Timeline - as per the Quantum review

Key:
1. Numbers in () relate to 're-organised' work element numbers assigned by the verbal agreement between Romairport / Engineer / Employer (ref. paragraph 11-15 of Contractor's Claim No. 1). See "Prog- Addendum 10_Attachment E" worksheet, column A
2. Dates of Taking Over Requests, Taking Over Certificates and Final Taking Over (Defects Liability Certificate) are from "Tabel Centralizator - Eliberare GBE Faza 3.xlsx"
3. Final Taking Over (Defects Liability Certificate) dates for work elements 6 and 7 per Engineer's correspondence 332/06.03.2017 and 535/10.04.2017, respectively
4. Other dates are taken from Claim No. 1 and documents in bundle Volume 1 of 3 / Quantum Review
5. Orange shading indicates where RA need to prove that the indirect costs incurred during this period is not a cost that is already included in the "Mobilisation" price
6. Light Green shading indicates where RA does not need to discharge the presumption that Indirect cost was otherwise included in its "Mobilisation" price. However, RA will need to prove that there were no concurrent delays that would mean time but no Cost recovery.
7. Blue shading identifies the additional work RA claims payment for
8. Other shading is only used to highlight durations
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

May-10

May-11

May-12

May-13

May-14

May-15

May-16

May-17
Mar-10

Mar-11

Mar-12

Mar-13

Mar-14

Mar-15

Mar-16

Mar-17
Nov-09

Nov-10

Nov-11

Nov-12

Nov-13

Nov-14

Nov-15

Nov-16
Comments / Source Information /

Aug-09

Aug-10

Aug-11

Aug-12

Aug-13

Aug-14

Aug-15

Aug-16
Dec-09

Dec-10

Dec-11

Dec-12

Dec-13

Dec-14

Dec-15

Dec-16
Sep-09

Feb-10

Sep-10

Feb-11

Sep-11

Feb-12

Sep-12

Feb-13

Sep-13

Feb-14

Sep-14

Feb-15

Sep-15

Feb-16

Sep-16

Feb-17
Apr-10

Apr-11

Apr-12

Apr-13

Apr-14

Apr-15

Apr-16

Apr-17
Oct-09

Oct-10

Oct-11

Oct-12

Oct-13

Oct-14

Oct-15

Oct-16
Jun-10

Jun-11

Jun-12

Jun-13

Jun-14

Jun-15

Jun-16

Jun-17
Jan-10

Jan-11

Jan-12

Jan-13

Jan-14

Jan-15

Jan-16

Jan-17
Jul-10

Jul-11

Jul-12

Jul-13

Jul-14

Jul-15

Jul-16

Jul-17
Period Commencing
Actions and Queries for RA to address

Addendum 10
Time for Completion (Packages 1 - 9) How were the packages re-organised? i.e. 1-7
EOT
Additional Works whether by express instruction of
Additional Works the Engineer or otherwise. The costs are abstracted
from the "Quantum review" and are therefore
indicative only.
Direct Costs 20.759.859,43
Instructions for Additional Works Copies of these instructions are in Appendix 5 of the
include, but are not limited to, those Request for Arbitration. Are there any other
issued by the Engineer on 01.10.2013, instructions?
01.11.2013, 11.11.2013, 20.12.2013,
15.01.2014, 07.04.2014 and 05.08.2014)

Variations to the Extension of the 200.452,04

The black shaded cells are based
Finger Building on invoice dates for the additional
Additional Quantities executed in the 20.559.407,39 works
Extension of the International and
Schengen Departures Terminal
- not related to the Hold Baggage 22.383,16
Handling System ("HBS")
- related to the Hold Baggage Handling
System ('"HBS")
A. AUG 2013 - DEC 2013 - time from 321.743,60
notification of CNAB (Employer) to the
first Engineer's Instruction
B. DEC 2013 - AUG 2014 - time between 3.988.986,39
first and second Engineer's Instructions

C. SEPT. 2014 - DEC.2016- time from the 16.226.294,25

last Engineer's Instruction until
December 2016

Indirect Costs. If any indirect costs can be allocated

Prolongation to a Variation then such costs would attarct profit

Contractor
Defects Liability Period(s) See comments in cells for dates (3) (1, 2 & 3) (1 & 2) (5) (4 & 5) (4) (6) (6 & 7) (7)
EOT Award (1)* Claim No.1, paragraph 214 and 215-
Para 214 - Late supply of x-ray machines by the
Employer.
Para 215 - "The Engineer therefore granted the (6 & 7)
Contractor extension of time until 15 October 2012 in
respect of the Extension DT (6) and until 22 December
2012 in respect of the Arrivals Terminal (7)."

