Let's orient on the site and the business case

• Tell me about the greenfield parcel you are evaluating and the primary business driver for choosing it
• Walk me through the go/no-go timeline for land purchase, due diligence milestones, and any external deadlines tied to the decision
• How many acres are in the parcel and what portion do you expect to develop in the first phase Options: Less than 5 acres, 5–20 acres, 21–50 acres, 51–100 acres, More than 100 acres
• Which internal metric will determine whether leadership considers this site a success Options: On-time pad delivery, Within budget estimate, Regulatory approval on schedule, No major rework after mobilization, Other
• Who on your team is the primary owner of the site selection decision and who else influences it Options: Project Director, Real Estate Manager, VP Facilities, CFO/Finance, Operations Lead, Other

Where the decision really breaks — timing, cost, or surprises

• If subsurface surprises forced a six-month delay and a 20% cost increase, would you proceed with the land purchase Options: Yes, proceed, Maybe, need more mitigation, No, we would stop the purchase
• Identify the top three operational consequences if the building pad misses the equipment installation date Options: Delayed production ramp, Increased equipment storage cost, Contractor idle time, Penalties to tenants or customers, Other
• On what fixed date must the pad be ready for your critical path activities, for example equipment set or foundation start Options: Within 8 weeks, Within 12 weeks, Within 3 months, Within 6 months, Target date is later than 6 months
• Rate how you prioritize cost, schedule, and regulatory certainty when making the purchase decision Options: Schedule highest, then cost, then permits, Cost highest, then schedule, then permits, Permits highest, then schedule, then cost, All equal priority
• Describe a past project where an unexpected site condition changed your outcome, including the cost or schedule impact
• Which single site risk would make you walk away from the purchase immediately Options: Unmappable wetlands, No feasible utility access, Known contaminated soils, Unresolvable right-of-way, Other

Point to the schedule assumption you trust least

• Point to the schedule assumption you trust least and explain why
• When is the land closing targeted and how firm is that date Options: Firm and contracted, Planned within 2–4 weeks, Planned in 1–3 months, Tentative beyond 3 months
• How many critical milestones must be met before mobilization, for example final geotech, site survey, permits, or utility agreements Options: 1–2, 3–4, 5 or more
• Who must sign off to authorize mobilization to the site and what will they require to say yes Options: Project Director, Real Estate, Finance/CFO, Operations, Procurement
• If a required permit slips by more than 8 weeks, what is the single decision you would make about the project timeline Options: Move the timeline, proceed with contingency, Pause until permit is resolved, Proceed on limited scope, Re-scope to reduce permit need

The ground truth — subsurface and environmental blind spots

• Tell the last time a geotechnical or environmental finding changed feasibility on a site you control, and what it cost in time or money
• To what depth were borings performed for this parcel, or if no borings exist, indicate that status Options: No borings yet, Borings to 10 feet, Borings to 30 feet, Borings deeper than 30 feet, Unknown
• Which environmental investigations have been completed, select all that apply Options: Wetland delineation, Threatened/endangered species survey, Cultural resources assessment, Phase I environmental site assessment, None completed
• If widespread shallow rock or unsuitable soils are discovered across the pad, how flexible is your contingency budget expressed as a percentage Options: Less than 5%, 5–10%, 11–15%, More than 15%
• Which regulatory approval, if delayed beyond 12 weeks, would stop the project Options: Stormwater permit, Wetland mitigation approval, Building/site grading permit, Utility connection approvals, Other

The other paths you're considering

• What alternatives to hiring an external site development partner are you actively evaluating Options: Keep incumbent contractor, Use internal construction team, Design-build combined contract, Delay purchase and re-evaluate, Other
• What would have to be true about your current approach for you to stay with it instead of switching to an outside partner Options: Cost estimates consistently within 10%, Internal team can meet mobilization date, Permitting pathway confirmed, No material subsurface risk uncovered, Other
• Has anyone inside your organization proposed solving site preparation fully in-house, and if so, who would lead that effort Options: Yes, Project/Construction team, Yes, Facilities, No internal proposal, Other
• Which criteria would cause you to favor an incumbent over a new partner Options: Proven local experience, Lower cost, Existing contracts, Faster mobilization, Self-perform earthwork/utilities
• If an internal option can deliver a similar schedule but at 15–20% higher cost, which would you choose Options: Lower cost external partner, Internal team despite higher cost, Depends on risk allocation

