Issue No.75 November 2015 neccontract.com

NEWSLETTER

UK government launches £11.8 billion of NEC contracts for High Speed Two

SIMON FULLALOVE EDITOR Contents Revisiting the curse of the Z clause 2 The UK government has opened the bidding to south portal of Long Itchington Wood process for £11.8 billion of NEC contracts for phase Green tunnel (£0.9 billion). NEC develops DBO contract for ADB 2 one of the High Speed Two (HS2) rail project. All North − Long Itchington Wood Green tunnel Full house at NEC facilities 2 contracts will be let under the NEC3 Engineering to Delta junction and Birmingham spur (£1.5 management seminar and Construction Contract option C (target billion); and Delta junction to West Coast main contract with activity schedule). line tie in (£1.3 billion). Fergusson resumes Australasian lead 3 Chancellor George Osborne launched the seven NEC Asia-Pacific Users’ Group publishes 3 main civils packages for the 230 km London-to- Framework contract conference programme Birmingham section during a visit to China in Winning contractors will also enter a framework New online training module for 3 September. He also announced an HS2 ‘partnering agreement in which additional contracts worth up TSC service managers day’ to encourage the creation of Anglo-Chinese to £3.25 billion will be let for the route 80 km north bid teams. of Birmingham, subject to ministerial decisions US client adopts NEC for major Irish 4 later in the year. food depot Faster journeys The civil works represent the first tranche of UK sustainable construction hub 4 HS2 forms a major part of the government’s plan tier one NEC contracts and cover the phase one delivered using NEC to build a ‘northern powerhouse’ by providing surface route, tunnels and structures. The second 360 km/h rail services between London, tranche will include the stations and the third Using NEC to incentivise lowest whole-life cost 5 Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Construction tranche will comprise railway systems. These will NEC recommended for hydropower projects 6 of the London-to-Birmingham section is due to be launched in 2016 and 2017 respectively. start in 2017 and, when opened in 2026, will cut Construction work on phase one will start FAQs 7 the travel time between the two cities from 81 following royal assent of the phase one hybrid ICE Register of Accredited NEC3 ECC 8 minutes to 49 minutes. bill, which is currently being considered by Project Managers HS2 Ltd chief executive Simon Kirby said, ‘The Parliament. ● start of the civil engineering bidding process is a NEC Diary 8 major milestone for HS2 as we continue to move towards the start of construction in 2017. Over NEC contracts worth £11.8 billion have been advertised for the new 230 km, high-speed rail route the next decade, the winners of these contracts between London and Birmingham will go on to build 230 km of bridges, tunnels and earthworks and create thousands of jobs across the construction industry.’ Tendering process Contractors will be allowed to submit pre- qualification questionnaires for all seven civils packages and, if successful, will be invited to bid for a maximum of four packages. There will be a maximum award of two packages per tenderer. The seven contracts are split over three geographical areas − north, central and south − along the London to Birmingham route, as follows.

South − Euston tunnels and approaches (£0.9 billion); and Northolt tunnels (£1.4 billion). Central − Chiltern tunnel and Colne Valley viaduct (£1.3 billion); North portal Chiltern tunnels to Brackley (£1.3 billion); and Brackley

CONTRACTS • BOOKS AND GUIDES • TRAINING • USERS’ GROUP • PROJECT SUPPORT SERVICES • events • webinars • SOFTWARE 2 NEC users’ group Newsletter•No.75•November 2015 telephone: +44 20 7665 2446 email: [email protected] wEB: neccontract.com

