AK General Contractor common mistakes
AK General Contractor · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Memorizing lien-notice deadlines as a single number instead of tracking the separate deadlines for residential vs. commercial projects and for owner vs. subcontractor claimants.
Alaska lien law has different notice and recording timelines depending on project type and claimant position, so candidates who learn one deadline apply it to every scenario.
What to do instead
Build a one-page matrix of claimant type by project type with the required notice, recording, and enforcement dates, and recite it from a blank page until it is automatic.
Computing markup by multiplying cost by the overhead-and-profit percentage and treating the result as the bid price, instead of dividing cost by (1 minus the markup percentage).
The two formulas give similar answers at small percentages, so the error goes unnoticed in practice problems and only surfaces on larger markups.
What to do instead
Work five practice problems each way and compare results side by side; state in writing which formula applies to markup-on-cost versus markup-on-price before solving any bid problem.
Applying a single weather day allowance to a schedule without tying it to the specific month and trade doing the work.
Candidates treat weather days as a project-level lump sum rather than a productivity adjustment that varies by season and activity.
What to do instead
Practice adjusting activity durations month by month using local climate data, and annotate each schedule activity with the assumed weather-loss factor.
Reading a critical path as the sequence of longest-duration activities rather than the sequence with zero total float.
Long activities look intuitively critical, so candidates skip the forward and backward pass and guess the path.
What to do instead
For every network diagram, compute early start, early finish, late start, late finish, and float for each node before answering; identify criticality only from zero float.
Sizing excavation slope and shoring from a memorized maximum angle without checking soil type, depth, and adjacent surcharge loads.
Candidates memorize one slope ratio from a safety table and apply it to every soil condition and depth.
What to do instead
Practice classifying soils from given descriptions and select protective systems from a depth-and-soil-type table; always note adjacent structures and spoil-pile loading in the answer.
Confusing the required inspection hold points in a concrete pour sequence, such as when reinforcement and embedments must be verified relative to formwork and placement.
Inspection sequencing is learned as a list rather than as a dependency chain, so the order gets scrambled under time pressure.
What to do instead
Draw the pour sequence as a flowchart with a hold point at each transition, and rehearse the sequence aloud for footing, wall, and slab pours.
Treating fire-resistance-rated assembly requirements as a finish schedule item rather than verifying the rated assembly, penetration protection, and joint details together.
Candidates focus on the visible finish and overlook that the rating depends on the whole assembly, including how penetrations and joints are protected.
What to do instead
For each rated assembly question, list the four elements (assembly, penetration, joint, opening) and confirm each is addressed before selecting an answer.
Selecting HVAC, plumbing, or electrical equipment from a rule-of-thumb unit rate without confirming the governing code requirement or the design condition given in the problem.
Rule-of-thumb sizing is common in the field and feels authoritative, so candidates skip the code check embedded in the question.
What to do instead
Before answering any MEP sizing question, write down the governing code section and the design condition stated, then verify the proposed size satisfies both.
Answering hazard-communication and respiratory-protection questions from general familiarity instead of the specific written-program elements the standard requires.
The standards are procedural, and candidates remember the intent but not the required written components.
What to do instead
Build a checklist of required written-program elements for each major safety standard and test yourself by listing them from memory, then checking against the regulation.
Handling erosion and sediment control and hazardous-materials questions by naming a best practice rather than identifying the permit, plan, or notification requirement that applies.
Candidates conflate field best management practices with the regulatory trigger that makes them mandatory.
What to do instead
For each environmental scenario, first identify the permit or plan threshold that applies, then the control measure; practice with a table linking project disturbance area to required approvals.