Practical gates — permits, utilities, and who does what

• Point to any hard gating constraint that must be resolved before mobilization on your target schedule
• Which specific permits are outstanding and at what stage are they Options: Not started, Submitted, awaiting review, In comment response, Approved
• Who on your side will own utility coordination and municipal negotiations Options: Internal Facilities/Engineering, External consultant, Real Estate, No owner assigned yet
• Does your team have a named owner for survey baselines and geotechnical deliverables Options: Yes, named owner, No, not yet, Partially assigned
• If the city requires an easement negotiation that adds 10 weeks, what is your fallback plan Options: Proceed with alternative access, Pause project, Use temporary construction access, Re-scope site

How you will accept the work — measurable and non-negotiable

• If we delivered the pad on time but with unresolved punch list items, would you accept it or delay final acceptance Options: Accept and track punch list under warranty, Delay final acceptance until closed, Accept only partial areas
• List the measurable acceptance criteria you require for final billing and turnover, select all that apply Options: Pad elevation within 0.10 ft of design, Compaction tests passing 95% standard, Stormwater functioning per permit, Utility tie-ins inspected and approved, All permit inspections closed
• Which single acceptance criterion would you refuse to compromise on Options: Elevation tolerance, Compaction/testing, Permit signoff, Utility availability, Other
• Are there any third-party inspectors or municipal signoffs that must be present at handover Options: Municipal inspector, Third-party materials lab, Environmental official, None required
• If acceptance is contingent on a third-party schedule, what maximum delay is acceptable before you stop the project Options: Less than 2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, 5–8 weeks, More than 8 weeks

Budget guardrails, contingencies, and contract triggers

• Which payment milestone or mobilization trigger is most likely to block approval if it is unacceptable Options: Large upfront deposit, Milestone tied to permit approval, Payment on mobilization only, Progress payments based on tests
• What is your target budget range for overall site preparation, select the closest band Options: Under $500k, $500k–$1M, $1M–$5M, $5M–$20M, Over $20M
• If contingency needs exceed 15%, would you pause negotiations, renegotiate scope, or accept the increase Options: Pause and reassess, Renegotiate scope, Accept increase, Unsure
• Which risk allocation arrangement do you prefer for unknown subsurface conditions Options: Fixed price with buyer contingency, Shared risk with unit pricing for extra work, Owner buys remediation directly, Time and materials with cap
• If a vendor requires a mobilization deposit greater than 10% of contract value, would that be acceptable Options: Yes, No, Maybe with escrow or holdback

Who moves this forward inside your organization

• Who in your leadership can veto this project and on what basis would they do so
• Walk me through the internal approval steps from the project owner to final sign-off, including procurement and finance involvement
• Which stakeholders will require tailored deliverables from the feasibility assessment, for example CFO wants cost ranges, operations wants schedule certainty Options: CFO/Finance, Operations, Engineering, Real Estate, Procurement, External investors
• At what point in the evaluation would you be comfortable giving authority to proceed to a single vendor Options: After feasibility report, After preliminary estimate and schedule, After detailed scope and price, Only after competitive bids
• Which internal resource constraints could slow the decision even if the feasibility numbers look good Options: Limited headcount for review, Budget cycle timing, Procurement rules, Other

If the feasibility study delivers, what happens next

• If the feasibility assessment confirms cost and schedule within your target, what stops you from signing a contract that same week Options: Nothing, we would sign, Need internal approval cycles, Require competitive bid, Other
• Which deliverable from the assessment would most accelerate your ability to commit, choose one Options: Detailed cost breakdown by work package, Firm mobilization date, Permit path confirmed, Utility availability confirmed
• How soon do you expect to review the feasibility deliverables and who will attend that review Options: Within 1 week, 1–2 weeks, 2–4 weeks, Longer than 4 weeks
• What would you like the seller to prepare before the kickoff to make the assessment productive Options: Existing geotech reports, Topographic survey, Permit application drafts, Utility contact list, Other
• Are you ready to schedule an on-site kickoff meeting within the next two weeks if we agree scope and price Options: Yes, No, Need to confirm internal schedule

• Feasibility Workshop, Site-Preparation Program

• Confirm the current state and cost of failure
• You confirm the documented current-state consequences match your exposure to schedule and budget risk.
• Provide existing geotechnical reports, environmental surveys, and survey baselines for the parcel before the follow-up feasibility deliverable.
• You confirm the geotechnical approach and contingency logic would materially reduce subsurface uncertainty for your parcel.
• Geotechnical risk proof using your site data
• Deliver a site-specific feasibility estimate and schedule with identified risk allowances and recommended next investigations within 7 business days.
• Confirm the required pad delivery date and the acceptance criteria that will define on-time completion.
• You confirm the permitting and utility coordination plan provides a credible path to the pad delivery date or identify the gap that remains.
• Permitting and environmental mitigation proof
• Utility coordination and critical-path timeline proof
• You agree on the specific evidence and deliverables needed next to reach a go/no-go recommendation on the parcel.
• Propose a mobilization trigger and payment milestone structure tied to the agreed investigation outcomes and permit milestones.
• Cost and schedule tradeoffs tied to acceptance criteria
• Validate alignment with your needs

• Feasibility Workshop, Site-Preparation Program
• Feasibility Workshop Deck
• Feasibility Workshop Brief

• meeting
• slides
• document

• Site Clearing and Vegetation Removal
• Mass Earthwork (Cut, Fill, Rebalance)
• Rock Excavation and Controlled Blasting
• Pad Subgrade Preparation and Compaction
• Temporary Dewatering and Groundwater Control
• Underground Utility Trenching and Installation
• Perform Municipal Utility Tie‑ins
• Stormwater Infrastructure Construction (BMPs, Basins, Pipes)
• Erosion Control and Sediment Management Installation
• Wetland Mitigation and Habitat Restoration Works
• Access Road and Construction Entrance Buildout
• Foundations and Shallow Footing Construction
• Final Grading and Site Cleanup

Site Clearing and Vegetation Removal

• Provide the acreage and the site plan reference for areas to be cleared (attach topo or parcel map if available).
• Identify any trees, protected species habitat, or no‑touch zones noted on the ecological survey or jurisdictional wetland delineation. Options: None noted, Protected trees/species present, Delineation pending
• List your preferred disposal or reuse method for cleared biomass and stumps per the local solid waste or C&D recycling rules. Options: Haul to landfill, Chipping and on‑site reuse, Third‑party recycling, Owner to remove
• Specify seasonal or timing constraints for clearing referenced on the environmental memo (e.g., bird nesting window, breeding season). Options: No seasonal limits, Nesting window applies, Winter work only, Other
• Confirm access limitations shown on the site plan or easement exhibits that could restrict clearing equipment size or haul routes. Options: No restrictions, Restricted access windows, Height/weight limits on access, Requires temporary ROW permit
• Describe erosion and sediment controls you expect during clearing as called out in the draft SWPPP or local ordinance. Options: Silt fence and inlet protection, Erosion control matting, Temporary diversion swales, Need SWPPP prepared

Mass Earthwork (Cut, Fill, Rebalance)

• Provide the earthwork target volumes or the cut/fill balance from your grading plan (cubic yards), or indicate if only contour plan is available. Options: Cut volume provided, Fill volume provided, Only contours available, No grading data yet
• Estimate acceptable haul distance to onsite borrow or offsite disposal and reference the borrow/source permit or quarry spec if known. Options: Onsite re‑balance preferred, Offsite borrow within 5 miles, Offsite borrow 5–20 miles, Owner will supply borrow
• List the maximum allowable heavy equipment axle loads and any roadway weight limits along proposed haul routes per local DOT/ROW notes.
• Specify the cut/fill slope limits and benching requirements shown on the geotechnical report or grading detail. Options: 1.5:1 or steeper allowed, 2:1 required, Benching per geotech, Temporary shoring required
• Indicate the compaction standard expected for engineered fills (reference target density and standard, e.g., 95% modified Proctor ASTM D1557). Options: 95% MMDD (ASTM D1557), 90% standard Proctor (ASTM D698), CBR target specified, Per geotechnical engineer
• Describe traffic control or permitting needs for offsite haul (local hauling windows, overweight permits, truck staging areas) referenced from the traffic management plan. Options: No special permits, Overweight/OWD permits required, Night haul windows required, Owner to secure permits

Rock Excavation and Controlled Blasting

• Provide the geotechnical or borings log indication of rock depth, rock type, and estimated rock volumes for blasting estimation. Options: Boring logs attached, Estimated rock depth provided, No borings yet, Investigative borings required
• Identify any structures, utilities, or sensitive receptors within 500 feet that require a pre‑blast survey or vibration limits per local ordinance. Options: No nearby sensitive receptors, Residential/structures nearby, Critical utilities nearby, Pre‑blast survey required
• Specify required blast vibration or airblast limits from the jurisdiction or owner standard (e.g., PPV mm/s or decibels). Options: Standard PPV ≤ 5 mm/s, Owner limit stricter than local, Decibel limit applies, No specific limit provided
• List the blast notification and permitting steps you expect (local blasting permit, pre‑blast survey, neighbor notifications). Options: Permit required, Permit not required, Pre‑blast survey required, Owner handles notifications
• Describe rock excavation disposal strategy and testing requirements for reuse or offsite acceptance (e.g., aggregate spec, TCLP testing). Options: Reuse as structural fill, Offsite disposal to landfill, Process and sell as aggregate, Testing required
• Indicate if controlled blasting is restricted by time‑of‑day or seasonal limits on the project permit or local code. Options: No restrictions, Time‑of‑day limits, Daytime only, Seasonal/no blasting allowed

Pad Subgrade Preparation and Compaction

• Provide the target pad elevation tolerance relative to the structural slab elevation shown on the civil/site plan (inches). Options: ±0.25 in, ±0.5 in, ±1.0 in, Specify custom tolerance
• Specify the compaction acceptance criteria for pad subgrade including test method and threshold (example: 95% modified Proctor ASTM D1557). Options: 95% MMDD (ASTM D1557), 90% D698 standard Proctor, CBR ≥ specified value, Per geotech memo
• Provide the required density testing frequency and spatial distribution from the geotechnical plan (e.g., 1 test per 1,000 sq ft or per lift). Options: 1 per 1,000 sq ft, 1 per 500 sq ft, Per geotech direction, TBD
• Specify any proof‑rolling or proof‑loading procedures required before concrete or foundation placement as noted in the structural or geotechnical report. Options: Proof‑roll required, Proof‑load required, Not required, Per geotech guidance
• Confirm whether import fill must meet a laboratory gradation or contamination standard (e.g., no organics, <2% passing #200) and provide test spec. Options: Imported engineered fill required, Onsite reuse allowed with testing, Contamination testing required, No restriction provided
• Provide acceptance criteria that will confirm the pad is ready for foundation placement (elevation tolerance, compaction tests, number of passing in‑situ density tests and proof‑roll sign‑off).

Temporary Dewatering and Groundwater Control

• Describe the anticipated groundwater conditions from borings or seasonal high groundwater elevation and reference the boring logs. Options: GW more than 10 ft below grade, GW 0–5 ft below grade, Fluctuating seasonal groundwater, No data available
• Specify the temporary dewatering method you prefer or that the geotechnical report recommends (wellpoints, deep wells, sump pumping). Options: Wellpoints, Deep wells with pumps, Sump and pumps, Combination
• Indicate whether a discharge permit or NPDES authorization will be required for dewatering and whether a plan exists. Options: Discharge permit required, Permit not required, Permit pending, Owner to obtain
• List expected contaminant testing or monitoring required for pumped discharge (pH, turbidity, TSS, contaminants of concern per environmental report). Options: pH and TSS required, Full analyte suite required, Turbidity monitoring only, No monitoring required
• Specify standby power and contingency dewatering capacity required for rainy season or power failures as shown in the construction schedule. Options: 24‑hr standby pumps, Redundant pumps on site, No standby required, Owner to provide
• Confirm dewatering discharge location options shown on the SWPPP or site plan (to storm system, infiltration area, municipal sewer) and any agency approvals needed. Options: To storm system with permit, To infiltration area, To sanitary with approval, Discharge offsite only

