7 and 8 - Government of Botswana

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Responses: - Agreed. - Agreed - Agreed. It would be preferable to compact to refusal with the heaviest plant available rather than to a pre-determined percentage of Mod AASHTO compaction. However, this approach may not always be appropriate, particularly where the material breaks down under compaction which, if it did, would make it even more diffi cult to attain the normally specifi ed relative compaction. Proceedings of Roads Department Workshop June 2003, Guidelines 7 and 8 13
3. PRESENTATION OF GUIDELINE NO. 7 3.1 Overview An overview of Guideline No. 7 was presented by Phil Paige-Green of CSIR who was part of the consultant team involved in the preparation of the document. The importance of the Guideline was placed in the following context: ● Whilst fi nancial auditing of public funded projects is commonly undertaken, little attention has been given to the complementary activity of technical auditing. ● In recent years, a number of road projects have either failed pre-maturely, are exhibiting distress that will ultimately lead to failure in the near future or have experienced signifi cant cost overruns. In the absence of a Technical Audit, it is often not possible to fairly apportion accountability to the parties involved in the contract. ● The production of a Guideline on technical auditing of road projects is a step in the right direction in terms of putting in place a process that should enable any problems that occur to be adequately and transparently diagnosed as a basis for apportioning responsibility, where appropriate. 3.2 Presentation of Key Aspects The presentation followed the sequence of main topics included in the Guideline which may be summarized as follows: 14 1. Introduction. 2. Technical Audits: General procedures. 3. Data requirements. 4. Scope of post construction audit. 5. Post construction audit procedure. 6. Assessment of audit results. 7. Reporting. As was the case with the presentation on Guideline No. 8, the presentation on Guideline No. 7 provoked wide-ranging discussions and comments on a number of issues which are presented in Section 3. 3.3 Matters Arising from Discussion 3.3.1 Specifi c concerns of the Association of Building Contractors (ABCON) Issues: - If the parties carrying out the contract and, more especially, the Supervising Engineer are competent then we question the need for a third party to carry out the technical audit either during or post-contract. - The client has his own lab and, as such, as is done in South Africa, he can collect samples for check testing on a regular basis. In South Africa this is normally done on a quarterly basis. - If there is any doubt of the veracity of results from any site, an independent check of laboratory procedures should be more than adequate. Proceedings of Roads Department Workshop June 2003, Guidelines 7 and 8
Page 1 and 2: MINISTRY OF WORKS AND TRANSPORT Min
Page 3 and 4: Ministry of Works and Transport Roa
Page 5 and 6: FOREWORD Guideline no 7 Technical A
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .
Page 9 and 10: The two Guidelines being presented
Page 11 and 12: 2.3.2 Scope and Use of Guideline 10
Page 13: 2.3.5 Bituminous Surfacings 12 Issu
Page 17 and 18: 16 - It is fully agreed that the au
Page 19 and 20: ● The Technical Audit is carried
Page 21 and 22: ANNEX 1 PROGRAMME 20 ��
Page 23: Name Organisation Postal Address E.

7 and 8 - Government of Botswana

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?