PAKISTAN

WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

INDIVIDUAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE REPORT

REGARDING DRAFT PARA NO.235/2021-22

ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN CONTRACT COST
RS.6.04 MILLION DUE TO CHANGE IN SPECIFICATIONS
IN RESPECT OF TARBELA 4TH EXTENSION HPP, WAPDA

Presented By:
Muhammad Husnain
Dy. Director (M&S) WAPDA
135th MMC, WASC Islamabad

WAPDA ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF COLLEGE, ISLAMABAD

Nov, 2022
 DEDICATED

TO

My Beloved Mother

who always prays for my success, good health & life

and demonstrates patience
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am thankful to Almighty Allah for His blessings and mercies which He

bestowed upon me, my parents who grownup and made me able to stand
here with the jewels who are serving the nation day and night and my wife &
kids who always love me more then I expect.

Thanks to the Management of WAPDA Administrative Staff College

Islamabad, Particularly Mr. Zaigham Abbas, Course Director, Mr. Waqas
Ahmad, Deputy Course for providing an opportunity to share my practical
experience, and to improve my confidence, communication, interpersonal
and presentational skills by joining 135th Middle Management Course w.e.f.
31st October, 2022 to 30th Dec, 2022 at WASC Islamabad.

Here I shall also mention and appreciate guidance and support of my seniors
in Monitoring & Surveillance (M&S) who guided and helped to achieve my
tasks.

Muhammad Husnain
Dy. Director (Civil)
th
135 Middle Management Course
WASC, Islamabad.
 PREFACE
This is the report of Individual Management Experience which is being presented
in the 135th middle management course at WASC in Islamabad on 14th of
November, 2022. At Tarbela 4th Ext Project, there are two major sides, one is
right bank colony and the other one is called left bank colony. Due to construction
of T4th HPP some additional Houses were constructed in right bank colony and
an additional Over Head Water Tank was to be constructed to meet the Water
demand of the residents.

CDO Water designed the OHWT and issued drawings in 2013, 02x No Drawings
were revised and the specifications were changed from 3000 PSI to 4000 PSI
Concrete and the steel was recommended 60 Grade in place of 40 Grade. When
the construction was started and the contractor was directed to construct as per
new specifications, he submitted a Variation Order No 1 with additional cost of
Rs 6.04 Million. Contractor submitted a new concrete Mix Design and
consequently, new Rate for 1 cubic Meter 4000 PSI concrete was estimated as
about 37000/- and was agreed on 3607 Rupee by the both parties. The work was
done and the payments were made to the contractor. In 2021-22, Audit observed
and highlighted the case. Hence an Inquiry Committee was constituted with the
approval of Member (Water) who inquired the case and submitted its
recommendations and fixed the responsibility for loss to the Authority. I was
member of that Inquiry Committee who during visit of site led a team, I planned
and organized the activity and got control by getting the relevant documents from
Project office.

I am thankful to WASC Faculty who provided ma a chance to present this report

as my individual Management Experience which was requirement of the course.
 INDIVIDUAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Self Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Monitoring and Surveillance (M&S) WAPDA .............................................................. 1

2. BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM ........................................................................ 3

2.1 Audit Para ........................................................................................................................ 3

2.2 Management Reply ........................................................................................................ 4

3. CONSTITUTION OF INQUIRY COMMITTEE ............................................................ 6

4. TERMS OF REFERENCE (TOR)............................................................................... 6

5. MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................... 6

5.1 Planning............................................................................................................................ 6

5.2 Organizing ........................................................................................................................ 7

5.3 Leading ............................................................................................................................. 8

6. FINDINGS / OBSERVATIONS .................................................................................. 9

7. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... 12

8. RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................... 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

INDIVIDUAL MANAGEMENT EXPERIENCE REPORT REGARDING DRAFT

PARA NO.235/2021-22 ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN CONTRACT COST BY
RS.6.04 MILLION DUE TO CHANGE IN SPECIFICATIONS IN RESPECT OF
TARBELA 4TH EXT. HPP WAPDA

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Self Introduction
Name: Muhammad Husnain

Date of Birth: 01-05-1981

• Graduated in Civil Engineering from University of Engineering and

Technology (UCET) Bahaud Din Zakrya University (BZU) Multan in 2001-
2006

• Joined Associated Consulting Engineering (ACE) at Mangla Dam Raising

Project from 2006-2007

• Worked with SMEC on Detailed Engineering Design and Feasibility Study of

Kohala Dam Hydropower Project from 2007-2010.

