July 2018

Calendar Calendar

We have 942 registered users
The newest registered user is Elieneza Mgonja

Our users have posted a total of 1229 messages in 346 subjects
Who is online?
In total there are 5 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 5 Guests :: 1 Bot


[ View the whole list ]

Most users ever online was 49 on Fri Jul 06, 2018 7:06 am


Go down


Post  id2013 on Wed Mar 26, 2014 11:42 pm

Your submission is correctly in sense that there is no clear and systematic guideline which comprehensive when it comes on the issue of contract management and administration. Either the implementation of such contracts has left on the project implementer depending on their experience to handle such projects. Consider that you encounter such problem and it is your first project to implement that you have to expect  a lot of issues needs a help from guideline in respect to specific for contract management.

The Authority is better to issue guideline on this matter like they did on guideline for evaluation and alike. My early topic regarding the ''robust contract management system still needed'' is not answered, may be through we could get the way forward including this contradiction as GWK reported.

Back to your concern, the PPR 2013 and the GCC do not contract when you it thorough. What you have reported in your submission is that the PM has vested the power to give instructions in the site including variations/additions but the PM should forward to Client for approval if at all the instructions will contains cost implications. In due course once the forwarded request to client has been received, The approval from TB should be sough since is the one approved the original contracts and by doing so the received variations or additions may increase the contract amount.

Secondly, the PM is vested the power to instruct the CONTRACTOR to implement a certain issues that contains technical matters that is within his jurisdiction in the contract management. Practically all instructions on site should be recorded in the site instructions Book of which its reason must be documented.

So GWK, revisit the GCC again to see the scope of PM and the PPR 2013 you can see that each requirements has its own time and bounderies to be implemented.
I submit


Posts : 50
Join date : 2013-07-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down


Post  GWK on Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:58 pm

Please I need immediately help on contradicting provisions in Public Procurement Regulations 2013 VS General Conditions of Contract for small works issued by PPRA.

PPR 111(1) instructs the extension of time of contract to be issued ONLY by Accounting Officer but Condition of Contract for small works clause 1(1) has vested powers to Project Manager

PPR 110(3) requires all the variations to be referred to the appropriate tender board for approval before instructions to contractor is issued but GCC clause 41 -44 has vested powers to Project Manager.

On the other hand, PPR 252 provides for Supervisor of works however there is no enough details on how supervision is to be conducted (Not well detailed as goods inspection and acceptance).
The supervisor in PPR 252 seem to be as the Project Manager in the General Condition of Contract whose clauses contradicts provisions of PPR so please help me on role of these two people/firm (Supervisor and Project Manager) and their interactions

Please clarification is needed because during pre-award Public Procurement Regulations are closely adhered but during execution of contract PPR seem to be neglected. It is my believe that if dispute arises Contract provisions will be used by parties and not otherwise. Thank you for your reaction to this issue


Posts : 54
Join date : 2014-03-24
Age : 51
Location : DAR ES SALAAM

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum