claims for extra works lines b and c

Upload: izo-serem

Post on 03-Apr-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 7/28/2019 Claims for Extra Works Lines B and C

    1/3

    NOTES ON LINES B AND C

    The contractor carried out works on the above sewer lines and were measured and included in IPC No 5

    for certification and payment. However, the Engineer noted that works done did not qualify to be paid

    under the items in the Bill of Quantities as there was no relevant item. In his letter, the Resident

    Engineer recommended that the contractor raises a claim for reimbursement for the works carried out

    for consideration by the Engineer. Consequently, the contractor raised the issue with the Engineer in his

    letter NWSB/GSP/LBC/2010/23/11 of 23rd November 2010 claiming that the rate inserted for these

    works were rendered inappropriate and that the Engineer should establish applicable rates as provided

    for in the contract.

    On the 15th December 2010, the contractor in his letter GSP/SA/2010/12/15 sent a reminder to the

    Engineer seeking his decision on the on the issue raised before him. No response was received and the

    contractor again in his letter NWSB/GSP/LBC/2011/03/02/(12) of 3rd

    February 2011 sent yet another

    reminder to the Engineer on the same matter.

    On the 9th February 2011, the Resident Engineer, in his letter RE/GSP/MSC/(063) of 4th February 2011

    responded to the contactors letter of 3rd February 2011 advising that the contractor had been

    compensated fully for the works carried on sewer lines B and C and that any works carried out by the

    contractor in the construction and maintenance of the deviation through Aerodromes property was a

    private matter between the Site Agent and the Officer-In-Charge of the Garissa Airstrip.

    In response to the Resident Engineers letter, the contractor in his letter GSP/SA/2011/9/2 of 9th

    February 2011 informed the RE that the matter had been referred to the Engineer for his adjudication

    and hence was out his hands.

    In his letter NWSB/WP/7 Vol. VIII/(31) of 12th

    May 2011, the Engineer advised the contractor that the

    issue raised was adequately compensated in the various items in the Bill of Quantities and that the

    matter of a deviation through Aerodromes property was a private arrangement between the contractor

    and the Officer-In-Charge of the Airstrip. The contractor was not satisfied by the Engineers ruling and

    then appealed through his letter GSP/SA/31/5/2011 of 31st May 2011 and the matter has not been

    reviewed since.

    Contractors contention for additional compensation

    The bone of contention was compensation for Item K732 and K731 for Breaking up, temporary andpermanent reinstatement of murram roads for sewer lines B and C respectively. The BOQ provision for

    these items were K732 10 m and K731 25 m. In arriving at these quantities, the designer anticipated

    that the sewer line will follow in its entirety along the road reserve and only cross the road at minimal

    sections. Thus the reason for providing minimal quantities for these items. It is also normal practice that

    other services are located along the road reserve with the permission of the relevant authority in charge

    of such roads.

  • 7/28/2019 Claims for Extra Works Lines B and C

    2/3

    In preparation of his tender, the contractor anticipated that any crossing of roads on lines B and C; and

    indeed any other sewer lines will be minimal and any deviation to be provided for passage of traffic will

    be limited. This is corroborated by the minimal quantities inserted in the BOQ. Therefore, the contractor

    did not expect to construct and maintain such lengths of deviation for passage of traffic. No experienced

    contractor would expected such a scenario to happen.

    At the time of execution of the project, permanent developments had been established along the design

    alignment and became apparent that the alignment had to be changed to accommodate these new

    developments. Due to these developments, it became envitable that the only viable solution was the

    sewer line to follow the road in these sections. Sewer line C from MHC21 to MHC9 for a distance of 670,

    followed the road which is heavily plied by both private and public vehicles. The road section affected

    was closed to all traffic before any activities could be carried. The contractor had no alternative but to

    provide a deviation through the Aerodromes property. In order to construct the deviation, the

    contractor had to seek for the authority of the owner, the Officer-In-Charge Garissa Airstrip. This was a

    private arrangement but for the good of the project under the prevailing conditions.

    After receiving a no objection, the contractor opened sections of the perimeter fence and constructed a

    deviation of 1000m through bushy area by use of equipment. It only construction of the deviation that

    the contractor could close the road for sewer construction activities to start. The contractor continued

    to maintain the deviation for the entire period that works were ongoing in this section. At the end of the

    construction, the contractor reinstated the deviation and also the perimeter fence.

    In process of construction of this sewer line, a section of the Meteorological department perimeter

    fence of chain link on concrete posts.

    In sewer line B, the contractor had to follow pipeline alignment which was damaged in various section

    during the of construction of the sewer. These damages were unavoidable as the alignment was similarand there was no available space either for permanent and/or temporary relocation of the pipeline.

    Damages to the pipeline occasioned caving in of the trenches and resulting in the contractor executing

    additional works which otherwise would have been avoided if relocation of the pipeline was done These

    additional costs are not captured by the items provided in the BOQ and hence the for establishing a

    suitable item and rate to compensate the contractor adequately.

    Costs incurred

    The contractor incurred costs in deployment of the following resources;

    a) D6 Bull dozerb) Motor Graderc) Compactord) Wheel Loadere) Tipper Truckf) Water Bowserg) Excavator

  • 7/28/2019 Claims for Extra Works Lines B and C

    3/3

    h) Plant operatorsi) Driversj) Skilled and unskilled labourk) Fencing posts (wooden/concrete)l) and other materials.