Project change request form
Statewide Coastal Programs
1. Overview
Project name and code:
Asset number:
Change request number:
Requested by:
Date requested:
Fund source:
Project charge code:
Detailed explanation
a. What has prompted the need for the variation?
Port Welshpool Eastern Seawall Remediation, CMS106825
1
Kathleen Roberts
17/11/2023
VicCoasts
4020.5820.24123.25607.2003.XXXXX.9999
1. While excavating for the new conduit alignment the
contractor discovered the substructure of the old
pier had been left in situ behind the existing
seawall, and the crossheads had formed conduits
through which the surrounding sand had been
stripped out leaving substantial voids. The
superintendent and designer recommended
addressing this issue by backfilling the voids with
stabilising stand to ~100mm about the existing
substructure to ensure it will low right back into the
voids, ensuring no undiscovered area and not be
able to strip away again in future as it is a bound
material. This issue was unknown and could not
be known before the contract was executed. The
additional cost to fill these voids is $5995.60
excluding GST.
2. The contractor made an error in their quote,
mistyping the amount of rock they believed they
required for the job therefore claiming that they
had underquoted for the supply of rock to complete
the seawall. A quantity was not listed in any
DEECA documentation supplied to the contractor.
The contractor made their own calculation using
the designs. The contractor claims the estimated
required rock is 4120 tonnes, however they
calculated their quote, by error, off 1420 tonnes
(they claim due to a typo). The contractor sent a
letter to DEECA proposing that they had no
obligation to complete the works and proposing
OFFICIAL

b. Please provide crucial facts and analysis to support
your variation recommendations.
that DEECA pay for the supply and transport of the
estimated remaining rock required. DEECA sought
legal advice and was informed there was no
obligation to pay the contractor an additional sum
as it is a lump sum contract. A Bill of Quantities
was not supplied in the tender documentation to
tenderers. The Legal advice offered was that, if the
contractor refused to complete the remainder of
the work under the contract it would be open to
DEECA to issue a notice to show cause to the
contractor and ultimately take the work out of the
contractor’s hands/terminate the contact and
engage a third party contactor to complete the
work. Th additional cost incurred by DEECA in
doing so would be capable of being pursued by
DEECA against the contactor. However, in the
experience of the lawyer, the cost of pursuing
those amounts (which will be in excess of the 5%
security that is understand is held by DEECA) is
expensive and depending on the approach taken
by the contactor, is likely to exceed $50,000 (and
perhaps may be much more) and may not yield a
payment form the contractor. It will also result in
significant delays. Legal advice suggested , if
DEECA was satisfied that the contractor made an
error in its calculation they recommended that
DEECA consider whether it would be willing to
agree to increase the contract sum by an
acceptable amount to achieve completion of the
works. After receiving this legal advice that it
would be in the best interest of DEECA to come to
an agreement with the contractor, DEECA sent a
letter to the contractor (drafted by the lawyer)
advising of DEECA’s rights and suggesting a
meeting between DEECA and the contractor.
DEECA met with the contractor on two occasions
following this and came to an agreement to pay for
a rate of $48 excluding GST per tonne of rock
required to complete the wall at a maximum
amount of $78,768. 00 excluding GST. DEECA
had a formal agreement drafted by the lawyer as a
Deed of Variation formalising this agreement. This
is not technically a variation to the contract as the
scope of works is not changing for this but rather
an additional agreement?
3. DEECA sought legal advice for the contractor’s
claim and to draft up a deed of variation which
incurred the cost of $4600 excluding GST.
As above in part a.

Project finances
Original budget: $332,680 Revised budget: $422,043.60 Current $0
ex GST ex GST expenditure:
ex GST

2 Project change request form

Statewide Coastal Programs
OFFICIAL
Project schedule
Original 31/12/2023 Revised 31/12/2023 Estimated % 80 %
completion date: completion date: completion:

Project status
Overall status: ✘ On track
Click or tap box to select status Monitoring
Off track
Summary comments:

2. Change request details

Type of change request Change request detail Impact assessment
Select all that apply Clearly outline the change(s) sought Impact of change (complete for each
selection) e.g., project outcomes,
stakeholders, quality, reputation.

✘ Scope The scope of the works has This will result in an improved
increased to include the filling of quality of final works, and ensure
the voids behind the seawall with greater longevity, reduced
stabilising sand as recommended maintenance of the structure.
by the designer, contractor, and
superintendent on discovery of
these voids when removing
sections of the old wall. This will not
change the timeframe.
✘ Budget The budget of this project will An increase in budget to ensure the
increase from $332,680 excluding works are completed to a high-
GST to $422,043.60 excluding GST quality standard and relationships
because of the variation to fill the maintained. Increasing the budget
voids, additional rocks and to seek legal advice ensures that
professional legal advice for the the project/contract management
contract. team is following correct processes
to administer the contract to ensure
the best outcome for all.
Resources
Outputs/deliverables
Timeframe
Methodology
Technology
Other

Details of past change requests

Variation number Type of change Date of last approved change:
<Detail change 1>
<Detail change 2>
<Detail change 3>

Project change request form 3

Statewide Coastal Programs
OFFICIAL
3. Contract variation details (if applicable)

Note: A variation from superintendent is required after this form is approved.

Contract number (link to contract): CMS106825

Contract expiry date: 31/12/2023
New contract expiry date: 31/12/2023
Minimum contract value (inc GST): $332,680
Maximum contract amount (inc GST): $332,680
Contract variation amount (inc GST): $131,567.96
New contract amount (inc GST): $464,247.96

4. Review
Senior Procurement Officer
Name: Nadeem Arif
Date: 16/11/2023
Signature:

5. Approval
Manager Statewide Coastal Programs
Name:
Position:
Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Signature:

6. Financial delegate approval of the project scope and contract

variation

< $100,000 inc. GST – Manager Statewide Coastal Programs

< $500,000 inc. GST – Regional Director Barwon South West (SRO)
> $500,000 inc. GST – Deputy Secretary RECAFP

Name:
Position:
Date: Click or tap to enter a date.
Signature:

4 Project change request form

Statewide Coastal Programs
OFFICIAL
 Project change request form 5
Statewide Coastal Programs
OFFICIAL