guaranteed fixed-price contract with all risk on the contractor. Revisiting the curse Curse of the Z clause In recent years the ‘curse of the Z clause’ has become a familiar topic at NEC Users’ Group of the Z clause conferences. I was recently a keynote speaker at an NEC seminar for steelwork contractors, RUDI KLEIN NEC USERS’ GROUP PRESIDENT where again Z clauses became a heated topic of conversation. As most NEC users will confirm, NEC contracts Office) and NEC that certain Z clauses would One attendee said the very existence of the Z work best when used in their original, unamended be included as standard on central government clause option provided an excuse to those keen form. projects. These were primarily related to security on importing multifarious amendments. Unfortunately, through the ‘loophole’ of option matters. Z, far too many NEC contracts are amended Possible solutions beyond recognition and fail to deliver as they Incorrect usage Other than wringing our hands in frustration, should. However, lawyers and quantity surveyors what can actually be done? Certainly it is good see brought up on the concepts of ‘provisional sums’ major NEC employers such as the UK Environment Correct usage and grants of ‘extensions of time’ continue to Agency taking the lead by dramatically reducing its The Z clause option in NEC contracts was never amend NEC contracts − through incorrect use of Z clauses (see Issue 65). intended to provide a carte blanche invitation to usage of Z clauses − to make them resemble the Some have suggested NEC should abandon the amend NEC contracts at will. On the contrary, its traditional contracts they are used to. Z clause option altogether, while others propose aim was to include additional contract conditions An extreme example of a Z clause recently a new series of options that includes standard to suit the unique nature of the work involved. brought to my attention was, ‘The conditions additional clauses for national government For example, a few years ago there was of the…contract shall be read such that all projects in each country. agreement between the former UK Office of references to Compensation Events are If you have any other suggestions, we look Government Commerce (now part of the Cabinet removed.’ This effectively converts NEC into a forward to hearing from you. ● NEC develops DBO contract for ADB

REKHA THAWRANI NEC GENERAL MANAGER

NEC has developed a collaborative design, documents, and will quote NEC3 and FIDIC as journal Management Procurement and Law build and operate (DBO) contract for the examples. (Patterson and Trebes, 2013). Asian Development Bank (ADB). If accepted it The bank is also encouraging borrowers, where The team also developed Z clauses specific to will potentially lead to increased use of NEC3 appropriate, to require contractors to design and ADB’s requirements as a multilateral development contracts across the Asia-Pacific region. initially operate the new assets. This prompted the bank. Based in Manila, Philippines, ADB is one of the requirement for a modern NEC-style contract for world’s leading multilateral development banks, design, build and operate. Alternative to FIDIC gold book lending over US$10 billion a year for economic The draft contract is currently with the ADB for and development projects throughout Asia and Team of NEC specialists review. NEC is considering developing the contract the Pacific. for wider consumption as an NEC alternative to Following ADB’s request for a draft NEC3 the FIDIC design, build and operate ‘gold book’ design, build, operate and contract, NEC put Alternatives to standard documents contract. To date ADB has required borrowers to use together a team of contract specialists led by its standard bidding documents based on either former NEC panel chairman Peter Higgins and Reference the multilateral development bank version of the including NEC Users’ Group secretary Rob Patterson R and Trebes B (2013) NEC for FIDIC ‘red book’ contract for employer-designed Gerrard and NEC and procurement specialist design-build-operate contracts. Proceedings of the works, or the Japanese ENAA model form for Richard Patterson. Institution of Civil Engineers − Management, electrical and mechanical plant design and The team developed the new contract Procurement and Law 166(5): 260−268. ● installation. by combining the NEC3 Engineering and ADB now plans to allow borrowers to use any Construction Contract (ECC) with elements of the For further information or if you are interested in internationally recognised standard conditions Term Service Contract (TSC), building on a paper a design, build, operate contract, please email info@ of contract as an alternative to standard bidding published in the Institution of Civil Engineers’ neccontract.com.

chaired by BIFM chief executive officer James Sutton. Les Stratford provided an update on the Full house at NEC facilities activities of BIFM’s procurement special interest group that he chairs, and this was followed by a general introduction to NEC contracts from NEC consultant Tim Knee-Robinson. management seminar Owen Gower of Vinci Facilities then gave the keynote presentation, providing a practitioner’s PHILLIP BUTLER NEC Marketing MANAGER view of best practice in facilities management procurement. At the heart of his presentation The British Institute of Facilities Management FM’ contract pack for the facilities management was a case study on the benefits of using the TSC (BIFM) held a well-attended seminar on using sector (see Issue 67). It includes the NEC3 Term for managing facilities for Lincolnshire County NEC for facilities management last month. Around Service Contract (TSC), the NEC3 Term Service Council. The event concluded with a lively question and 100 delegates attended the NEC-supported Short Contract, an NEC guide entitled How to use answer session. ● evening event at the Institution of Civil Engineers NEC3 contracts in facilities management and headquarters in London, with many more viewing BIFM’s good practice guide FM Procurement. it online − both live and later on YouTube. The event, entitled ‘FM procurement: why is it For more information see the NEC YouTube Last year NEC and BIFM launched an ‘NEC for good practice to use NEC for FM contracts?’ was channel at youtube.com/user/NEC3contract. CONTRACTS • BOOKS AND GUIDES • TRAINING • USERS’ GROUP • PROJECT SUPPORT SERVICES • CONFERENCES • RECRUITMENT • SOFTWARE 3

