NSCR GCR S03C ZWD LTR Co 000021

North-South Commuter Railway Extension
(NSCR-EX) Project
General Consultant Services
Reference No.: NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000021

12 March 2024
ISMAN WIDODO
Authorized Representative
Joint Venture of PT Adhi Karya (Persero) Tbk. and
PT PP (Persero) Tbk.
Jalan Raya Pasar Minggu KM. 18
Jakarta Selatan, 12510, Indonesia
Subject: S-03c; Engineer’s Response to Proposal PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) -

Engineer’s Instruction No. 01/S03c/2023
Reference: (1) ADHI – PTPP JV Letter (Ref No. APJV/SCRP03C/2023/XI/T/026) PNR Track
Recovery (BOQ-2) - Engineer’s Instruction No. 01/S03c/202, dated 28
November 2023
(2) GCR Letter (Ref. No. NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000016) PNR Track

December 2023
(3) ADHI – PTPP JV Letter (Ref No. NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000002)

Contractor’s Response to PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) - Engineer’s
Instruction No. 01/S03c/202, dated 14 January 2024

January 2024

Instruction No. 01/S03c/202, dated 21 February 2024

February 2024

Instruction No. 01/S03c/202, dated 08 March 2024
Dear Mr. Widodo,
The response from the Engineer regarding the titled submission can now be accessed in the DRC
(Encl. 1) pertaining to the subject in question.
Thank you very much for your kind consideration.
GCR Consortium Office: 20th and 21st Floor, Greenfield Tower, Mayflower Street, Greenfield District, Mandaluyong City, 1550
(Main Office) Metro Manila, Philippines
Tel: +63-2-5322-3700
Oriental Consultants Global Unit 38C, 38th Floor, Rufino Pacific Tower Bldg., 6784 Ayala Avenue, Makati City 1223, Philippines
Philippine Branch Office Tel: +63-2-856-9747~9750 | Fax: +63-2-856-9751
North-South Commuter Railway Extension
(NSCR-EX) Project
General Consultant Services
Sincerely,
for and on behalf of
GCR Consortium
TETSUYA YOSHIZAWA
Engineer’s Delegate
Senior Resident Engineer
Copy furnished:
JEREMY S. REGINO
Undersecretary for Railways, Department of Transportation
CELESTE D. LAUTA
OIC-General Manager, Philippine National Railways
Encl.: 1) S-03c; Review Comments to Proposal PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) - Engineer’s Instruction
No. 01/S03c/2023 – Revision D – NONO - [NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-DRC-CO-000004]
GCR Consortium Office: 20th and 21st Floor, Greenfield Tower, Mayflower Street, Greenfield District, Mandaluyong City, 1550
(Main Office) Metro Manila, Philippines
Tel: +63-2-5322-3700
Oriental Consultants Global Unit 38C, 38th Floor, Rufino Pacific Tower Bldg., 6784 Ayala Avenue, Makati City 1223, Philippines
Philippine Branch Office Tel: +63-2-856-9747~9750 | Fax: +63-2-856-9751
NORTH-SOUTH COMMUTER RAILWAY EXTENSION
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT
DOCUMENT REVIEW COMMENT (DRC) SHEET
(CP S-03c) ADHI KARYA & PT PP TBK JOINT

Submittal From: Submittal Date: 08-Mar-2024 Submittal Stage: ☐ Design ☐ Construction ☐ T&C ☐ As-Built ☒ Others
VENTURE
NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000008 South Commuter Railway Project- Package S-03c: Proposal PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) - Engineer’s
Submittal No.: Submittal Title:
NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000009 Instruction No. 01/S03c/2023
Document No.: NSCR-APJV-S03C-TR-BOQ-CO-000001 Document Title: Proposal PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) - Engineer’s Instruction No. 01/S03c/2023 Rev:
Number of days for

DRC No.: NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-DRC-CO-000004 DRC Date: 12-Mar-2024 4 Rev: D
Engineer’s review:
Engineer’s ☒ NONO Notice of No Objection ☐ NONOC(C) Notice of No Objection with minor comments ☐ NONOC(B) Notice of No Objection with intermediate comments ☐ NOR Notice of Rejection
Response ☒ Re-submission Not Required ☐ Re-submission is Required
Blue section: To be filled by GCR Green section: To be responded to by Sub-consultant/Contractor*
Review Status Action Taken/

Reviewer Page/Section Comment Checker Comment
Item Reviewer’s Comments (GCR) by Reviewer Sub-consultant/Contractor Response*
Initial /Drawing Type Initial Addressed
(Open/Closed) (Yes/No)
Method Kindly add Workflow Chart to show work sequence. Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
1. YW NA Closed DM Yes Instruction No. 01.
Statement
Kindly prepare Site Machinery and Equipment Please find in the updated Proposal of Engineering
Method with Quantities by work sequence by sequence. Instruction No. 01.
2 YW NA Closed DM Yes
Statement
Method Same one of above 2 for manpower is required. Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
3. YW NA Closed DM Yes
Statement
Kindly add detail layout showing loading with crane Please find in the updated Proposal of Engineering
Method and trailer. Instruction No. 01.
Statement
How many rails / sleepers will you load on trailer Rail

per trip? Kindly indicate it. - Expandable Trailer
Method Capacity: 25 Tons (Allowable 70% Cap)
Statement Weight of Rail: 37 kg/m
Length: 20 m
Max qty per truck: 24 pcs
1|Page
Form no.: GCR/QA/0001, Rev C, 08-Sep-2023
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Sleeper
- Dump Truck
Capacity: 8 Tons
Weight of Sleeper: 200 kg/pcs
- Trailer Truck
Capacity: 25 Tons
Weight of Sleeper: 200 kg/pcs
There are two options of vehicle to transport the

sleeper. It depends on the site condition.
Schedule (Duration) is deviated from Addendum Yes Please see updated schedule following the latest TOR
Method #4. It should be match with Addendum #4. Add. 5
6. YW
Statement
NA Closed DM
Security Plan is missing from technical proposal. Yes Please find Site security plan layout in the attachment
PNR Designated Storage Area
In case ROW has issue and there is time gap
Method
7. YW
Statement
between completion of PNR Track Recovery and NA Closed DM
start permanent work.
2|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Care must be taken when suspending and lowering Yes The appropriate tools and equipment to prevent rail
long objects. swing during loading and unloading process as
Please illustrate what you mean by appropriate follows:
tools equipment and preventative measures when
1. Spreader Beam
rails are swung This tool will stabilize the rail during lifting
process
2. Rail Tong
8. TK NA Closed DM This tool will clamp rail during lifting process
3. Rope
Both ends of the rail will be tied using rope.
Those ropes will be controlled by manpower
to avoid rail swing during the lifting process
Contractor to confirm the selected Subcontractor is Yes According to the Meeting dated 27 Dec 2023, The
"EIGENTECH Corporation" as the most technically Contractor requested to add another subcontractor in
qualified Subcontractor/Suppliers and are capable the proposal.
to execute the works.
Contractor to include in the revise proposal the The selected Subcontractor is Joratech.
9. EA Attachment 5 Technical and Commercial assessment report for N/A Closed BDM
the proposed Subcontractor.
The Contractor revised the proposal and provided

the Contractor’s Assessment
Contractor to present the unit rate in whole units Yes Revised
with two decimal places (stated in Preamble Item
No. 8) to avoid discrepancy in Amount
computation. Kindly check Contractor's proposal
Attachment 2 and Attachment 4. Example: Adding
Attachment 2, the Attachment 2 Amount will result to a variance
10. EA
Attachment 5 of 0.01 vs the proposal letter reference 014/NSCR- N/A Closed BDM
03C/ADHI-PTPP/JV/XI/2023
Contractor still needs to comply with this comment.
No further comment
Contractor to provide advance copy of DUPA of Yes Noted
Attachment 4
11. EA
DUPA
CP S-03c Main Contract Works for checking of N/A Closed BDM
OCM & Profit % (shall be the same)
3|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Contractor will submit DUPA for main works in stages
Contractor to provide at least 2 items of BOQ Bill after commencement date.
1 DUPA that shows OCM & Profit percentage and
Supervisor and HSE staff rate.
Contractor provided insufficient details on the Yes Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
DUPA to review. The Contractor to provide a
correct DUPA on Labor and to state the quantities
Attachment 4 of men, number of hours and unit rate per hour for
12. EA
DUPA
N/A Closed BDM
Foreman, Skilled Labor and for Unskilled Labor.
No further comment
correct DUPA on Equipment and to state the
description of equipment like backhoe, crane,
Attachment 4 truck, etc. with quantity on number of units, quantity
13. EA
DUPA
N/A Closed BDM
on number of hours it will be used, and to provide
the unit rate per hour of each equipment.
No further comment
correct DUPA on Materials and to state the
Attachment 4 description of material to be used like drums, empty
14. EA
DUPA sacks, 2" x 4" good lumber, cutting disc, etc. with N/A Closed BDM
quantity, unit, and unit rate of the said materials
No further comment
Contractor to provide substantiation document on Yes Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
Attachment 4 the PHP 154,647.07/no. cost of Steel Drum
15. EA
DUPA Item 5-3
N/A Closed BDM
No further comment
Contractor to provide substantiation document on Yes Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
the PHP 2,227.68/cum Aggregate Sub-base
Attachment 4 Course
16. EA
DUPA Item 15-4
N/A Closed BDM
No further comment
17. EA Attachment 2 BOQ Item No. 9 Recovery of Ballast is not required N/A Closed BDM Yes Noted, Will align to the Addendum No. 05
to recover as per PNR Approval on Letter NSCR-
4|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

