Difference between revisions of "Ruskin Overrun 2012"
From Deh Cho BridgeWiki
(Started) |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*What, in general terms, does Ruskin's contract require of them as to price and/or timetable? | *What, in general terms, does Ruskin's contract require of them as to price and/or timetable? | ||
*What, in general terms, would Ruskin be claiming as a GNWT fault or liability making the GNWT responsible for additional costs, assuming there ''are'' any price or timetable requirements in the contract. | *What, in general terms, would Ruskin be claiming as a GNWT fault or liability making the GNWT responsible for additional costs, assuming there ''are'' any price or timetable requirements in the contract. | ||
| − | * Is Ruskin making any significant financial sacrifice to | + | * Is Ruskin making any significant financial sacrifice to the effort to complete by November? |
| + | * Is the additional $10 million substantially accounted for by the added manpower and resources? | ||
* What compensation, if any, arose from the steel fabrication delays? | * What compensation, if any, arose from the steel fabrication delays? | ||
The first two are especially interesting, and not properly addressed. If Ruskin negotiated a price but no guaranteed timetable, then presumably as long as they meet whatever standards of effort are applicable in cases like this, they would seem justified in requiring extra payment to accelerate the timetable. | The first two are especially interesting, and not properly addressed. If Ruskin negotiated a price but no guaranteed timetable, then presumably as long as they meet whatever standards of effort are applicable in cases like this, they would seem justified in requiring extra payment to accelerate the timetable. | ||
Revision as of 13:26, 8 June 2012
On June 6, 2012, the GNWT announced it would require up to $10 million in additional construction funding to ensure completion by November 2012.
Observations
With no offence intended, it sometimes appears the media and MLAs waffle around with questions, instead of asking for the important information in a precise manner.
- What, in general terms, does Ruskin's contract require of them as to price and/or timetable?
- What, in general terms, would Ruskin be claiming as a GNWT fault or liability making the GNWT responsible for additional costs, assuming there are any price or timetable requirements in the contract.
- Is Ruskin making any significant financial sacrifice to the effort to complete by November?
- Is the additional $10 million substantially accounted for by the added manpower and resources?
- What compensation, if any, arose from the steel fabrication delays?
The first two are especially interesting, and not properly addressed. If Ruskin negotiated a price but no guaranteed timetable, then presumably as long as they meet whatever standards of effort are applicable in cases like this, they would seem justified in requiring extra payment to accelerate the timetable.
