| |
Lahad Datu Port Expansion
Malaysia
The Contractor for a port expansion at Lahad Datu in Malaysia engaged Nielsen-Wurster to perform extension-of-time entitlement and acceleration analyses. This Project primarily comprised the construction of a new ship jetty consisting of approach, side berth and main subsections. The Contractor encountered delays in its piling work resulting from differing site conditions and equipment constraints which forced the acceleration of follow-on concrete activities in order to meet the contractual phased completion dates. Nielsen-Wurster reviewed the claim documents and Project records, then prepared an independent expert analysis of the Contractor's claims and determined entitlement for excusable and compensable time extensions and quantified disruption to the planned work sequence. In the absence of a regularly updated Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule, Nielsen-Wurster developed fragnet schedules and quantified delays which affected the main work sequence. An Arbitration held in mid-1999 adopted Nielsen-Wurster's findings.
|
|
| |
Mount Hope Water Main Project
Panama
The General Contractor engaged Nielsen-Wurster to review a number of claims submitted by its subsidiary company on the Mount Hope Port Water Main Project in Panama. The Project involved placement of approximately 12,000 linear feet of ductile iron water main within a 300-day period. A number of impacts were introduced during the course of the Project by the Panama Canal Commission, in addition to differing site conditions and severe weather conditions that delayed the Project substantially from its scheduled completion date. Nielsen-Wurster reviewed six claims submitted by Contract Plumbers that had been subsequently denied by the Panama Canal Commission. It was Nielsen-Wurster's opinion that three of the six claims were valid for additional direct and overhead expenditures by Contract Plumbers and were beyond the contractual requirements of the Project. Nielsen-Wurster prepared a report of its findings that was presented to the Panama Canal Commission and enabled all issues to be resolved favorable to the Client.
|
|
| |
Panama Canal Transfer Station
Panama
Nielsen-Wurster provided construction expertise to the Panama Canal Commission regarding a dispute between the Contractor and the Panama Canal Commission. The construction involved cutting a portion of the Canal to permit installation of four breasting dolphins to create a new tie-up facility in order to maximize the number of ships through the Canal. Senior Nielsen-Wurster personnel visited the site and made an initial evaluation to ascertain major issues, acquire Project familiarization, determine approach alternatives, and produce an initial assessment of litigation risk. Nielsen-Wurster's technical staff provided a complete document management and database service, including a determination of issues, followed by a classification of each document with regard to the issues. A second visit to the site was made for a more extensive review of the documents, interviews with key personnel, and discussion of the findings. Recommendations were made with regard to the litigation, assisting in the settlement of the claim.
|
|
| |
Riofil / Manila South Harbor Pier 5 Extension
Philippines
Nielsen-Wurster was engaged by the Contractor to resolve a dispute with a privatized port operator after it had failed to reach agreement with its Engineer relative to variations and compliance issues. Nielsen-Wurster performed a Windows Analysis* of the Critical Path Method (CPM) schedule to calculate Project delays utilizing the Contractor's detailed as-built data. In addition, Nielsen-Wurster performed a productivity analysis to prove inefficiency caused by delays due to differing site conditions encountered in the pile driving operations and the time required for the Employer's review of the Contractor's alternate design. Nielsen-Wurster provided a written Expert Report and verbal presentation to the port operator during the final negotiations. The negotiations concluded with a favorable settlement to the Contractor and with no liquidated damages assessed.
|
|