GCR-LWD-LWD-LTR-TK-000003. Kindly reflect on
the revise proposal.
No further comment
It was observed a cost of PHP 21,093,726.29 for Yes Contractor put supervision and safety staff only (except
General Requirements (- for Contractor's general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Organization and Management, Traffic Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
Management, Risk Management, Safety and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
Management, Security Plan, Detailed Works Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Program, Photographs and Videos, Insurances, Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
Attachment 4 any other necessary management plans, any type Insurances, any other necessary management plans,
18. EA
DUPA Item 17
N/A Closed BDM
of necessary facilities, any type of environmental any type of necessary facilities, any type of
aspect, any other relevant General Requirements, environmental aspect, any other relevant General
etc.) while there is also a time related and lumpsum Requirements, etc.) will utilize main contract.
cost using the Main Contract Works BOQ Bill 1
items. Kindly clarify and provide substantiation. Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
No further comment
Contractor to provide substantiation of their usage Yes Contractor put supervision and safety staff only (except
of the Main Contract Bill No. 1 time related rates general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
when the bulk of this work is smaller compared to proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Main Contract. Kindly take note that the Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
Contractor’s proposal is a subcontract work thus and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
shall be supervision only. Example: Management Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Attachment 4 and Staff time related charges of PHP Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
19. EA
DUPA Item 17
N/A Closed BDM
9,210,439.00/month is too high when the number Insurances, any other necessary management plans,
of personnel to supervise this VO will be smaller any type of necessary facilities, any type of
compared to the number of personnel that will work environmental aspect, any other relevant General
on the Main Contract Works. Requirements, etc.) will utilize main contract.
No further comment Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.

It was observed a proposal cost for the following: Yes Contractor put supervision and safety staff only (except
- Time related costs of Contractor's Office general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
- Time related charges for the Employer and proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Attachment 4 Engineer's Site Offices Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
20. EA N/A Closed BDM and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
DUPA Item 17 Kindly take note that the Contractor’s Proposal is a
Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Subcontract Work thus it shall be a supervision
only. The facilities under the Main Contract Works Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
will be used and/or share for this VO. Insurances, any other necessary management plans,
any type of necessary facilities, any type of
5|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

environmental aspect, any other relevant General
Requirements, etc.) will utilize main contract.
No further comment
Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
- Time related charges for Operation and general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
Management of the CEMMP proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Contractor is to demonstrate requirements and Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
identify this CEMMP scope for this VO.
Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Attachment 4 Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
21. EA
DUPA Item 17
N/A Closed BDM
Insurances, any other necessary management plans,
No further comment
Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
- Survey and setting out - time related charges general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
- Time related charges for provision of method proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
statements, working drawings, material Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
submission, draft guarantees, etc. and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
Kindly take note that the Contractor’s Proposal is a Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Attachment 4 Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
22. EA
DUPA Item 17 Subcontract Work thus it shall be a supervision N/A Closed BDM
only. The proposed cost for the above items should Insurances, any other necessary management plans,
be by the Subcontractor. any type of necessary facilities, any type of

Contractor to provide substantiation on the cost Yes Contractor put supervision and safety staff only (except
proposal for Demobilization and Closing the Works general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
Attachment 4
23. EA
DUPA Item 17
N/A Closed BDM Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
6|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT


It was observed a proposal cost for the following: Yes Contractor supervision and safety staff only (except
- Fixed charge for Bond and Securities general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
- Fixed charge for Other Insurances proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
Requirements Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
- Time related charges for Other Insurance and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
Requirements Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
The Engineer is being aware of the potential risk for Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
this track recovery work. However, the associated
Attachment 4 any type of necessary facilities, any type of
24. EA
DUPA Item 17
insurance cost impact of all Variations at this stage N/A Closed BDM
of the project remains immature to consider. The environmental aspect, any other relevant General
Engineer proposes to re-assess it a later stage to Requirements, etc.) will utilize main contract.
conclude issuance when all Variations have been
issued and valued accordingly. The Contractor is to Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.
monitor this item and subject to a separate
application.
No further comment
It was observed that the cost proposal for BOQ Yes Contractor supervision and safety staff only (except
Item 17 General Requirements is 88.88% of the general requirement from subcontractor) in the update
Proposed Direct Cost. It was observed also that it proposal. Other items such as Contractor's
is 1,060.37% greater than the EIGENTECH Mobilization/Demob, Contractor's Project Organization
General Requirements. Kindly clarify and provide and Management, Traffic Management, Risk
substantiation as this is too high and not Management, Safety Management, Security Plan,
Attachment 2 acceptable. Detailed Works Program, Photographs and Videos,
25. EA
Item 17
N/A Closed BDM
7|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