• Joined WAPDA in 2010 and got first posting at Tarbela Dam Project in PMO.

• Was transferred from Tarbela to M&S WAPDA, Wapda House Lahore in

2013.

• Promoted as Sr. Engr (Civil) in M&S in Feb, 2017 and working till to date.

• Shared 2nd position in 121st JMC at WASC with Mr. Waqas Ahmad, Dy
Course Director of 135th MMC.

• Basically belongs to the city of Saints, Mangoes, Handicrafts and Sweet

Sohan Halwa: Multan

• My hobbies are Sketching, Paining, traveling gardening, grafting and

plantation.

1.2 Monitoring and Surveillance (M&S) WAPDA

Objectives of M&S are;

Page 1 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

• To safeguard the interest of Authority by ensuring the

Transparency by regular Monitoring & Surveillance.
• To ensure the quality of works under execution.
• To appraise Chairman WAPDA about updates of the Projects.
• To conduct technical and non-technical Fact Finding and
Formal Inquiries.
Organizational Chart

Chairman
WAPDA

GM(M&S)

Tech.
AD. Consult.
CE (M&S) (ADMN) Advisor
(Inq.) DBDP

Dir.
Dir. (MC) Dir. (MP) (Mont) Dir. (Inq) Dir. (Inv.)
DBDP
DD
Dy. Dir Dy. Dir. (Admn)
(03 Nos) Dy. Dir. (02 Nos.)
AD
(Admn)
Asst Dir
Asst. Dir.
(02 Nos) AD(Legl)

Functions of M&S are;

• Inspection and Monitoring of Power / Water Wing Projects,

Hospitals, WASC, Academy & Rest houses etc.

Page 2 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

• Investigation of Cases regarding Corruptions, Irregularities &

Misconducts (Complaints, Audit Para Inquiries etc)
• Monitoring of Disciplinary Actions (follow-up Actions)
• Keep check on Irregularities and Deviations from the Specified
Design Criteria & provision of Contract for projects under
execution.

2. BACKGROUND OF THE PROBLEM

2.1 Audit Para
PDP-235/2021-22, Increase in Contract Cost due to change in specifications
issued by CDO WAPDA after Award of Contract Rs.6.04 million.

• According to clause 5.2.4 of WAPDA procurement and contracts manual

2014, "precise and clear specifications are pre-requisite competitively to the
requirements of the employer/purchaser without qualifying or conditioning
their bids. The specifications must be drafted to permit the widest possible
competition and at the same time make clear statement of the required
standards of workmanship for works to be executed, standards of plants,
supplies and performance of the goods and services to be executed. Only if
this is done, the objectives of economy, efficiency and fairness in
procurement shall be realized, responsiveness of bids be ensured and
subsequent task of bid evaluation be facilitated."

• During audit of Accounts' record of the Project Director, Tarbela 4th Extension
Hydro Power Project for the period from July, 2020 to June,2021, it was
noticed that the drawings for overhead water tank were containing concrete
compressive strength of 4000 PSI and steel yield strength of 60,000 SI was
approved by the office of General Manager (CDO) wide letter dated
September 17", 2013. After tendering during 2017, the work order for
construction of O&M Staff colony for including construction of water tank was
awarded to M/s Sahibzada Liaquat Ali Shah & CO on Feb 18, 2018 @

Page 3 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

Contract price of Rs. 41.58 Million. As per tender/work order, specification of

concrete compressive strength was required as 3000 PSI and steel yield
strength of 40,000 SI instead of specification approved by the CDO. After
award of the work, these specifications were replaced with the specifications
already approved by the CDO through variation order No.1 with additional
cost of Rs. 6.04 Million based on market rates. Audit held that award of work
order in negation to the specifications approved by the CDO and afterwards
replacement of tendered specifications with specifications of CDO through VO
at uncompetitive rates was irregular and against the instructions regarding
efficiency, transparency, economy and competition in Public procurement
contained in WAPDA Procurement Manual and PPRA Rules.

• Non-Adherence to aforementioned instructions resulted in increase in

contract cost by Rs.6.04 million due to change in specification issued by CDO
WAPDA after award of contract up to the Financial Year 2020-21.

• The matter was taken up with the management in August 2021. The
management stated that detailed reply would be given after consultation of
record. No further progress was intimated.

• Audit recommends the management to investigate the matter for fixing

responsibility regarding award of work in violation of approved specifications
and afterwards its replacement through variation order.