Fergusson resumes Australasian lead

TIM WARREN NEC AUSTRALASIA USERS’ GROUP SECRETARY

I’m pleased to report that Warwick Fergusson on 5 November. It is two years since the last presentations on London 2012 Olympic venues in has been reappointed chairman of the NEC conference, which was also in Christchurch, so the UK and on the Mill Creek wind farm in New Australasia Users’ Group. He recently relocated it will be a real opportunity to see the changes Zealand (see issues 58 and 74). ● to Christchurch following nearly 3 years as in the city‘s central business district − several of programme director with national grid operator which are using NEC contracts. For further information please email info@ Transpower NZ. On the afternoon before the conference neccontract.com or visit neccontract.com/products/ Warwick chaired the group from April 2011 we have arranged a site visit for delegates to events. until May 2014 but had to step down due to work Christchurch Art Gallery, which is due to reopen commitments. It is great to welcome him back, at the end of this year following a NZ$50 million along with his organisational skill set based on a (£22 million) post-earthquake restoration hefty bank of project delivery roles throughout the carried out under NEC contracts (see issue 73). Asia-Pacific region. The following day there will also be also The Australasia Users’ Group’s steering group presentation from Christchurch City Council on will now work closely with Warwick to set out a the NEC-procured NZ$127 million (£55 million) path and vision for 2016 and beyond. Specifically Christchurch Town Hall restoration project. Warwick Fergusson, former programme we will be looking at the market drivers for NEC3. The conference keynote speaker will be Anooj director with Oodit, managing director of Turner & Townsend Transpower NZ, has November conference Australia, who will share his international been reappointed As reported in the last newsletter, the next experience of using NEC3 contracts to maximise chairman of the NEC Australasia NEC Australasia Users’ Group conference will be value from assets during both construction Users’ Group at the Commodore Airport Hotel in Christchurch and operation. There will also be case study NEC Asia-Pacific Users’ Group publishes conference programme

IVAN CHEUNG NEC ASIA-PACIFIC USERS’ GROUP SECRETARY The NEC Asia-Pacific Users’ Group has published construction and maintenance tenders in 2015 December workshop the programme for its annual conference, which is and 2016. Also planned in Hong Kong this year is an due to take place on 10 November in Hong Kong. The keynote presentation will be by Daniel ‘NEC in Action’ workshop on 10 December. The The opening address will be by Hon Chi-keung, Chung, director of the Hong Kong government’s afternoon event will include a site visit to the permanent secretary for development (works) Civil Engineering and Development Department, Happy Valley underground stormwater storage at the Hong Kong Development Bureau and which is now a major NEC user. This will be project, which was highly commended in this chairman of the NEC Asia-Pacific Users’ Group. followed by presentations on rail operator year’s NEC Large Project of the Year competition. He will provide an update on the Hong Kong MTR’s trial of NEC on a large swimming pool There will also be a talk on the reasons government’s general adoption of NEC for all project (pictured) and on CLP Power’s use of NEC for choosing NEC contracts and the issues for power station maintenance. encountered and how they were overcome. Other presentations and workshops will cover The event is designed to give delegates a real NEC performance measurement, use of Z clauses, ‘nuts and bolts’ experience of how a major keeping the programme up to date, and the project applies NEC contracts in the workplace benefits and challenges of working with NEC in and what benefits and challenges have been the Asia-Pacific region. experienced. ●

For further information email info@neccontract or MTR is trialling NEC for the HK$600 million (£51 million) second phase reprovisioning of visit neccontract.com/apconference15. Details of the Kennedy Town swimming pool, which is workshop will be posted on the NEC website in due scheduled for completion next year (see Issue 69) course.

online module has been specifically developed to help TSC service managers ensure a smoothly New online training module administered and collaborative project. The module takes less than an hour to complete and uses teaching, case studies and online assessment to deliver clarity on the roles, for TSC service managers responsibilities and actions under the TSC. Costing £70 plus VAT, the module is readily ELIZABETH BROOKFIELD NEC PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT MANAGER accessed and purchased through the NEC website. NEC has launched a new, succinct online Under the TSC, the service manager training module for NEC3 Term Service Contract needs to ensure the contractor's proposed (TSC) service managers on how to manage the plan and programme meet the employer's For further information email info@neccontract. contractor's plan and programme successfully. requirements in the service information. The new com or visit neccontract.com/training. 4 NEC users’ group Newsletter•No.75•November 2015 telephone: +44 20 7665 2446 email: [email protected] wEB: neccontract.com

extensive utility works. The project was successfully completed on time US client adopts NEC and within budget in February 2015. Back-to-back NEC contracts for major Irish food depot There were initially over 10 pages of Z clauses in the draft ECC contract. After reviewing the contract in detail, the employer’s local lawyers ED ELLIS ARUP confirmed the contract on its own merit was strong enough to protect all parties. The final The new Pallas Foods distribution centre at Consulting Engineers and Ethos Engineering, and amendments were fairly minor, totalling just three Kilnamonagh just north of Dublin is one of the construction was by a joint venture of John Paul pages − most of which related to confidentiality. largest building projects so far procured in Ireland Construction and Balfour Beatty. The joint venture contractor procured most using NEC contracts. of its principle subcontractors with the NEC3 US-based Sysco Corporation, which acquired Extensive works programme Engineering and Construction Subcontract (ECS) Pallas Foods in 2009, let the fast-track design-and- The centre comprises a 15 000 m2 steel-framed option A (priced contract with activity schedule), build project under an NEC3 Engineering and state-of-the-art refrigerated warehouse, a ensuring ‘back-to-back’ collaboration throughout Construction Contract (ECC) option C (priced 13 000 m2 a dry warehouse, 2260 m2 of the supply chain. contract with activity schedule) in July 2013. high-specification offices, 120 truck bays and The employer also let several significantly Sysco’s exemplar design was adapted for local parking for 330 cars. There is also a separate sized direct contracts for specialist equipment conditions by Arup, specialist architect Kavanagh truck maintenance and refuelling facility on the and installations using the NEC3 Engineering Tuite and refrigeration engineer Fitzmaurice Tingle 16 ha site. and Construction Short Contract (ECSC), again prior to award of the design and build contract. Substantial civil engineering works were fostering a spirit of mutual trust and cooperation The Arup team also acted as the employer’s NEC required, including 125 000 m3 of earthworks, across the whole site. project manager, administrator and supervisor for 53 000 m3 of lime and cement stabilisation, the contract. 48 000 m2 of paved areas, 5500 m2 of drainage One day workshop Detailed design was by TOTP Architects, Punch attenuation ponds, 1 km of access roads and As NEC is still relatively new in Ireland, we arranged a one-day NEC workshop at the start of contract. All project team members and key representatives of the supply chain attended and it was, without doubt, one of the best investments on the project. Despite some initial reluctance of the project team, we shared the risk register from the outset and conducted early warning meetings and risk mitigation throughout. We also managed to maintain a robust programme with monthly updates. The pay-off for some of the contractors unused to working with NEC finally came when they realised there would be no traditional arm wrestle The NEC-procured Pallas Foods distribution centre extends over a 16 ha site over the final account. ●

Delivering project values Two NEC training workshops were delivered UK sustainable building to the 12-strong project team at the outset. This helped to deliver a number of project values, such as collaboration and training. It brought the team together and, by discussing the hub delivered using NEC processes and best practice together as a team, we created a mutual air of trust that ran throughout construction. PHIL CROSSLEY WARD WILLIAMS ASSOCIATES On site the management processes for the contract ran very smoothly and supported the Cornwall Sustainable Building Trust adopted NEC ECC option A chosen process of delivering the project on time and to deliver Britain’s new state-of-the-art sustainable The developed design was by architect Poynton within budget. NEC cost, programme and risk construction centre. The £1.4 million Green Bradbury Wynter Cole, structural engineer CDeC management processes also allowed sustainability Build Hub is at the Eden Project visitor attraction and services engineer Hoare Lea. Following a values to be carefully monitored and delivered, site in Cornwall, UK and was part-funded by the two-stage tender, contractor Gilbert & Goode helping to achieve a BREEAM ‘outstanding’ European Regional Development Fund. was engaged under an NEC3 Engineering and rating as well as enhancing the training value of The quadrant-shaped, two-storey, highly Construction Contract (ECC) option A (priced the project. ● insulated timber-framed building features natural contract with activity schedule). thermal insulation, glulam roof beams and NEC was chosen to ensure the project’s triple-glazed windows, all helping it to achieve values were delivered successfully. These include a BREEAM ‘outstanding’ rating. The design and collaboration, resource efficiency, training and construction adopted a closed-loop, cradle-to- sustainability. ECC was seen as the preferable cradle approach, with fully recyclable and reusable contract to enable this to be achieved, as well materials being used throughout. as actually assisting many of these processes, As well as providing research, development, including structured project management. promotion and training facilities for the green Ward Williams Associates was ECC project building industry, the building itself is intended manager, quantity surveyor, CDM coordinator and to serve as a benchmark for sustainable design, BREEAM assessor on the project. Work started in procurement, construction and operation, October 2014 and was completed on programme The NEC-procured Green Build Hub is at the becoming a ‘living laboratory’. and to budget in July 2015. Eden Centre in Cornwall CONTRACTS • BOOKS AND GUIDES • TRAINING • USERS’ GROUP • PROJECT SUPPORT SERVICES • CONFERENCES • RECRUITMENT • SOFTWARE 5

