Page 4540 - Week 10 - Thursday, 23 September 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
& modelling consultants engaged for Stage 1 or Stage 2; if so, how many were engaged and from what companies were they from.
(4) Were there any adjustments made to the total lump sum fees for either bridge.
(5) In relation to both bridges, (a) what payments were made by the Government to the contractors, how much were they and when were they made, (b) how many revisions were made during the preliminary design stage to document readiness, (c) on what date were drawings/documents stamped as ‘For Tender’ or a similar notation and (d) how many revisions were there on drawings/documents issued for construction.
(6) As of the date of the bridge collapse, what number revision were the drawings/documents at and when was that revision issued.
(7) Were all revisions of the drawings/documents from Stage 1 given to the contractors working on Stage 2.
(8) What documents from Stage 1 were given to contractors on Stage 2.
(9) Was it intended that the Stage 2 bridge would be the same as the bridge of Stage 1.
(10) Were the plans for the span of Stage 2 the same as the span of Stage 1.
(11) In relation to both bridges, on what dates were site inspections made by the Project Officer.
(12) Did the Project Officer change at any point during construction of either bridge; if so, on what dates and what were the reasons for the changes.
(13) In relation to both bridges, (a) was an occupational health and safety (OH&S) system put in place by the head consultant and were any changes made to this system, (b) was an OHS&R Plan put in place by the consultant and were any changes made to this plan and (c) did the plans conform to AS 1100.
(14) Was a design options study undertaken for Stage 1 and/or Stage 2; if so, on what dates were the reports submitted.
(15) Was a designs options study sought for Stage 1 or Stage 2; if not, how many alternative design concepts were submitted.
(16) Were the means of access to voids and bearings for inspection and maintenance incorporated in the Final Sketch Plans for both bridges.
(17) Was a draft maintenance and inspection manual incorporated in the Final Sketch Plans.
(18) Have any contractors or sub-contractors who worked on the Stage 1 or Stage 2 worked on any other ACT Government capital works project since 2006 and for any such project, did the contractors complete the task they were assigned to do as specified at the awarding of the tender; if not, why not.
(19) In relation to both bridges, (a) what information was included in the Final Design Report and (b) what changes and on what dates were changes made to (i) design forces, moments, capacities and section properties for major members, (ii) expected
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video