Letter Ref.

: TA23154D/LET/DAR/CCECC CRCC JV/003

Date : 21st of September 2023
To : CCECC-CRCC JV
DAR ES SALAAM
TANZANIA
P.O Box 4083

Attention : Mr/ Zhang Junle

Authorized representative

Design and build contract for the electrified standard gauge railway (SGR) line phase II
Project : from Tabora to Kigoma.
PA/154/HQ/2021-22/W/02LOT1
Subject : Request for the Execution of Railway Trial Embankment.

Dear Sir,

Reference is made to the above-mentioned subject and the Contractors’ letter to the Engineer Ref. No.
TTK-CCJ-DAR-23-0003 dated September 6th, 2023, in which the Contractor submitted the method
statement for the trial embankment.

We hereby attached our reply to the above (Attachment No.2), noting that the submission code is “revise
and resubmit”.

On the other hand, the Contractor is instructed to submit the Project Quality plan “including numbering
system for the project” to facilitate the document submission process.

This is for your action and records.

Yours Sincerely,
For/ Dar Al-Handasah Consultants (Shair and Partners)

For/ George Fares

Director of Operations – Kenya and Tanzania

CC: Mr./ Machibya Masanja, Director of Civil Engineering Infrastructure, TRC

Mr./ Wallace Isaya, Project Manager for SGR Lot6, TRC

Attachments:
Attachment No. 1 (Letter Ref. No. TTK-CCJ-DAR-23-0003) 2 pages
Attachment No. 2 (DRR Method Statement for Trial Embankment ) 2 pages
Attachment No.1
Attachment No.1
 Attachment No.2

Project No. and Name: TA23154-0200S Standard Gauge Railway (SGR) Phase: 2
Engineer: Dar Al-Handasah JV Employer: Tanzania Railways Corporation Contractor: CCECC-CRCC JV

Document Number Status of the Document:

Project No. Originator Discipline Section / Location Document Stage Document Revision Approved
TA23154 Station Type No. Approved as noted
Revise and resubmit

Document Name: Method Statement for Trial Embankment Section Rejected

Transmittal No.: Submited by letter (Ref.No.: TTK-CCJ-DAR-23-0003) For Information

Date Received: 06/09/2023 Date Returned: 20/09/2023 PCM Upload Date:

System Discipline: Other Discipline:

General Track work Depot Civil
Signaling Rolling Stock Auxiliary System MEP
Telecommunication OCS Other Other …..................
Power Supply Work Base

Item Comment(s) Date of Response(s) Date of Item Date of

Comm
ent No.

Comment Response Closed / Closing

Open Item
Compaction should be:
-SSB 98%
-Layer A: 95 and 100% for cohesive and non cohesive
soils respectively
1 General -Layer B: 93 and 98% for cohesive and non cohesive 09/19/23
soils respectively
Frequency of sand replacement method compaction
tests should be specified and within the employer's
requirements (Page 11)
Slope stability checks according to material properties
of used soils should be made in order to approve these
2 General slopes. Drainage should be ensured in order to avoid 09/19/23
erosion. (Page 12)
Employer requires 200 mm A and 300mm B for
3 General Structural Layers (Page 21) 09/19/23

Minimum compaction should be 95% as the site's soil

4 General is non cohesive instead of 90%. (Original Ground 09/19/23
Treatment Page 23)
Number of tests should be specified as per the
5 General employer's requirements (6.4.8) in the sand cone 09/19/23
method. (Page 27)
90% is acceptable only in case of cohesive soils. (Page
6 General 09/19/23
27)
 Attachment No.2

Dynamic cone penetrometer test should be made in

order to make sure that a uniform up-to-standards
compaction is reached as per the employer's
requirements (6.4.6).
7 General Tests to determine the material properties of ballast 09/19/23
and sub-ballast layers are required as per the
employer's requirements (6.4.8).
CBR tests are required as per the employer's
requirements (6.4.8). (Page 27)
Compaction %: These values are only acceptable in
case a cohesive soil is used, otherwise 100, 98 and
8 General 09/19/23
95% of compaction should be ensured for Layer A, B
and subgrade respectively. (Page 28)
Section 1.3:
The “Technical specifications and requirements
9 General 09/19/23
specified in the bidding documents” are not part of the
Contract Documents and hence shall not be referred
tSection 1.3: The referred to Construction Management
10 General Plan shall be submitted for review (Site to check if this 09/19/23
plan has already been submitted/reviewed)
Section 1.3: The referred to “Information obtained from
on-site inspections” shall be enclosed for reference,
11 General noting that joint inspections may be carried out as 09/19/23
deemed necessary. (Site to review/check/amend as
necessary)
Section 1.3: The referred to “Drawings and related
12 General documents currently provided by the design” shall be 09/19/23
clearly identified.
Section 6: The Project’s ESHS shall be submitted
13 General under a separate submission for review. (Site to check 09/19/23
if this plan has already been submitted/reviewed)
Section 6: Contractor shall include the HSE risk
14 General assessment of the works subject of this specific 09/19/23
method statement.
Contractor shall also include the Inspection and Testing
15 General plan relevant to the works subject of this specific 09/19/23
method statement.

Reviewed by: Signature: Date: Response by: Signature: Date:

Approval shall not relieve Contractor of his liabilities under the Contract or constitute authorization of any change to Contract Documents.