Using NEC to incentivise lowest whole-life cost

RICHARD PATTERSON AND BARRY TREBES MOTT MACDONALD

Most businesses think long term. They realise their projects will need capital expenditure and Whole life costs result in a need for operational expenditure over the lifetime of the asset. The whole-life cost of the asset can be calculated as the net present cost based on the cash forecast to be expended discounted over the likely lifetime of the asset. Facilities Capital costs management costs Disposal costs Figure 1 shows one way of categorising the elements of the whole-life cost of an asset. The procurement route that directly encourages Figure 1. Planned the bidder to select the option with the lowest Categories of Replacement preventative Reactive Operating costs maintenance costs costs whole-life cost is the one that makes the whole-life cost maintenance costs contractor responsible for designing, building and operating the asset (Patterson and Trebes, 2013). on the diameter and number of pipelines used parties can pre-agree the ‘cost’ of particular If the employer does not have the cash for the and the efficiency of the pumps installed. In defects. capital expenditure, it can chose to let a contract principle, smaller pipes will have a smaller capital Option X17 acts in the same way as for design, build, finance and operate using project expenditure, but require more pumping capacity performance damages that can be built into the finance − often the route used in public-private (more capital expenditure) and higher pumping contracts of the Institution of Chemical Engineers, partnership arrangements (Patterson and Trebes, costs (more operational expenditure). Logically sometimes favoured for process contracts; the 2015). the contractor should be given as much flexibility ‘Schedule of Guarantees’ included in the FIDIC as possible to choose its design solution. Achieving lowest whole-life cost ‘yellow book’; and the ‘Performance Guarantees’ available in the FIDIC ‘silver book’. However, the employer may have good reasons Elements of operational expenditure In the pipeline and pumping station example, to want to operate the asset itself. In that case, if that can be tested the bid document could include a form to be the employer is requiring the contractor to design For significant elements of operational included as part of the ‘Works Information and build the asset, it may want to incentivise expenditure that can be directly tested and the contractor to deliver the solution to its provided by the Contractor for his design’, proven, a bidder can be required to state the requirements with the lowest whole-life cost. In requiring the bidder to state and guarantee the performance the asset will achieve. The ECC the UK this is encouraged by the Public Contracts ‘performance level’, in this case the specific power 3 Regulations and internationally by funding provides for this directly in option X17, ‘Low consumption of the system in kWh/m of water institutions. This article explains how an employer performance damages’. delivered to the storage reservoir. can procure for lowest whole-life cost using the Option X17 is deceptively simple in its The bid evaluation mechanism would include NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract drafting: ‘X17.1 If a Defect included in the Defects the net present cost of the energy consumed (ECC). Certificate shows low performance with respect over the life of the asset based on: the specific One way of selecting the best solution based to a performance level stated in the Contract power consumption offered by the bidder on net present cost is through extensive design Data, the Contractor pays the amount of low (‘power consumption offered’); a notional average development and ‘optioneering’. This might performance damages stated in the Contract requirement of the daily volume of water at the be prior to defining the employer’s detailed Data.’ This is effectively a pre-priced ‘get out of jail’ storage reservoir; the cost to the employer per requirements in a construction contract. This card for the contractor to pay rather than have to kWh/m3 of power; the notional design life of the could be during the first stage of an ‘early correct the defect. system; and a stated discount factor. contractor involvement’ procurement route, In the absence of constraints in the works Together, the net present cost of the power over working with the contractor to arrive at a contract information, the contractor would have the option the design life can be stated as to correct the defect – at least up to the defects for detailed design and construction. net present cost = A x power consumption date. If X17 is not included, then the contractor power offered Building operational expenditure into could instead offer a ‘deal’ to the employer to an ECC contract accept the defect, as it can for any defect, under where A is a constant. Construction contracts are mainly set up to clause 44. The benefit of using X17 is that the Continued on page 6 >> cover the process of designing and delivering an asset. As such they focus on the capital expenditure of that asset. If the procurement is CAPITAL EXPENDITURE The ‘Prices’ to incentivise lowest whole-life cost, it will have to build in the operational expenditure of the asset. Figure 2 shows that operational expenditure can be considered to be built up of different OPERATIONAL EXPENDITURE components: elements of operational expenditure that can be directly proven in defined tests; other Elements NOT affected by elements of operational expenditure significantly the contractor’s design affected by the contractor’s design; and elements of operational expenditure not significantly Elements affected by May be included in ‘Works affected by the contractor’s design. the contractor’s design Information for Contractor’s design’ As an example, consider a simple water transfer scheme in which the employer’s requirement Elements that can Can be made subject to guarantees Figure 2. is to transfer a stated flow rate of water from a be directly proved of performance offered by bidder Elements contributing to river intake up to a storage reservoir. Power costs in tests using option X17 whole-life cost for pumping will contribute significantly to the operational expenditure and will be dependent 6 NEC users’ group Newsletter•No.75•November 2015 telephone: +44 20 7665 2446 email: [email protected] wEB: neccontract.com

>> Continued from page 5 The contract data for X17 would state that the Other elements of operational informed by the value of the performance amount for low performance damages are, ‘£A for expenditure affected by contractor’s damages (and possibly performance bonuses). each kWh that the specific power consumption design However, there would be no direct commercial in the power test prior to completion exceeds Other elements of the contractor’s design might incentive for the project manager, on behalf of the the specific power consumption stated by the affect the operational expenditure but not be employer, to collaborate with the contractor to contractor in part [X] of the works information easily directly tested and proven. In the example bring down the operational expenditure – as the provided by the contractor for his design.’ these might include: the level of automation in the contractor will get all the benefit. This of course is Additionally, for some types of performance it pumping station and so the amount of manning the same for the capital expenditure. might say, ‘The payment of performance damages required; the plant and material used for the Under a target contract (ECC option C) it instead of correcting a defect is acceptable for pipeline (and so design life of plant and material); is in the employer’s interests to work with the exceeding the specific power consumption stated the replacement cost of mechanical and electrical contractor through the project manager to by the contractor by up to Y %.’ The performance items during the lifetime of the asset; and annual minimise construction costs and so increase the level in the contract data for X17 would state, planned preventative maintenance costs. saving below the target, which is shared between ‘The specific power consumption stated by the Each of the elements could be modelled based contractor and employer as defined in the share contractor in part [X] of the works information on the solution offered by the bidder. If the details profile. The contract does this by comparing the provided by the contractor for his design.’ of how these are to be modelled can be set out actual defined cost plus fee and the final total The works information would set out the in the instructions to bidders and so the net of the prices (the target). However, assuming details of a test to be carried out to demonstrate present cost of these elements can be calculated, the low performance damages correctly reflect the actual power consumption of the system; state the mechanisms can be combined to ensure the the additional net present cost of the asset when that test is required and whether ‘passing’ bid with the lowest overall forecast net present to the employer caused by a failure meet the the test is required as a condition for completion cost does best in the financial element of the bid performance levels, the employer will have no or should be carried out after completion; and evaluation. direct incentive to help the contractor deliver or state whether the test would be either carried out Having chosen the bidder on that basis, the improve upon the tendered performance level of by the contractor and witnessed by the supervisor instructions to bidders would have to make it clear the asset. This may not be a significant problem. (typically as a requirement for completion), or that the relevant elements of the bidder’s solution However, if wanted, it would be possible, via carried out by the employer and witnessed by the must be included in ‘Works Information for the relatively simple additional conditions of contract, contractor and the supervisor after completion Contractor for his design’. Then the contractor is directly to incentivise the reduction of the overall and take over by the employer (if the test is required to build the low net present cost solution net present cost. This would involve defining the carried out after both completion and take over). that it offered as a bidder. achieved actual net present cost, based on the If the test did indeed show power consumption For other elements of the works where the defined cost plus fee of the capital spend and the greater than that offered by the bidder, the contractor does not have flexibility in its design net present cost of that part of the operational supervisor would notify the defect. As provided in sufficient to affect significantly the operational expenditure as proven in defined tests, as X17.1, if the defect was still current at the time of expenditure, there is no need to make specific described above. It would then involve calculating the defects certificate, the contractor would pay provision over and above making the employer’s the contractor’s share based on a comparison the employer the ‘amount for low performance requirements and constraints clear in the works between the actual net present cost and the damages’ that would compensate the employer information. tendered net present cost. This would then for its asset being less efficient in power than had directly commercially incentivise the contractor been promised by the bidder and on which basis Combining operational and capital and the project manager to collaborate to deliver the bidder won the contract. The mechanism expenditure incentives the low net present cost required by the employer. therefore incentivises the contractor to make sure The provisions described in the previous its design gives the employer an asset with a net sections can be used to incentivise the bidder to Conclusion present cost for power (in this example) no worse offer a solution with good performance levels, and Incentivisation based on net present cost is than has been offered. However, as drafted, the to incentivise the contractor actually to deliver the logical. The NEC3 ECC contains some simple but mechanism would not give the contractor any good performance levels used to win the contract very powerful mechanisms to allow the employer incentive to improve on the power consumption − and to improve on the performance level if to put in place such incentivisation. These can be as offered in its bid. If that was required, and it performance bonuses are used. developed within the structure of the contract would seem logical, then a Z clause along the lines As the contractor develops its design, it will directly to incentivise the contractor and project of the following would be appropriate: ‘If the [test always be constrained by the requirements and manager to collaborate to achieve a net present to demonstrate the actual power consumption of constraints in the works information – both that cost lower than tendered. the system] shows better performance than the provided by the employer and that provided by performance level stated in the Contract Data, the the contractor. Employer pays the amount of high performance If the contract is a lump sum contract (ECC References bonuses stated in the Contract Data in the first option A), the contractor and the employer know Patterson R and Trebes B (2013) NEC for design- assessment of the amount due after the issue of what will be paid for the capital expenditure. As build-operate contracts. Proceedings of the the Defects Certificate’. the contractor’s design develops after award, it Institution of Civil Engineers − Management, The principle could be made to apply separately will make a commercial decision on how much it Procurement and Law 166(5): 260−268. to performance levels for different things affecting will spend (effectively at its cost and so taken from Patterson R and Trebes B (2015) NEC for DBFO the operational expenditure of the asset that any profit in the capital expenditure) to minimise – taking best practice procurement into PPPs. could be guaranteed by the bidder and tested by the net present cost of its solution and so avoid Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers the contractor. These bonuses could alternatively performance damages or earn any performance − Management, Procurement and Law be put in place via option X20. bonus. That decision will be appropriately 168(5): 213−219. ● NEC recommended for hydropower projects