2.2 Management Reply

Office of the T4th HPP Project replied that the Audit contention is not based
on facts. Facts are as under:

• As per General Conditions of Contract (GCC) Clause 1(k) "The Contract price
is the Accepted Contract amount Stated in the Letter of Acceptance and
thereafter adjusted in accordance with the Contract. Hence, change in
Contract Price is evident through the word adjustment i.e. either it may
increase or decrease.

Page 4 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

• All the variations issued so far are in accordance with the provisions of Sub-
Clause 38 of GCC as per site requirements and for obtaining the best value of
the investment being made by the Employer on the Works.

• It is highlighted that all the Contract Documents in the World has the
provisions for the variations in the works based on actual site requirements
during the execution of works.

• All changes have been made as per site requirements and not due to
discrepancies in the Bidding Documents.

• All the Contractors submitted the Bids and rates quoted were as per strength
of concrete/steel provided in the Bidding Documents. Most responsive and
economical bidder is selected for execution of Works. Thus a fair competition
has been experienced in the Bidding process.

• Any change in the strength of concrete/steel comes under variation in

specifications and fulfill the criteria of issuance of Variation Order. Hence, the
Variation Order was issued as per Conditions of the Contract.

• As far as Audit observation regarding investigation of the matter, it is

considered that the figures of strength of concrete/steel mentioned in the
Bidding Documents may be treated as an inadvertent human mistake/error
which beings not machine. - Under open competitive bidding process, there is
no rule that Contractor is bound to follow any estimate. Every Contractor,
submit its own rates as per market conditions and nature and place of the
Works etc.

• It is pointed out that rates are to be agreed between the parties otherwise the
matter goes into the dispute. So the parities were agreed at the rate of PKR
36,007.84 per cum depending assessment as per site conditions and
acknowledging the facts that no price adjustment was applicable in the
Contract.

• The Audit working of cost breakdown has no justification under the Law and
Contract as neither it is based on WAPDA Drafting Standards nor any

Page 5 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

reference of rates used in the analysis have been provided. Further, it has not
been approved by any competent technical forum.

• After award of the Contract, Contract Provisions are the binding between the
parties not the general norms/ justifications etc.

• Keeping in view the above narrated facts, Audit is requested to drop the
observation please.

3. CONSTITUTION OF INQUIRY COMMITTEE

To reach the actual facts, a Fact Finding Inquiry Committee was constituted with the
approval of Member (Water) vides Office Order No.GM(C&M)W/D(A)W/Inq-229/E-
I/1383-89 dated 04.02.2022 to examine the proposed Draft Para No.235/2021-22 on
account of increase in contract cost due to change in specifications issued by CDO
WAPDA after Award of Contract-Rs.6.04 million in respect of T4 Wapda Tarbela.
The undersigned was nominated as member of the Inquiry Committee. The
constituted Inquiry Committee was as under.

a. Mr. Mujahid Tanveer Chief Engineer(Dams)Wapda Convener

b. Mr. Ahmed Bux Director(WEC)Wapda Member
c. Mr. Muhammad Husnain Deputy Director(M&S)Wapda Member

4. TERMS OF REFERENCE (TOR)

i. To probe into the contents of Draft Para No.235/2021-22 T-4th Tarbela and
assess the loss to WAPDA Authority if any.

ii. Submit the report within 30 Days.

5. MANAGEMENT
5.1 Planning
a. Relevant record/ information will be needed to reach the actual facts

Page 6 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

b. Actual site will be visited to see the Overhead Water Tank and to collect
the information

c. Meetings will be held with Project authorities to get the goal

d. A focal person is required to keep liaison between project office and

Inquiry Committee to save the time

e. The proceedings will be carried out to conclude the report well in time.

5.2 Organizing
a. Chief Engineer/PD Tarbela 4th Extension Project was requested to
provide information/data related to Draft Para and to nominate a focal
person to assist the Inquiry Committee vide letter dated 08.02.2022.

b. In response to letter dated 08.02.2022, Chief Engineer/PD Tarbela 4 th

Extension HPP provided the requisite information/data with a letter dated
14.02.2022.

c. First meeting of the Inquiry Committee was called vide letter dated
16.02.2022 and held in the office of Chief Engineer (Dams)/Convener of
the Inquiry Committee on 18.02.2022.

d. After scrutinizing the provided data, Chief Engineer/PD Tarbela 4th

Extension HPP was again requested to provide further data/information
as well as to depute a well conversant officer as a focal person vide
letter dated 21.02.2022.

e. In response to above letter, Chief Engineer/Project Director Tarbela 4th

HPP informed vide his letter dated 23.02.2022 that most of officers has
been promoted and only one Sub Engineer(Civil) who supervise the
work at site is available and will attend the proceedings. Furthermore he
intimated the officers worked on the Project during course of
implementation of the project.

