Get email alerts on the Contract Time Extension topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contractor cites pipe vandalism and flags potential delay; board requests formal, detailed request
Summary
TGB Unlimited sent a letter saying pipe vandalism may prevent meeting the Nov. 23 substantial‑completion date but did not include required supporting dates or a requested duration; staff will ask for a supplemented, contract‑compliant request before the board considers any extension.
Dan told the board he had received a letter from TGB Unlimited indicating that pipe vandalism had disrupted contractor progress and that TGB was concerned it could not meet the November 23 substantial‑completion date. Dan said the letter referenced section 4.05 of the contract but "none of that was provided" in terms of the dates when the disruption began or ended or the number of days requested.
Board members discussed the difference between a notification and a formal extension request; they agreed staff would respond to TGB and ask the contractor to submit the supporting data required under the contract (dates, scope of disruption, and requested number of days). Members noted the board could refuse an extension if the contractor did not comply with contract requirements and that the engineers committee should review details before the next board meeting.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.
