| 摘要: | 目前各道路橋梁管理機關對於災後之緊急搶修工程，多以於年底或汛期前發包次年之災害防救開口契約，或根據政府採購法第22條、第105條辦理緊急採購之方式進行。本研究首先蒐集交通部公路總局及縣市政府各道路橋梁管理單位與災害防救相關之契約共20份，進而訪談單位主管、承辦人員、承包廠商及專家學者等共15位人員，針對目前道路橋梁之災後搶修執行現況作一探討，比較其中之優缺點並提出相關之建議。 在災害防救開口契約，即預約式經常性災害搶險搶修工程方面，本研究彙整出目前執行現況之問題：（1）災後搶修工程含於一般例行性維護開口契約內，（2）開口契約採用工程採購契約範本，（3）單一廠商多區得標，（4）災前動員條款規定不清，（5）施工人員安全考量不足，（6）跨區支援易生界面問題，以及（7）竣工驗收易生爭議。在緊急採購作業方面，本研究亦發現目前執行現況具下列特性：（1）迅速度不足，（2）多採用政府採購法之限制性招標，以及（3）未應用災害防救法。 本研究根據目前道路橋梁災後搶修之執行現況，就執行面（短程目標）、契約面（中程目標）與法規面（長程目標）提出改善建議。在執行面之改善建議為：（1）使用施工通知單，（2）每年檢討施工補充條款內容，以及（3）加強承辦相關人員平時之訓練；在契約面之改善建議為：（1）增加廠商投標之誘因，（2）詳細規範災前動員條款，（3）增訂施工人員安全條款，以及（4）特殊工法或較具專業度之工法得獨立發包；最後在法規面之改善建議則為：（1）增訂災害防救開口契約範本，（2）釐清災害防救法與政府採購法之相關性，以及（3）定義緊急採購使用之時機。本研究之成果對於道路橋梁管理關機災後搶修工程之採購發包作業，應有相當之助益。 Currently road and bridge management agencies repair or remedy damaged roads and bridges after disaster by incorporating indefinite delivery contract (IDC) tendered in year-end or before flood season, applying limited tendering procedures based on Article 22 of Government Procurement Act, or by tendering an emergent contract based on Article 105 of the same Act. This research collects 20 copies of relevant contracts from various agencies such as Directorate General of Highways and local governments, and then interviews 15 experienced personnel such as chiefs of agencies, persons in charge, contractors, scholars, and experts to explore deficiencies of current practice and to provide corresponding suggestions. This research summarizes seven problems in the current practice of using IDC: (1) remedy works included in regular maintenance IDC, (2) IDC incorporating clauses of standard engineering procurement contract, (3) multiple awards of IDC of a single contractor, (4) ambiguous clauses for pre-disaster mobilization, (5) insufficient considerations of workers’ safety, (6) interface problems of cross-district supports, and (7) disputes resulting from amount of completed work. Three attributes of tendering emergent contracts are also discovered: (1) slow contract awarding, (2) applying limited tendering procedures based on Government Procurement Act, and (3) absence of applying Disaster Prevention and Protection Act. This research proposes corresponding suggestions to current problems from executive (short-term), contractual (mid-term), and statutory (long-term) aspects. Proposed suggestions, from the executive aspect are (1) issuing a paper notice when informing work scope, (2) revising complementary clauses yearly, and (3) enforcing personnel training; from the contractual aspect are (1) increasing incentives for the contractor, (2) detailing definitions of mobilization clauses, (3) including safety clauses for workers, and (4) tendering separately for special methods or professional techniques; and from the statutory aspect are (1) defining a standard IDC for post-disaster remedies, (2) defining clearly the relationships between Disaster Prevention and Protection Act and Government Procurement Act, and (3) defining the timing for tendering emergent contracts. Results of this research are deemed useful to the agencies responsible for road and bridge remedies after disasters. |