Page 7 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

f. In the light of information provided by PD T4th Ext. HPP, The

questionnaire was served to the officers to get further information
regarding the matter. Replies to the questionnaire were received.

g. Chief Engineer/PD Tarbela 4th HPP was requested vide letter dated
March 02, 2022 to provide the data at the earliest as the matter is most
urgent.

h. The Competent authority was requested to extend the given date for
completion of the inquiry which was accorded.

i. Meeting the Inquiry Committee was held on 11.03.2022.

j. Dy. Director (M&S) WAPDA being Member of the Inquiry committee

visited the site and collected the relevant documents.

k. During scrutiny of the record some further information was sought from
the Project Office regarding rate analysis of 4000 Psi concrete vide letter
dated 25.03.2022.

l. In response to above letter, Project Office provided additional

information regarding the matter.

m. To conclude the inquiry, Project Office was requested to provide the

incumbency list of the involved Officers/ officials.

5.3 Leading

During my site visit, I led a team of following members which was provided by
the Project office to search the relevant record;

a. Mr. Tanveer Ud Din, Sr Engineer TDP, Focal Person to the Inquiry Committee
b. Mr. Farooq Niazi, Junior Engineer T4th HPP
c. Mr . Tauseef Ur Rehman, Sub Engineer T4th HPP

Page 8 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

6. FINDINGS / OBSERVATIONS

On the basis of record/information provided by the Project Office, Inquiry Committee

has found that;

a. Initially CDO Water issued 20 Nos of drawings for construction of 20,000 gallons
overhead water tank to Chief Engineer(/PD(Tarbela) 4th extension HPP vide his
letter dated 15.08.2013.

b. After lapse of almost one month, 2 No Drawings i.e. 512-2-55 (R1) and 512-2-
56(R1) were revised and issued by CDO Water to Chief Engineer/PD T 4 th HPP
vide letter dated 17.09.2013 wherein concrete compressive strength was
changed from 3000 PSI to 4000 PSI and steel yield strength from 40 KSI to
60000 KSI.

c. Contract No.T4HP/Works/E-I/14-C for the construction of infrastructure works of

O&M Colony at Tarbela was awarded to M/s SahibzadaLiaqat Ali Shah and Co.
on 19.02.2018.

a. Scope of Work: Construction of road, water supply, overhead water tank,

sewerage (complete)and green area development

b. Bid Cost: Rs.41,578,456.63

c. Date of Commencement: 19.02.2018

d. Date of Original completion: 09.11.2018(263 days)

d. Contractor submitted the rate of reinforced cement concrete work using course
sand including all labour and material except the cost of steel reinforcement and
its labour for bending and binding which will be paid separately for concrete ratio
1:2:4 as Rs.17000 per Cumec and providing & fabricating mild steel intermediate
grade 40,000 Psi (276 MP) yield for cement concreate including cost of cutting,
bending, laying, making joints as 122 Rupees per kg.

e. Chief Engineer/PD T 4th HPP requested CDO for confirmation of concrete and
steels strengths Vide a letter dated 09.07.2018 for which CDO vide letter dated

Page 9 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

30,07.2018 confirmed that that the drawings No.512.-2-55(R1) and 56(R1)

prepared utilizing concrete compressive strength as 4,000 PSI and steel yield
strength as 60 KSI shall be considered for further action.

f. Contractor was directed to carry out the mixed design for the super structure of
overhead water tank as per CDO approved drawings i.e. 4000 PSI for concrete
vide project director letter dated 22.06.2018. Contractor vide his letter dated
17.08.2018 submitted concreted mixed design for 4,000 PSI strength for the
construction of overhead water tank.

g. Contractor vide his letter dated 24.07.2018 replied that the deviation of concrete
strength as well as steel from G-40 to G-60 as per approved design is a
compensation event as it stopped them from starting the construction of
overhead water tank and require proportionate increase in contract price.

h. Project office vide letter dated 06.09.2018 directed the contractor to submit
quotations for G-60 steel and 4,000 PSI concrete for which contractor submitted
the new rates of 4000 PSI concrete, 60,000 PSI steel, PVC Class-D blind pipe of
300 mm dia, PVC Class-D strainer pipe of 300 mm dia, MS pipeline with internal
100 mm dia etc/ vide his letter dated 15.10.2018

i. The strength of concrete and steel covered in the estimates were 3000 PSI and
40,000 PSI respectively while as per CDO the required strength of the same
material was 4000 PSI and 60,000 PSI due to which Variation Order(VO) was
approved. New rates for 4000 PSI strength concrete and 60,000 PSI yield steel
was given as Rs.36,007.84 per cumec and Rs.179.23 per kg respectively based
on market rates.

j. VO No.1 was submitted for approval vide note NO.9574 dated 16.11.2018 and
was approved on 29.01.2019 by GM(Power)Tarbelawhich is 14.53% of the actual
contract price as per Wapda Book of Financial Power Section-IV Clause F(ii) in
conjunction with general instructions/ix and was issued to the contractor vide
letter dated 06.02.2019 for which contractor agreed vide his letter dated
11.02.2019.

Page 10 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

k. Committee gone through the concrete mix design submitted by the contractor as
well as the contents of rate analysis submitted for approval of competent
authority wherein a major discrepancy was noticed by the committee that the unit
of quantities used in the mix design do not match with unit of quantities used in
the rate analysis.

The same was shared with the project office for making correction in the rate
analysis vide letter dated 25-03-2022. In response, project office, submitted the
corrected rate analysis vide their letter dated 29.3-2022, which was authenticated
by the project office during the visit of committee to project site on 05-04-2022 to
the actual rate of the concrete having strength 4000 PSI was authenticated to be
Rs 21000 for 01m3 instead of Rs 36000/- as approved through Variation Order
No. 1.

The committee also confirm the total quantity of the concrete 4000 PSI used for
construction of overhead water tank to be 103.5 m3 This confirm the loss of
Rs153,299.25/- to the authority with regard to concrete of 4000 PSI strength.
However, no such discrepancy was noticed for 60000 Psi Steel. Estimated loss is
as;

Rate for 4000 Psi/m3 Conc.approved in VO-1 = Rs. 36,000/-

Actually calculated rate per m3 =Rs. 21,188.50

Difference of amounts =36,000-21,188.50

=14,811.5

Total quantity of 400 Psi concrete used =103.5 m3

Total loss to the authority =14,811.50x103.5

=153,299.25 Rupees.

Amount to be recovered from the contractor is 153,299.25/-

Page 11 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

7. CONCLUSIONS

i. CDO issued revised. Drawings well before the award of contract.

ii. Revised drawings were not taken into account during preparation of BOQ and
award of contract by the Project Office inadvertently.

iii. The specifications of concrete steel and others were changed and the work was
executed on the revised specifications. The specifications were changed in the
interest of Project as if overhead water tank was constructed on 3000 PSI
concrete strength and 40,000 PSI steel strength, the results would have been
different in the form of life/usability of the structure.

iv. On the basis of concrete mix design for 4000 Psi concrete New rate demanded
by the contractor was Rs. 37871.40/- per cubec meter. The rate was analyzed by
the Project Office and was curtailed to 36007.84 PKR/m3.

v. Inquiry Committee thoroughly studied the rates quoted by the contractor and
formulated by the Civil Directorate and reached the result that the quantities
taken to formulate the rate of 1 cubec meter 4000 Psi concrete were wrong as
the quantities were taken from concrete mix design where the units were used as
liter and the same quantities were used with the unit cubec feet while formulating
the rate analysis which resulted in huge difference of amounts resulted in loss to
the Authority.

vi. Inquiry committee, calculated new rate for 1 cubec meter 4000 Psi concrete PKR
21,188.50 per cubec meter with correct quantities based on the rates quoted by
the Contractor while formulating the rate as 37871.40 PKR/cubec meter.

vii. The difference of the rates i.e. rate given to the contractor and the actual rate of 1
cubec meter 4000 Psi concrete is the loss to the Authority which may be
recovered from the contractor by the Project Office to recover the loss to the
Authority.

Page 12 of 13
 Muhammad Husnain, 135th MMC

8. RECOMMENDATIONS

i. The difference of the rates i.e. rate given to the contractor and the actual rate of 1
cubec meter 4000 Psi concrete is the loss to the Authority which may be
recovered from the contractor by the Project Office to save the loss to the
Authority.

ii. If it is not possible to recover the loss from the contractor, Project Team involved
in approval of rate analysis as well as approval of VO No.1 may be held
responsible for the loss to the Authority.

iii. If the contractor has not been paid its final bill/retention money, the loss should
be recovered from the contractor and letter of displeasure should be issued to
the Project Team to avoid such mistakes in future.

(Muhammad Husnain)
Deputy Director (M&S) Wapda
Participant of 135th MMC
at WASC, Islamabad

Page 13 of 13