Page 5376 - Week 12 - Thursday, 28 October 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(k) what procurement processes have been or will be followed for the contracts to be awarded and (l) what provisions do or will the contracts carry relating to warranty arrangements and completion bonuses or other incentives.
(14) Did the managing director of ActewAGL in his letter to the editor of The Canberra Times, published on 21 April 2010 state that “If it were to be built today our estimates are that it would cost between $225 and $275 million”, if so, what is the basis for the statement.
(15) In relation to the Googong water treatment plant, both the original treatment plant and the new treatment plant constructed in 2004, what protective coatings have been considered, specified and/or applied to the concrete tanks.
Ms Gallagher: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
1. I am advised that the construction contract was awarded to the “TWJH Joint Venture”, being comprised of Thames Water (Australia) and John Holland. SKM were the designers supporting the TWJH Joint Venture.
The contract was awarded after an Expression of Interest process, followed by interviews to reduce the initial contenders to two consortia. The two consortia were requested to carry out sufficient design work to provide an upper limit fee for the design and construction of the Water Treatment Plant for completion by December 2004.
2. I am advised by ACTEW that practical completion of the plant was achieved on 22 December 2004.
3. I am advised that under the project agreement, the contractor provided the following warranties that commenced from 22 December 2004:
i. 2-year Defects Liability for the whole of the Plant which expired on 22 December 2006;
ii. Performance Guarantees of the Plant regarding:
a. Power consumption, and
b. Treated water quality, both of which expired on 22 December 2006; and
iii. 5-year Extended Warranty for all Major Equipment (specific to electro mechanical plant and equipment) to operate without defects and which expired on 22 December 2009.
4. I am advised that the quotation referred to as part of this question presents only part of the specifications regarding protective coatings. Section 9.1 of the Design Brief continues: “This requirement will be relaxed where the Contractor can demonstrate the contacting water will be non-corrosive and non-erosive to the concrete surface.”
The Design Brief further states at section 12.1: “All new equipment and structures shall be given corrosion protective coatings, apart from the following surfaces, unless specified otherwise elsewhere:- …; Concrete; …”
(a) I am advised by ACTEW that the material to be used in lining the relevant concrete surfaces was not explicitly specified, nor was the method of application or the extent of coverage beyond that listed above.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video