| dc.description.abstract | 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.
| en_US |