It was observed that the submitted track removal Yes The current condition of the CPS03C project is not
schedule is not aligned according to PNR Track commence yet even when we submit the proposal by
Recovery Works TOR addendum 04 that was 24 November 2023.
submitted by the Engineer dated 19-Oct-23.
According to contractor’s proposed schedule, the We consider schedule on the Addendum 04 as
commencement and the completion dates are 15- indicative working duration only. We are not
Jan-24 and 25-Jan-25. however, in TOR considering the indicative commencement date: 14
addendum 04 the commencement and the November 2023 due to it has been obsoleted.
completion dates are 14-Nov-23 and 16-Jun-24.
Contractor to clarify.
The duration in our proposal is longer compare to
addendum 04 due to as follows:
Contractor should submit major of initial document

within 28 days after Commencement Date (CD)
Duration of Engineer Review according to GS is around
28 days.
Permit of works from authority before start construction
Attachment activity such as DOLE and etc.
1.Engineering
26 SH Instruction No.1 A Closed RMA Thus, contractor confirm comply with the Addendum 4
(Attachment-1 schedule as long as all parties aware that the approval
Schedule) duration is quite short. For instance, duration between
CD and Temporary fence is only 2 weeks. Within 2
weeks Contractor to provide document of drawing &
material sheet of fence and Engineer shall approve
those documents before start the construction activity
Please find the update schedule in the attachment
8|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

It appears that the updated schedule referred to Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1
in your reply is missing or not provided. The
Contractor is requested to furnish the revised
Detailed Works Program schedule for the PNR
track recovery in accordance with Engineers
Instructions No. 01/S03c/2023 (Scope of
Works). This detailed works program should be
developed in accordance with the contractor's
technical proposal and methodology, aligning
with the Engineer’s provided latest schedule.
- Please find the update schedule in the attachment

1 we already revised and breakdown the activity for
Temporary Fence installation devided By Zone and
• The Contractor to reflect the activity of added PNR designated Storage area on schedule
General Mobilization and kindly
breakdown the activity for Temporary
Fence installation per zone in the updated
Schedule Rev. C (attachment 1).
• It was observed that the activities for PNR

Designated Storage Area and Access Site
Preparation on both pages 1 and 2, as well
as General Mobilization on page 2, are
missing from the submitted updated
schedule Rev. C- attachment 1. The
Contractor to revisit the TOR addendum 5
and the submitted schedule.
9|Page
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

• Discrepancies of the number of durations - Please find the update schedule in the attachment
used have been observed on the 1 we already revised the duration per activity refer
submitted updated schedule rev. c to TOR addendum 5 and instruction to start
(Attachment 1). Kindly note, the number of temporary fence with track recovery on April 1
durations per activity on the submitted 2024.
schedule (shown below) should align with For refrense please check the table below the
the duration of TOR addendum 5 issued by duration between TOR addendum 5 and our
the Engineer. revised document duration
Noted, no further comment.
10 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Contractor to clarify the number of durations used for Road Yes
construction at the Road Crossing Track.
Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
It was observed that the total durations used for Road Instruction No. 01.
works construction at the road crossing track is doubled
compared to TOR addendum 04 allotted duration. Please
see table below for the comparison: We have already revised the document to refer to TOR
PNR Track Recovery Works TOR addendum 4 Constractors Proposed Schedule addendum 05 and please see table below for
Start Finish No. of Days Start Finish No. of Days
comparation. Please take note that the commencement
date is indicative only.
29-May-24 16-Jun-24 19 29-Oct-24 3-Dec-24 36
Kindly revisit and check other activities durations as well
and compare it to TOR addendum 4 schedule.
The Contractor is requested to furnish the Engineer a
revised Detailed Works Program for the PNR track
recovery for review (refer to comment no. 26).
• The total duration for track recovery works
should be 216 days, not 215 days as
indicated in the provided comparison table
in the Contractor’s response section of
Attachment
this DRC. The duration calculation should
1.Engineering
span from the start date to the end date
27 SH Instruction No.1 A Closed RMA
and should not be between two dates.
(Attachment-1
Please make the necessary amendment
Schedule)
accordingly. - We have already revised the document to refer to
TOR addendum 05 and instruction to start
• Discrepancies have been observed on the temporary fence with track recovery on April 1
submitted between the updated schedule 2024. please see table below for comparation.
rev. c (Attachment 1) and the provided Please take note that the commencement date is
table comparison in the Contractor’s indicative only.
response section of this DRC. See table
below and refer to comment no. 26.
11 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

It was observed that the contractor added Yes Please refer to response no 26
additional activities on their submitted track
removal schedule compared to original schedule of
We have already revised the update schedule refer to
PNR track TOR addendum 4.
original schedule of PNR track TOR addendum 5.
Please see table below:
Attachment
1.Engineering Added
28 SH Instruction No.1 activities. B Closed RMA
(Attachment-1
Schedule)
Kindly refer to response on item no. 26.

Kindly add one column on the submitted track Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
relocation schedule on the attachment 1 and show Instruction No. 01.
the number of durations used for each activity.
Attachment Already added one column on schedule to show
1.Engineering Kindly refer to response on item no. 26. duration for each activity
29 SH Instruction No.1 B Closed RMA
(Attachment-1
Schedule) Kindly refer to response on items no. 26 and no. Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1 we
27. already revised

Kindly breakdown the activity name “Track Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
Relocation” into more detailed task and show the Instruction No. 01.
Attachment 1. activities of removal, dismantling, relocation and
Engineering transportation of PNR track including other items
30 SH Instruction No.1 B Closed RMA We have already revised the update schedule included
associated and stated in the scope of works. the removal, dismantling, relocation and transportation
(Attachment-1
Schedule) of PNR track following TOR Addendum 05
12 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

The Contractor to include or add the location/
chainage in the Activity name for Temporary
Fence, Track Recovery and Road Existing
Crossing, if applicable. See sample below:
Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1 we
Example: Install Temporary Fence Zone 1 already revised
Northbound and Southbound (Ch. 19+622 to
Ch. 20+522).
Contractor to elaborate or complete the Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
description of activity name “Preparation” on Instruction No. 01.
your submitted schedule to avoid confusion.
Attachment 1.
Preparation means all the activity prior to site activity
Engineering
Contractor can clearly state what page or where to such as preparation of approval document, method
31 SH Instruction No.1 B Closed RMA
find the contractor response to engineer’s statement, subcontractor approval, permit and all
(Attachment-1
comment. necessary documents.
Schedule)

Contractor to clarify the statement shown below: Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
Instruction No. 01.
We have already revised the Schedule Refer to TOR

addendum 05
Attachment
1.Engineering
Instruction No.1
32 SH B Closed RMA
(Chapter 3 It was observed that the statement shown above is
Schedule - Page contrasted to submitted PNR Track Recovery
25). Works TOR addendum 04. Kindly refer to my 1st
comment showing the TOR add 4 schedule.
The contractor is requested to adjust the

number of weeks indicated for activity items 3 Please see table on our response no 27 to make sure
and 5, as the submitted schedule in Addendum the duration same as TOR addendum 05
5, it should be 16.5 and 21.8 weeks. See
attached photo below.
13 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1

we already revised
Contractor to revisit the TOR addendum 5

schedule.
Kindly refer to response on items no. 26 and no.

27.

Kindly include on your submitted proposal of EI No. Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
1 (BOQ-2) the productivity used in Track Recovery Instruction No. 01.
33 SH General Works. B Closed RMA
Noted.
Contractor shall include on your submitted Yes Please find in the update Proposal of Engineering
proposal of EI No. 1 (BOQ-2) the no. of resources Instruction No. 01.
that will be allocated for the whole Track Recovery
Works. Please find it in the attachment 1
In addition to specifying the number of teams Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1 we
assigned to each activity, the contractor is already revised
required to provide the corresponding number/
34 SH General quantity of manpower allocated per activity. B Closed RMA
The contractor shall also provide the number of

teams and quantity of manpower for temporary
fence installation works in the next
submission.
14 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

In your next response, the contractor is Yes
required to explicitly indicate the location of Noted
items that have already been addressed. Please
35 SH General provide the page number, section, or B Closed RMA
attachment number for reference.
Noted.
On Attachment -4 Technical Evaluation - Track Yes Please find the update schedule in the Attachment 1
Relocation-1 under attachment 2 page 56 (Time
Schedule). Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1 we
The subcon (Joratech Corp.) schedule is not already revised
aligned to PNR track recovery TOR add 5. That
was attached on Proposal of Engineering
Instruction No. 01, figure 27, page 39 as shown
below.
Attachment
36 SH A Closed RMA
2/Page 56
While the TOR Addendum 5 schedule spans 28

weeks or 7 months, ADHI-PTPP JV
subcontractor’s schedule extends over 36
weeks or 9 months. Please adjust and align the
ADHI-PTPP subcon schedule with the
specifications outlined in TOR Addendum 5.
15 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Kindly refer to response on items no. 26 and no.
27.

Contractor confirmed that the Security will be by Yes Contractor proposes another security provider that
Eigentech. Contractor to confirm that the Security have experience in similar project considering site
Guard is in line with PADPAO compliance and/or condition
Attachment 2 requirements.
37 EA N/A Closed BDM
DUPA 14
Please find the company profile with the Padpao
No further comment certificate in the attachment 3.
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes THIS PROJECT HAS A DIFFERENT SITUATION IN
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to OTHER PACKAGES SINCE THERE ARE MORE
clarify the subcontractor’s OCM of 7.5% while on UNDERGOUND UTILITIES LOCATED IN PACKAGE
Packages S-04 to S-06 a 6.5% only was used. 03C AND WE CANNOT ASSURE THAT THE ROADS
THAT WILL BE USED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION
ARE ALL SAFE. BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE IN
Attachment 2
38 EA N/A Closed BDM MUNTINLUPA, LGU's REQUIRE US TO PUT
DUPA
PROTECTION FOR ALL MANHOLE COVER FOR ALL
THE ROADS THAT WILL BE PASSED THROUGH.
THIS WILL ALSO APPLY IF THERE ARE BRIDGES
THAT WILL BE DAMAGED DURING OUR
TRANSPORTATION AND OTHER DAMAGES
No further comment
DURING OUR TRACK REMOVAL WORKS.
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes SERVICE DRIVER ON EVERY WORK ITEM WILL BE
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to UTILIZE ON THE TRANSPORT OF MANPOWER,
clarify the Service Driver on some of the direct work TOOLS & MATERIALS FROM LAYDOWN AREA TO
Attachment 2 items of DUPA. This should be under the General WORK AREA. 3 SERVICE WAS ADDED TO
DUPA Requirements. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes "ACTUAL ACOOMPLISHEMENT ON S04 IS 4 NOS
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to PER DAY FOR 1 GROUP, THE PROPOSAL IS 7.5
clarify the low productivity of removal of track rail of NOS PER DAY FOR 2 GROUPS. BREAKDOWN OF
7.5 nos./day with 68 trackmen while on S-05 actual TRACKMAN ARE AS FOLLOWS:
Attachment 2 data it only has 18 trackmen works per day. GROUP 1 (DISMANTLING-20, UNLOADING TO
DUPA 1 TEMPORARY STOCKPILE -10) = 30
GROUP 2 (DISMANTLING -20, UNLOADING TO
TEMPORARY STOCKPILE -10) = 30, CROSSING
No further comment
16 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