Underground Utility Trenching and Installation

• Provide utility as‑built drawings, existing service map, or GIS layers showing existing mains and laterals on or adjacent to the parcel. Options: As‑builts attached, GIS data available, No existing records, Owner to provide
• Specify trench depth, bedding and backfill materials per utility standard details for water, sanitary, storm, and telecom shown on civil details. Options: Standard depths provided, Shallow utilities required, Depths vary by utility, Per utility owner specs
• Indicate required pressure and leak testing procedures for potable water mains and expected test documentation. Options: Hydrostatic test required, Pressure decay test, Bacteriological sampling required, Per municipality
• List conduit sizes, fiber/telecom pull‑string requirements, and manhole spacing from the communications plan or utility scope. Options: Conduit and fiber required, Conduit only, Owner provides telecom, Not required
• Specify the required backfill compaction standard around utilities and typical density testing frequency called out in the civil details. Options: 95% standard Proctor, 90% standard Proctor, Mechanical compaction per spec, Per utility owner
• Indicate whether CCTV inspection, mandrel tests, or camera documentation are required for sanitary/storm piping acceptance and how many linear feet per run. Options: CCTV required for all runs, CCTV on critical runs only, No CCTV required, Specify footage

Perform Municipal Utility Tie‑ins

• Provide the municipality/utility district tie‑in requirements or reference the utility permit drawings and connection points. Options: Municipal requirements attached, Standard connection details provided, No guidance yet, Permit pending
• Specify required municipal inspections or witness points for tie‑in (meter set, pressure test, chlorination, backflow preventer) and expected sign‑offs. Options: Meter set and inspection, Pressure test witness required, Chlorination & bacteriological clearance, Owner to coordinate
• Indicate expected municipal scheduling constraints for service activation (lead time for meter, transformer, or sewer connection). Options: Meter lead time <2 weeks, Meter lead time 2–8 weeks, Transformer lead time 8+ weeks, Unknown
• Specify required documentation for acceptance of the tie‑in (municipal sign‑off form, as‑built drawings, pressure test logs). Options: Municipal sign‑off required, As‑builts plus tests, Electronic submission only, Other
• Confirm responsible party for securing municipal permits and coordinating inspections (you, contractor, or shared responsibility). Options: You secure permits, We secure permits, Shared responsibility
• Provide the evidence that will validate municipal tie‑in completion (signed municipal inspection, meter set photo, meter/energization certificate).

Stormwater Infrastructure Construction (BMPs, Basins, Pipes)

• Provide the stormwater design criteria or drainage report reference (design storm, discharge rates, allowable release rates). Options: Design storm attached, Drainage report attached, Criteria TBD, Local code governs
• Specify the types of BMPs and basins required (detention pond, retention basin, bioretention, infiltration trench) as shown on the civil drawings. Options: Detention pond, Bioretention/Infiltration, Underground detention, Combination
• Indicate the required materials and pipe classes for storm sewer runs and the typical manhole/structure details from the civil standard details. Options: RCP per spec, HDPE/ADS allowed, Concrete structures, Per municipality
• Specify required hydraulic performance verification or post‑construction testing (as‑built survey to confirm basin volumes, infiltration testing). Options: As‑built survey required, Infiltration tests required, Full hydraulic model validation, Owner to approve
• Confirm maintenance access and required protective measures during construction (siltation forebays, sediment traps, construction access ramps). Options: Access shown on plan, Access constraints exist, Maintenance easement required, Not defined
• Provide the acceptance evidence for stormwater infrastructure performance (as‑built elevations, hydraulic comparison to design, post‑construction inspection report).

Erosion Control and Sediment Management Installation

• Provide the draft SWPPP, erosion control plan sheets, or the permit references that govern silt fence, inlet protection, and turbidity controls. Options: SWPPP attached, Plan sheets provided, Permit pending, No SWPPP required
• Specify required materials and installation standards for erosion controls (silt fence type, wattles, sediment basins) from local code or the SWPPP. Options: Class A silt fence, Compost filter socks, Sediment basin required, Per SWPPP
• Indicate required inspection frequency and reporting for erosion controls during rainy season as required by NPDES or local ordinance. Options: Weekly inspections, After each storm, Daily during rain events, Per permit
• List temporary stabilization measures expected after clearing and before final stabilization (temporary seeding, tackifier, erosion mat). Options: Temporary seeding, Erosion control matting, Hydroseed, Mulch and tackifier
• Specify who will maintain erosion control measures during construction and how change‑orders for failures should be handled. Options: You maintain, Contractor maintains, Shared maintenance, TBD
• Indicate any turbidity or discharge monitoring limits called out by the permit that will require field testing and logs. Options: TSS/Turbidity limits specified, pH and other analytes required, No discharge monitoring, Permit pending

