Civil Works Implementation WINRIP DOC MPR CTC MPR No.25 2015 01 2015 01 12 00224.

Western Indonesia National Roads Improvement Project 24 At the end of this reporting month of January 2015, all the four 4 contract packages were still lagging farther behind schedule. The situation remains the same as in previous month as four 4 of the contract packages continue to follow a downward trend of delayed schedules. With the remaining time left of less than 50 of the contract time for all of the four 4 contract packages, the Contractors will have hard time to deliver the Works on the target dates of completion, unless a workable and realistic actio pla s or Catch-up Schedules ill e enforced by the Contractors. Package No. 1 : Biha – Krui Inspite of the high level meeting between the DGH and Contractors that was held in December 2014 in Padang wherein the main agenda were to resolved all issues and major problems that hampered the progress of the works, the expectation from the Contractor to deliver positive outcome never happened. It is evident that the Contractor never attempted to put the works toward attaining good progress as only 2.63 of the works was accomplished during the whole month of January 2015. The problem of slow and delayed progress have been going-on ever since the work commenced some thirteen 13 months ago. With only 40 or 258 calendar days of the contract time are left for the remaining 81 of the works to be done, the target date of completion in mid October 2015 may never be realized unless the Contractor will work double time on a realistic workable action plan in the coming months ahead. As the period ended, the overall actual physical work progress is only 18.71 of the scheduled progress of 67.46 toward the end of the month. In other words, there was a huge deficit of delayed works or an slippage of -48.75 behind schedule. Some of the major problems that should be given more attention to resolve by the Contractor are inadequate cash flow, shortage of labor for drainage works and insufficient supply of aggregates for base and asphalt mix. A more detailed status of this Package is presented in ANNEX P-I Executive Summary Report. Package No. 2 : Padang Sawah – Sp. Empat Including Air Gadang Bridge As of end this month the total overall work progress is 40.41 against scheduled progress of 50.52 which is still behind schedule by -10.11 . In this reporting month January 2015, the progress showed signs of slight improvement with respect to eliminating the previous negative slippages to put the progress on schedule. Although a good o th’s progress of . as acco plished duri g the period, the olu e of ork do e was not enough to come close to the schedule. Major problems that are still unresolved are the carryover problems from previous months such as the frequent breakdown of the Asphalt Mixing Plant where the bulk of the progress depends on and the redesign of the sub-structure of Air Gadang Bridge which is still on the exploration works soil investigation. To date, the delayed work is still on a manageable level, but it is still a bit of concern that unless the current problems are addressed immediately, the delayed works will further fall behind in the coming months. ANNEX P-2 Executive Summary Report present a more detailed status of the Contract Package. Western Indonesia National Roads Improvement Project 25 Package No. 3 : Manggopoh – Padang Sawah The current overall work progress of only 29.11 against scheduled progress of 51.62 since the works commenced 13 month ago is of much concern due to the very limited remaining contract time left. As of end of this month, the remaining contract time is only 47 or 346 calendar days with still 71 of the works to be completed. At the end of this reporting month January 2015 the slippage went farther down to -22.51 fro pre ious o th’s slippage of -19.63 in December 2014. If the average accomplishment of close to only 5 per month progress attained for the past three 3 months will not improve to at least twice the previous monthly work output in coming months, the Project will never be completed on the target date of completion on the early part of January 2016 unless the Contractor will work double time to implement a realistic and workable action plan. The problem of slow and delayed work progress have be going-on for the past six 6 months. Problem which the Contractor have to prioritize and give more attention to resolve are the frequent out of order of the Asphalt Mixing Plant, inadequate number of units of dump truck, shortage of labor for drainage works and low output of the crusher plant to produce quantity of aggregate requirements. Due to urgency to maximize the output of paving works to attain a good monthly progress, the Contractor shall maintain the AMP regularly and address and resolve all issues that are presently hampering the progress of the works. A more detailed status of the project progress are shown in ANNEX P- E ecutive “u ar Report . Package No. 4 : Ipuh – Bantal The current status of this contract package still remain in critical situation with respect to completion date on January 9, 2016 as the negative slippage further went down to -33.14 from -31.53 the last month. To date the actual progress of only 13.79 since the project started 13 month ago is of much concern than the slippage. Simply looking at the percentage of work accomplished, it seems that the project is only on the early stage of construction, whereas by this time, at least 47 of the works should have been completed. The major work item which should have been given more concentration in order to attain a good progress during the period would have been the drainage works 12.26 , granular pavement 18.07 and asphalt pavement 49.27 which have a combine total work value of 79.40 . However, the Contractor was able to accomplished only 3.96 , progress for the three 3 major orks ite out of the o erall o th’s progress of 4.44 . Inspite of the high level meeting between the DGH and Contractors that was held in December 2014 in Padang wherein the main agenda were to resolved all issues and major problems that hampered the progress of the works, the expectation from the Contractor to deliver positive outcome never happened. It is evident that the Contractor never attempted to put the works