Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
QUALITY AND PRACTICES FOR ITS ASSURANCE 26 fully developed and effective, primarily because of the Corps' Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System (discussed in Chapter 3).24 Other agencies would do well to emulate these practices. 3. The FAR and its amplifications by specific agencies are not as restrictive to improvements as the agencies believe. On the whole, the FAR is an excellent guide, and agencies can work effectively within its guidelines to take more innovative approaches than they are now executing. Some of these innovative approaches are discussed in the next chapter. REFERENCES Building Research Board, Committee on Construction Change Orders, 1986. Construction Contract Modifications: Comparing the Experiences of Federal Agencies and Other Owners, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. Office of the Federal Register, 1985. Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Parts 1 to 99, Code of Federal Regulations, 48CFR 1.000, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Newman, Robert B., June 1989. Use of Consultants for Construction Engineering and Inspection, NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 146, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. 24 Otherwise, the Corps and NAVFAC follow similar procedures. See, for example, Contractor Quality Control (CQC) System, NFGS-01400 (February 1991), Department of the Navy; Contractor Inspection System, NFGS-01401 (February 1991), Department of the Navy; and Contractor Quality Control, CEGS 01440 (January 1991), Department of the Army.