Wetland Mitigation and Habitat Restoration Works

• Provide the jurisdictional delineation report and any mitigation ratios or mitigation plan references required by regulatory agency permits. Options: Delineation attached, Mitigation plan attached, Mitigation required but not developed, No wetlands present
• Specify the mitigation approach expected (offsite mitigation bank credits, on‑site mitigation area, in‑lieu fee) and reference the mitigation banking instrument if used. Options: Mitigation bank credits, On‑site mitigation, In‑lieu fee, Negotiated approach
• Indicate the performance standards for restored habitat (survival rates, species list, monitoring years) as called out in the permit conditions. Options: Performance standards attached, Standard survival rates apply, Monitoring 3–5 years, Owner to define
• List seasonal planting windows or protection periods for restoration work that are in the mitigation plan or environmental permit. Options: Spring planting window, Fall planting window, Avoid nesting season, Planting window flexible
• Specify long‑term monitoring and maintenance obligations required after construction (monitoring reports, replacements per year). Options: Monitoring 2 years, Monitoring 3–5 years, Per permit until performance met, No monitoring required
• Indicate who will secure mitigation credit purchases or complete permit required restoration (you, contractor, or third‑party mitigation provider). Options: You secure credits, Contractor secures credits, Third‑party mitigation provider, Shared responsibility

• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Payment & Milestone Schedule
• Mobilization Trigger Agreement
• Conditions Precedent: Permits & Investigations
• Authorization for Site Access & Geotechnical Investigations
• Risk Allocation & Contingency Agreement
• Change Order Agreement
• Performance Security & Warranty
• Insurance & Indemnity Schedule
• Acceptance Certificate & Final Billing

• Closeout Health Check (weeks 1-4)
• First Measurement Review (weeks 4-10)
• 90-Day Warranty & Performance Review (around day 90)
• Quarterly Continuous Improvement Review

• Compile a backlog closure plan for long-tail warranty items with target dates and monitoring steps.
• Confirm whether warranty defect rate and punch-list closure time meet the thresholds recorded in the Site Acceptance Checklist or require extended remediation.
• Agree on any extended remediation plan or monitoring approach with milestone dates.
• Set the recurring reporting cadence for warranty performance and unresolved items.
• Document the extended remediation plan with milestones and deliver it to the shared channel.
• Establish the recurring warranty performance report format and schedule.
• Open escalation tickets for any high-severity items that exceed target resolution windows.
• Trend review of core metrics
• Reduce recurring defect categories by agreeing concrete process or checklist changes.
• Improve average punch-list closure time and first-pass compaction test pass rate toward the targets recorded in the Site Acceptance Checklist.
• Close or transition long-tail warranty items with clear timelines or monitoring plans.
• Publish a lessons-learned summary that lists recurring root causes and the agreed process changes.
• Update the pre-construction and QA checklists to reflect agreed changes and circulate the revised templates.
• Reconfirm acceptance criteria and documentation
• Confirm that all required as-built documentation referenced in the Site Acceptance Checklist has been delivered or has an agreed delivery date.
• Produce a prioritized initial punch-list with remediation deadlines and an established shared issue channel.
• Agree the cadence for short-term punch-list burn-down updates until the first measurement review.
• Publish the complete as-built package and test reports to the shared project channel.
• Create and circulate the initial punch-list with remediation target dates and severity classification.
• Activate the warranty/issue tracking channel and post the escalation procedure.
• Present current metric state
• Establish whether the open punch-list count and compaction test pass rate meet or are trending to the Site Acceptance Checklist targets.
• Agree a timebound remediation plan for any off-target metrics with concrete milestones and retest dates.
• Ensure the warranty register is updated to reflect all corrective actions and retest requirements.
• Log all corrective actions and retest requirements into the warranty register with target completion dates.
• Schedule required rework and verification tests and circulate the timeline to the shared channel.
• Produce a short report summarizing root-cause findings for any metric gaps identified in this meeting.
• Cumulative performance summary
• Verify as-built deliverables
• Severity triage and remediation status
• Recurring root-cause analysis
• Diagnose root causes for gaps
• Process and checklist updates
• Agree corrective actions and timelines
• Surface early punch-list and warranty items
• Decide on extended remediation or monitoring needs
• Update warranty and punch-list register
• Finalize escalation and long-term communication cadence
• Backlog and long-tail item review
• Immediate remediation and short-term schedule
• Confirm communication and issue channel