FLAGMAN WAS ADDED TO GENERAL
REQUIREMENTS
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes PRICE WAS ADJUSTED ON THE SAID DUPA
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to (1640.73)
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Boom Truck
Attachment 2 Operator at PHP 1,640.73 (DUPA 1, 2) vs PHP
41 EA 1,457.91 (DUPA 3-5, 3-6, 4-5, 4-6, 5-3, 6, 15-1, 15- N/A Closed BDM
DUPA
4, 15-5, 16)
No further comment
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Backhoe
Attachment 2 Operator at PHP 1,640.73 (DUPA 1, 2) vs PHP
DUPA 1,691.17 (DUPA 15-1 to 15-4, 16)
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes NO VALUE ON THE ESTIMATE (ALREADY
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to DELETED)
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Crane
Attachment 2 Operator at PHP 2,011.91 (DUPA 3-3 to 3-6) vs
DUPA PHP 2,041.07 (DUPA 4-5 to 4-6)
No further comment
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Small Machine
Attachment 2 Operator at PHP 1,457.91 (DUPA 15-1) vs PHP
DUPA 1,055.48 (DUPA 15-4)
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes (20,675) IS FOR PURCHASE PRICE WHILE (747.50)
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to IS THE RENTAL PRICE
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Grinder 7” at
Attachment 2 PHP 20,675 (DUPA 1) vs PHP 747.50 (DUPA 15-
DUPA 5)
No further comment
17 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes (178,560) IS FOR PURCHASE PRICE WHILE (4,000)
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to IS THE RENTAL PRICE
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Towerlight at
Attachment 2 PHP 178,560 (DUPA 1) vs PHP 4,000 (DUPA 3-3
DUPA to 3-6, 4-5, 4-6, 15-1 to 15-5)
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes (85,000) IS FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE WHILE
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Contractor to (6,450) IS THE RENTAL PRICE
clarify the discrepancy of the rate of Rail Spreader
Attachment 2 Beam with Rail Clamps at PHP 85,000 (DUPA 3-3)
47 EA vs PHP 6,450 (DUPA 3-4 to 3-6, 4-5, 4-6, 15-1 to N/A Closed BDM
DUPA
15-5)
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes PRICE WAS ADJUSTED BASED ON THE UNIT RATE
subcontractor in the revised proposal. The rates on THAT WAS UTILIZED ON S04. TOOLS &
some items (MDT, mini backhoe, backhoe, EQUIPMENTS FROM S04 CAN NOT BE UTILIZED IN
Attachment 2 hydraulic rail lifter, hydraulic track jack, grinder 7”, THIS PROPOSAL BECASUSE THERE ARE STILL
48 EA 20-footer container van, crane) are higher N/A Closed BDM UNFINISHED DISMANTLING WORKS FOR S04 &
DUPA
compared to Package S-04. Kindly clarify. S06.
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes DISMANTLING WORKS ON S04 TO S06 WAS NOT
subcontractor in the revised proposal. The rates YET COMPLETED DUE TO ON-GOING REVENUE
with salvage cost on S-04 to S-06 was applied in LINES OF PNR UNTIL ALABANG STATION AND THE
this proposal. Example equipment are push rail ISSUES FOR IN-FORMAL SETTLERS WAS NOT YET
trolley, rail trolley with towing bar, rail lifting beam RESOLVED, THEREFORE, WE CAN NOT UTILIZED
with roller chain block, hydraulic rail lifter, hydraulic THE EQUIPMENTS PURCHASED FOR S04,S05 &
Attachment 2 track jack, rail tong, rail saw, sleeper tong, & S06.
DUPA demolition hammer.
The Packages S-04 to S-06 are nearly complete
thus the rates in the proposal for this package shall
be rental only. Kindly clarify.
No further comment
Contractor to clarify the rates on 6.7KVA generator, Yes DISMANTLING WORKS ON S04 TO S06 WAS NOT
Attachment 2 tower light (PHP 178,560) & sledge hammer are YET COMPLETED DUE TO ON-GOING REVENUE
50 EA rates of new equipment instead of rental rate only. N/A Closed BDM LINES OF PNR UNTIL ALABANG STATION AND THE
DUPA
ISSUES FOR IN-FORMAL SETTLERS WAS NOT YET
18 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

RESOLVED, THEREFORE, WE CAN NOT UTILIZED
THE EQUIPMENTS PURCHASED FOR S04,S05 &
S06. THE PRICE OF NEW TOOLS/QUIPMENTS
UTILIZE IN THE PROPOSAL IS AROUND 80-90%
No further comment ONLY
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes " FOR ITEMS 3-3 TO 3-4, THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
subcontractor in the revised proposal. The MANPOWER WAS FOR LOADING & UNLOADING
productivity computation in the proposal is low ACTIVITY.
compared to what was used in Package S-04 to S- FOR ITEMS 15-1, THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
Attachment 2 06. MANPOWER WILL BE UTILIZE FOR REMOVAL OF
51 EA DUPA 3-3, 3-4, Kindly recheck the quantity of workers, equipment N/A Closed BDM CONCRETE & EMBEDDED TRACKS INCLUDING
15-1 and duration of works. TRAFFIC MAN WHILE PERFORMING THE ACTIVITY
". TOTAL NUMBER OF MANPOWER WAS REDUCED
AND THE TRAFFIC MAN WAS TRANSFERRED TO
GENERAL REQUIREMENT
No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes WE CANNOT COMPARE THIS TO PACKAGE 04
subcontractor in the revised proposal. Clarify the BECAUSE THE CRANE WAS REMOVED IN
increase of transportation cost per KM compared to TRANSPORTATION OF RAILS IN PACKAGE 04 AND
Attachment 2 what was used on S-04 to S-06. WE ONLY PUT THE CRANE IN THE
52 EA DUPA 3-33 to 3- N/A Closed BDM TRANSPORTATION OF SLEEPERS. WHERE AS IN
6, 4-5, 4-6, 5-3 PACKAGE 3C, THE CRANES WERE SEPARATE TO
BE USED IN THE TRANSPORTATION FOR RAILS
AND SLEEPERS SINCE THEY WILL NOT BE
No further comment TRANSPORTED SIMUOLTANEOUSLY.
Contractor to clarify the incorrect subtotal of DUPA Yes ADJUSTED BASED ON THE TOTAL PRICE
3-3, 3-4, 4-5 & 4-6 on Materials & Consumables. REFLECTED
Example:
Attachment 2
DUPA
No further comment
Contractor to clarify the need of 2 teams for labor Yes 1 TEAM FOR LOADING & 1 TEAM FOR UNLOADING
and 2 boomtruck for productivity of 1 x 20-footer
Attachment 2 container van per day
DUPA 5-3
No further comment
19 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

Contractor to clarify the 16 days duration of forklift Yes ADJUSTED PRICE TO 15 DAYS
Attachment 2 when the workers and other equipment are 15 days
55 EA work only for the 15 nos. container van. N/A Closed BDM
DUPA 5-3
No further comment
It was observed an ambiguity of DUPA amount vs Yes ADJUSTED UNIT RATE TO 141,176.47
quantity multiplied by the unit rate.
Kindly recheck the unit rate and amount of Other

Attachment 2 consumables (CWN, etc.)
DUPA 15-5
No further comment
It was observed that the rate of rebars, marine Yes ADJUSTED UNIT PRICE BASED ON THE CURRENT
plywood, C-purlins and ready-mix concrete are MARKET VALUE
high compared to prevailing market rates. Kindly
Attachment 2 clarify.
57 EA N/A Closed BDM UPON CHECKING, THE PRICE GOVERNS SINCE
DUPA 15-5
THE READY MIX IS A SPECIAL ORDER (4,000 PSI
W/ 3 DAYS CURING TIME) AND THE QUANTITY IS
No further comment SMALL.
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes THE COMPLETION OF RECOVERY WORKS IS
subcontractor in the revised proposal. AROUND 7 MONTHS PLUS 1 MONTH FOR
Kindly clarify the duration of 9 months when as per MOBILIZATION & ANOTHER 1 MONTH
Addendum 5 (TOR 5) is only between 7 – 8 DEMOBILIZATION. WE NEEDED 1 MONTH FOR
Attachment 2
58 EA months. N/A Closed BDM MOBILIZATION SINCE WE NEED TO ESTABLISH
DUPA 17
OUR LAYDOWN AREA AND PURCHASED
ADDITIONAL TOOLS FOR THE PROJECT. WE ALSO
NEED TO RECRUIT MANPOWER DURING THE
No further comment MOBILIZATION PERIOD
It seems that the description “Protective” and “And Yes " PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE) -
temporary” are incomplete. 1,233,750.00
BARRICADES AND TEMPORARY ENCLOSURES -
329,000.00 "
Attachment 2
DUPA 17
Kindly clarify.
20 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT

No further comment
It was observed that Joratech is the recommended Yes THE GENERAL REQUIREMENTS IN THIS PACKAGE
subcontractor in the revised proposal. IS HIGHER THAN S04 BECAUSE WE INCREASE
Kindly clarify the General Requirement of 53.82% PRICES FOR THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATES AND
of the Direct Works compared to 41.83% only on OTHER ACTUAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS THAT
Attachment 2 WAS REQUIRED DURING IMPLEMENTATION BUT
60 EA Package S-04. N/A Closed BDM
DUPA 17 NOT INCLUDED IN THE ESTIMATE. IN ADDITION,
THIS IS AREA IS WITHIN METRO MANILA; THE
COST REQUIREMENTS IS HIGHER.
No further comment
It was observed that the Contractor/Joratech

corrected and/or adjusted the unit rates on DUPA
1 to 16.
Attachment 2 Kindly clarify the change of rate of Performance
61 EA bond, downpayment bond, retention bond from N/A Closed BDM We have been revised it
DUPA 17
PHP 1,128,150.04 to PHP 1,182,153.03
No further comment
It was observed that Easternforce Security is the
recommended security subcontractor in the revised
proposal. The proposal from Easternforce that we submitted is
Attachment 2 Kindly clarify the 30% administrative overhead or the latest proposal after we have clarification and
62 EA DUPA 14-1, 14- the rate of PHP 12,281.49 when on S-01 proposal, N/A Closed BDM negotiation with them.
2 with the same security agency, it is PHP 9,651.09
No further comment
Note:
Latest Reviewer’s Comments are in Blue
Comment Type (for individual comments): A = critical nature, non-compliant; B = intermediate nature, to be responded to in subsequent submission; C = minor nature, may affect future submission.
List of
Reviewer
MS, Mayumi Shoji (Resident Engineer S- EA, Elna Abarientos (Cost Estimator) SH, Seigfred Hobayan (Schedule Engineer 3
03a and S-03c) (S-01 & S-03c)
TK, Tomonori Kato (Sr. Resident YW, Yusuke Watanabe (Sr. Resident BDM, Albert De Munck (Contract Manager 2 RMA, Roy Angeles (Construction DM, Doitsu Matsuki (SC Civil / Station Team
List of Engineer S-01 & S-03c) Engineer 2 CP S-03b) SC) Schedule Expert SC) Leader)
Checker:
21 | P a g e
(NSCR-EX) PROJECT
GCR Sub-consultant/Contractor*
Issued By: Responded By:
Ardiansyah Aziz I Wayan Eka Date: Click or tap to enter a date.

TETSUYA YOSHIZAWA PROJECT MANAGER (SC) Date: 12-Mar-2024 Project Manager Deputy Project Manager
22 | P a g e

NSCR GCR S03C ZWD LTR Co 000021

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NSCR GCR S03C ZWD LTR Co 000021

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

North-South Commuter Railway Extension

Reference No.: NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000021

Subject: S-03c; Engineer’s Response to Proposal PNR Track Recovery (BOQ-2) -

(2) GCR Letter (Ref. No. NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000016) PNR Track

(3) ADHI – PTPP JV Letter (Ref No. NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000002)

(4) GCR Letter (Ref. No. NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000018) PNR Track

(5) ADHI – PTPP JV Letter (Ref No. NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000008)

(6) GCR Letter (Ref. No. NSCR-GCR-S03C-ZWD-LTR-CO-000019) PNR Track

(7) ADHI – PTPP JV Letter (Ref No. NSCR-APJV-S03C-ZWD-SRR-CO-000009)

Dear Mr. Widodo,

Thank you very much for your kind consideration.

(CP S-03c) ADHI KARYA & PT PP TBK JOINT

Number of days for

Review Status Action Taken/

How many rails / sleepers will you load on trailer Rail

Review Status Action Taken/

There are two options of vehicle to transport the

Review Status Action Taken/

The Contractor revised the proposal and provided

Contractor still needs to comply with this comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Review Status Action Taken/

No further comment Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.

Review Status Action Taken/

No further comment Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.

Review Status Action Taken/

No further comment Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.

No further comment Please refer to updated DUPA in the attachment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Contractor should submit major of initial document

Please find the update schedule in the attachment

Review Status Action Taken/

- Please find the update schedule in the attachment

• It was observed that the activities for PNR

Review Status Action Taken/

Noted, no further comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Noted, no further comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Kindly refer to response on item no. 26.

Noted, no further comment.

Noted, no further comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Noted, no further comment.

Noted, no further comment.

We have already revised the Schedule Refer to TOR

The contractor is requested to adjust the

Review Status Action Taken/

Please find the update schedule in the attachment 1

Contractor to revisit the TOR addendum 5

Kindly refer to response on items no. 26 and no.

Noted, no further comment.

The contractor shall also provide the number of

Noted, no further comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

While the TOR Addendum 5 schedule spans 28

Review Status Action Taken/

Noted, no further comment.

Review Status Action Taken/

Review Status Action Taken/

Review Status Action Taken/

Review Status Action Taken/

Kindly recheck the unit rate and amount of Other