Road-Testing the ITA Contractual Practices Checklist

"1. INTRODUCTIONDo contractual practices affect project outcome? Can better contractual practices improve the likelihood of project success? The consensus amongst experts is that better contractual practices really do improve project outcomes. With this in mind the members of the International Tunnelling Association (ITA) Working Group 3 on Contractual Practices (WG3) pooled their collective knowledge to publish in 2011 the document entitled The ITA Contractual Framework Checklist for Subsurface Construction Contracts (ITA Working Group 3, 2011). Written for projects involving significant subsurface works, e.g. tunnels and caverns, the ITA Framework Checklist explains the major contractual issues that must be considered to ensure a successful project. Its goal is not to specify how each issue should be resolved, but rather to highlight the issues and give recommendations on how they should be addressed. The Checklist is compatible with, and provides guidance for reviewing, standard contracts such as FIDIC and NEC. One of the authors is a co-author of the Checklist and has contributed to previous papers describing the Checklist and its applicability to hydropower projects (Hodgkinson & Wilson 2014, Hodgkinson & Wilson 2015). The Checklist identifies a series of issues that should be contractually defined, which can be summarized as follows: •,Methods for dealing with geotechnical uncertainties should be defined in the contract •,There should be an appropriate level of geotechnical/geological investigation •,Sufficient mobilization periods should be allowed •,Sufficient time should be allowed for testing and commissioning •,Procedures for timely dispute resolution should clearly defined •,Quality and performance requirements should be clearly defined and measurable •,Provision should exist for cost consequences of unforeseen circumstances •,Dispute resolution processes should be clearly defined •,Payment processes should be fair and clearly defined •,Risk should be clearly allocated and parties should be able to bear the risks they carry •,There should be a mechanism for adjusting payments according to conditions •,The risk management approach should be clearly defined •,Admeasurement or unit price approaches are recommended •,The responsibilities of each party must be clearly defined •,The consequences of non-performance should be clearly defined •,The construction programme (schedule) should be realistic."