important safeguard against overlooking items is to have
another person independently review and double check the
cost estimate before sending it out to the owner or general
contractor.
14. Construction Estimating Errors in taking short cuts: Taking
shortcuts when making an estimate can be risky. Sometimes
there is a temptation to take shortcuts when under the pres-
sure of time-limit in which to complete the cost estimate on
time or because of a heavy backlog of work. Shortcuts
take the form of guesstimating, using square feet or
cubic foot costs in place of details, and using lump sum
figures picked out of the air, all of which have great risks. This
is generally when the estimator says, "we got that job? What
did I miss?"
15. Not Allowing for Realistic Contingencies: Some construc-
tion projects may have inherent and unusual problems that
should be recognized when the cost estimate is being pre-
pared. Failure to make the allowances or contingencies may
result in not getting the contract or losing money if awarded
the contract. These contingencies include severe winter
weather conditions, or extremely hot and humid climates. The
project may be located in an area of the country subject to
heavy rainfall. Justifications for a realistic contingency include
anticipated labor troubles, material shortages, or political
problems. Although it is poor policy to make flat allowances
for contingencies without good reasons, particularly when
competition is high. Keep it realistic.
16. Inadequate or Excessive Overhead Charges are common
Construction Estimating Errors:
This one job may not be sufficient to take care of the whole
company and its overhead. A good way to eliminate this prob-
lem is to simply look at the job you are dealing with and com-
pare what the overhead would be to other contractors bidding
on the job big or small.
(Continued from page 6)
Page 8 T H E G R E A T P L A I N S A D D E N D A # 3 5
E S T I M A T I N G E R R O R S
Conclusion
Given today's economic climate, where contractors may find them-
selves hurriedly reviewing plans and specifications and preparing an
increased number of bids in advance of bidding deadlines to secure
much-needed work, bids may be more susceptible to human error.
While mathematical or typographical errors may provide grounds for
a contractor to withdraw a flawed bid, a contractor's failure to care-
fully review and follow unambiguous contract documents or its fail-
ure to properly estimate manpower, equipment or materials neces-
sary for completion may leave it with little chance to walk away from
an erroneous bid. Prudent contractors will take great care to try to
avoid potentially costly bid errors, particularly unforced errors which
could be avoided by rereading bidding standards and plans and
specifications before submitting a bid.
(Continued from page 7)
D O W N E C O N O M Y
Meeting Date: October 27, 2010
Time: 11:45 AM Location: Granite City Food and Brewery
Attendance: Chris Ahrenholtz, Mark Mentele, Justin Short, Steve
Rice
Discussion topics:
October Meeting Review—Rob Maglinger
November meeting preview—Andy Greenberg
November fundraiser—Texas Hold’em Poker
Committee reports
No reports
Old Business
SBO is reminding chapters to provide Federal ID numbers and
Articles of Incorporation
I N T H E B E G I N N I N G
T H E R E I S A N
E S T I M A T E .
Canon #1
Professional estimator shall
perform services in areas of
their discipline and competence.
Canon #2
Professional estimator shall
continue to expand their profes-
sional capabilities through con-
tinuing education programs to
better enable them to serve
clients, employers and the in-
dustry.
Canon #3
Professional estimator shall
conduct themselves in a manner
which will promote cooperation
and good relations among mem-
bers of our profession and those
directly related to our profes-
sion.
Canon #4
Professional estimator shall
safeguard and keep in confi-
dence all knowledge of the busi-
ness affairs and technical proce-
dures of an employer or client.
Canon #5
Professional estimator shall
conduct themselves with integ-
rity at all times and not know-
ingly or willingly enter into agree-
ments that violate the laws of
the United States of America or
of the states in which they prac-
tice. They shall establish guide-
lines for setting forth prices and
receiving quotations that are fair
and equitable to all parties.
Canon #6
Professional estimator shall util-
ize their education, years of ex-
perience and acquired skills in
the preparation of each estimate
or assignment with full commit-
ment to make each estimate or
assignment as detailed and accu-
rate as their talents and abilities
allow.
Canon #7
Professional estimator shall not
engage in the practice of ―bid
peddling‖ as defined by this code.
This is a breach of moral and
ethical standards, and this prac-
tice shall not be entered into by a
member of this society.
Canon #8
Professional estimator and those
in training to be estimator shall
not enter into any agreement that
may be considered acts of collu-
sion or conspiracy (bid rigging)
with the implied or express pur-
pose of defrauding clients. Acts of
this type are in direct violation of
the Code of Ethics of the Ameri-
can Society of Professional Esti-
mators.
Canon #9
Professional estimator and those
in training to be estimator shall
not participate in acts, such as
the giving or receiving of gifts,
that are intended to be or may be
construed as being unlawful acts
of bribery.
B O A R D M E E T I N G M I N U T E S &
C O M M I T T E E R E P O R T S
Page 9 V O L U M E 1 , I S S U E 5
A S P E C A N O N S
P R E S I D E N T S
M E S S A G E
The American So-
ciety of Profes-
sional Estimators
serves construc-
tion Estimators by
providing educa-
tion, fellowship,
and opportunity
for professional
development.
M I S S I O N
S T A T E M E N T
Upcoming Chapter Meetings
December 8 - Estimating Errors
January 12, 2011 - Tom Becka
February 9, 2011 - Legal Issues in Construction
March 9, 2011 - Site Visit
April 13, 2011 - Federal Issues in Construction
May 11, 2011 - Educational Seminar, Elections, and Awards
Upcoming Board Meeting:
December 1 - January 5, 2011 - January 26, 2011 -
February 23, 2011 - March 23, 2011 - April 27, 2011 - May
18, 2011
A M E R I C A N S O C I E T Y O F P R O F E S S I O N A L E S T I M A T O R S
G R E A T P L A I N S C H A P T E R 3 5
December 15, 2010
Last Day to submit Proposed Amendments to Bylaws Committee
January 1, 2011
Last Day to Submit Certification Applications CR
IT
IC
AL
CA
LE
ND
AR
IT
EM
S
Www.sites.google.com/site/aspe35
There are many
activities planned
for the coming
year. If you have
program sugges-
tions, newsletter
topics, or other
ideas to share, we
would love to hear
from you
Related Documents