EOT Request (2) Claim No.1, paragraph 216 (6), 217-219 (7) (6) (7)
EOT Request (3) Claim No.1, paragraph 220 (Entirety of the Works (Entirety of the Works)
Prolongation 1) What was the agreed programme for the re-
organised packages (1 - 7)?
2) In contrast, can RA explain why Annex B.2.1 has
(3) (1 & 2) (5) (4) (6 & 7) (7)
only 6 packages and, how those packages relate to re-
organised packages 1 - 7?

1) How does the Taking Over request date compare Delayed

with the agreed programme for the re-organised issue of
packages? Taking
(2) If RA finished earlier why should Employer take Over Cert
this section over? by
3) The 'delay' occurs during the original Contract Engineer?
Period and there was no EOT request (i.e. no critical ("TOC
delay) so why should there be a Cost? Delay")
4) What ' additional ' indirect cost was actually
incurred during these periods due to the delay?
TOC Delay?
5) Does the average cost method enable RA to
accurately establish the actual Indirect cost incurred
during the critical period of incurred delay?
TOC Delay?
6) Clause 48.1 allows the Engineer 21-days to
respond to a Taking Over request. Did RA not expect
to incur 'normal' cost during that period? TOC Delay?

1) EOT Awarded by Engineer; ref. Claim No.1 para.

46, did RA activities in this period only relate to the
Employer delayed works in package (6) and (7)?
Prolongation of
2) There appears to be no other concurrent activities;
the Works
why has RA not identified Indirect cost for this delay
as a separate head of claim?

1) What activities was RA performing during this

period?
2) Did RA incur 'additional' Indirect cost due to TOC
delay?
3) Clause 48.1 allows Engineer 21-days to respond to
TOC Delay?
a Taking Over request - did RA not expect to incur
'normal' cost during that period?
4) Why has RA not identified Indirect cost for this
delay separately?

Additional Work Finger 1) Can RA confirm the actual period / dates these
works were performed?
(Dates / period were identified from Contract F3/83
Addendum No 1 and invoice 294/26.03.2012
(Elevator work) and purchase order 140215/145
dated 24.04.2014 and invoice 36-14 dated
18.07.2014 (Avoibridge Connectors), found in Vol 1 of (5) Avoibridge
(5) Elevator works
back-up docs) Connectors
2) Is this 'prolongation' or Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work?
3) Can RA identify / itemise the Indirect cost
associated with these works?
(Profit is allowable on Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work)

Further Testing HBS Claim No.1 (para. 55-60) says very little about this (6)
perio. RA to expand on this.
1) Can RA confirm the actual dates / period?
(Dates were identified from Claim No.1 para. 55-61)
2) How can RA demonstrate that Indirect cost
associated with its outstanding work (see Claim No.1
para. 55) is not included in the amount claimed?
3) Is this 'prolongation' or Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work?
4) Why does RA not include Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work in its valuation of
additional work?
(Profit is allowable on Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work)

Additional Work HBS 1) Clause 50.1 instructions (Claim No.1 para. (6)
61/63/75)
2) Engineer says "work required to rectify" - RA
claims "additional work"
1) Annex A.2.2 section C includes cost after Engineer
has advised all work associated with the HBS had
been carried out to its satisfaction (Claim No.1 para.
141) - is the work RA performed afterwards the same
or a separate claim?
2) Is this 'prolongation' or Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work?
3) Why does RA not include Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work in its valuation of
additional work?
(Profit is allowable on Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work)

Ongoing Support HBS Dates / Periods per Claim No.1 para. 141/142 (6)
RA to explain:-
1) what is happening in this period?
2) what work is being done (Direct Costs)?
3) why it is doing that work, e.g. Engineer's
instructions re. (alleged) defects
4) what indirect costs are being incurred performing
the work?
5) Is this 'prolongation' or Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work?
6) Why does RA not include Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work in its valuation of
additional work?
(Profit is allowable on Indirect cost incurred
performing additional work)
7) RA should also consider / identify the Indirect cost
it has incurred due to the extended Defects LIability
Period, i.e. not incurred performing (alleged)
additional work, for example, cost incurred
maintaining the RMG is not attributable to additional
work, as the RMG value is based on the Add. 10 price.
8) Can RA explain why it is incurring / expects to incur
further Indirect costs after 10.04.2017 i.e. when the
last Defects Liability Certificate was issued, by
specifying the activities?

Engineer
Defects Liability Period (Start) See comments in cells for dates (3) (1 & 2) (5) (4) (6) (7)
Defects Correction Cert (Finish) See comments in cells for dates (3) (1 & 2) (5) (4) (6) (7)
EOT Award (1)* Claim No.1, paragraph 215 (6 & 7)

Costs abstracted from the "Quantum Review"

Draft Final Statement is wrong approach to calculate

"theoretical" direct cost Costs abstracted from the "Draft Final Statement"

Page 1|1