“banner728.gif"

AG report notes poor  Kazungula bridge works

THE Kazungula weighbridge driveway was poorly designed but there is no evidence of any action done against the responsible consultant, a report of the Auditor General has revealed.

According to a report of the Auditor General on the road projects under the Road Development Agency (RDA) for the period January 2012 to December 2015, on April 14, 2008 the agency awarded a contract to Fair Face Enterprises to execute construction of additional works for the construction of the Kazungula weighbridge in Southern Province at a contract price of K3, 494, 716 VAT inclusive for a duration of three months.
The report, however, indicates that the contract price was later varied to K9, 571, 920.
“The rehabilitation works consisted of construction of shoulders to driveways and parking bays, erection of lighting mast and other electrical fittings, painting to weighbridge house and offices and sign-writing, construction of side and mitre drains, construction of passing lanes, installation of road signs and road line marking, construction of retaining wall, landscaping works to areas around the weighbridge house and surrounding areas, connection of new water reticulation to council line and finishes to the generator house,” the report read.
“The site was handed over by the employer on 23rd October, 2008. The consultancy contract signed with Zulu Burrow Limited commenced on 30th September, 2008 at a cost of K411, 012.”
It added that as of December 2016, the contractor was paid K9, 163, 647 while the consultant got K380, 155.
“Although the works had been completed and the project was beyond the defect liability period, a physical inspection conducted in May 2015 revealed that the concrete works undertaken were of poor quality and spalling (worn out) resulting into potholes that developed on the carriage way,” the report stated.
And the report stated that the carriage way on the weighbridge was reinforced with conforce wire instead of adequate reinforcement bars like 16 mm reinforcement bars.
“In general, the design was poor and could not withstand the stress of heavy duty vehicles,” read the report.
“In the response, management stated that the initial contractor was Turner Construction Limited Company whose contract was terminated due to poor workmanship and the original design by the supervising consultant Bicon Zambia Limited used conforce 257 mesh reinforcement. However, RDA engaged Zulu Burrow Consulting Limited who reviewed the original design and recommended the use of Y12 reinforced bars, the design was never changed to use Y12 reinforced bars. In addition, apart from terminating the contract with Turner Construction, there was no evidence that any other action was taken against the consultant despite the poor design done.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *