CONSULTANTS Get a proposal
Building frame and tower crane in warm evening light

Case studies

Three situations from the founders' recent site work. Project and client names are not given.

MV and LV switchgear room

Case 1: Hospital, electrical works, FIDIC Red Book

Brand approval is not a material approval

Situation

On a large hospital project abroad, the Engineer had approved only the brand for the MV cables, the UPS and the busbar trunking. On site this was being read as an approval, and orders were close.

What was done

  • Each item listed in the submittal log as "brand only, full MAR to be resubmitted".
  • Full MARs prepared with the specification marked clause by clause by the supplier.
  • Type test reports checked against the IEC standards named in the specification.
  • Factory acceptance tests shown in the programme where the specification asks for them.

Why it mattered

Ordering on a brand-only approval leaves the cost of any non-compliance with the Contractor. Keeping the status clear in the log avoided that.

Related: Material submittals, method statements and RFIs, Electrical documentation

Modern hospital building exterior

Case 2: Hospital, document control

A submittal log the technical office can actually deliver

Situation

The master submittal log had almost every shop drawing and MAR due in the first months. The technical office could issue about five shop drawings a working day, so the dates could not be met and the Engineer would have been flooded.

What was done

  • Shop drawings sequenced to the order of the works.
  • MARs and method statements planned about two weeks before the works they cover, after vendor selection.
  • Procurement lines grouped the way packages are really bought: all LV panels from one panel builder on one line.
  • Works outside the contract scope removed, and as-built drawings added as a deliverable.

Why it mattered

A log with dates the team can meet, and that the Engineer can plan review time against.

Related: Document control and registers, Material submittals, method statements and RFIs

Multi-storey building under construction

Case 3: Hospital, planning in Primavera P6

One programme instead of three

Situation

Several programme files were in circulation: a baseline, a recommended version and what-if copies. The payment milestones of the contract were not in the schedule, and factory tests were missing.

What was done

  • One Primavera programme, built on the monthly progress update.
  • Contract payment milestones added to the schedule.
  • FAT activities for panels, transformers and generators where specified.
  • What-if scenarios kept in a separate analysis file, not issued as programmes.

Why it mattered

One set of dates for site, procurement and the Engineer, and one programme to report progress against.

Related: Work programmes and progress reports, Electrical documentation

Follow Nota Consultants on LinkedIn for notes on FIDIC, submittals and contract administration.Follow
Lit building under construction with a crane at dusk

Facing a similar situation?

Initial response within 24 hours; written proposal within 48 hours for standard assignments.

Get a proposalBook a 15-minute call

No obligation. Tell us the contract and the problem; we tell you honestly whether we can help.

info@notaconsultants.com
Get a proposalSample documents