SIMON FULLALOVE EDITOR

NEC3 contracts were proposed as an alternative told delegates that NEC’s flexibility and and compared the merits of NEC and FIDIC procurement option for hydropower projects at collaborative approach were ideal for successful contracts for delivery of hydropower schemes. a major international hydropower conference in delivery of large, complex hydropower schemes His paper, co-authored with Warwick Fergusson, France last month. around the world. chairman of the NEC Asia-Pacific Users’ Group, Speaking at the three-day Hydro 2015 event in He presented the results of a survey of and presentation will be made available on the Bordeaux, Richard Patterson of Mott MacDonald professionals working in the hydropower sector NEC website at neccontract.com. ● CONTRACTS • BOOKS AND GUIDES • TRAINING • USERS’ GROUP • PROJECT SUPPORT SERVICES • CONFERENCES • RECRUITMENT • SOFTWARE 7

works – see the fourth main bullet of clause 80.1. Answer The contract is clear that the defects date is Yes, you are right and your contractor is the stated number of weeks after the completion wrong. The contractor is required to obey an of the whole of the works – see the entry in instruction given by your project manager and contract data part one. It is not dependent upon supervisor in accordance with the contract – see take over at all, and nor is it dependent upon clause 27.3. If that instruction is a compensation FAQs completion of part of the works. event, then the project manager is required to notify it as such at the same time he or she issues ROBERT GERRARD Equally the release of the first half of the retention in option X16 is dependent upon the it – see the first sentence of clause 61.1. The NEC USERS’ completion of the whole of the works, or the date contractor is then required to put the instruction GROUP SECRETARY when the employer takes over the whole of the into effect – see the last sentence of clause 61.1. works. The remaining retention is released once It is also important to understand that the the defects certificate has been issued, which in assessment of a compensation event in such turn will be dependent upon the defects date – circumstances will always be prospective rather see clause 43.3. than retrospective, that is it will be based upon a forecast of defined cost – see the last part of This is a selection of recent questions to the NEC clause 63.1. The assessment will assume the Users’ Group helpline and answers given. In all Adjudication and defined cost contractor acts ‘competently and promptly’ to the cases it is assumed there are no amendments Question compensation event – see clause 63.7. Therefore, that materially affect the standard NEC3 contract We have employed a contractor on an ECC if the contractor insists on delaying things as it referred to. option C (target contract with activity schedule). suggests, it will not get the time or monies costed The contractor has a potential dispute from as part of the assessment of the compensation Releasing retention one of its subcontractors which may well go event. to adjudication between subcontractor and The term ‘implemented’ in clause 65.1 only Question contractor. If the subcontractor is successful refers to finalisation of the time and money I am the project manager on a project using and the contractor pays the amount awarded, consequences of the compensation event − it the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract does this then become part of the defined cost does not refer to carrying out the underlying (ECC) option A (priced contract with activity under clause 11.2(23)? If this is correct, then works. schedule). Secondary option X16 (retention) has does it also form part of total of the prices for the also been incorporated. A retention-free amount purposes of calculating the contractor’s share? has been agreed with the contractor and the What, if any, impact does clause 11.2(25) second Terminating part of the works? agreed retention after that amount is 3%. bullet have on an adjudicator’s decision in such Question Take over certificates have been issued for circumstances? We are a contractor engaged under ECC some areas that have been handed over and option C on a project with assets in two different are now being occupied by the employer. The Answer locations. One of the asset location works has project is anticipated to achieve completion on a been stopped in its entirety under instruction for date in the near future. Option X5 is not used in The trouble here is you are confusing two over 12 months now. We would like to partially the contract and I am treating these ‘taken over different things, that is the price for work done terminate, that is terminate only the stopped areas’ as similar to ‘partial possession’. to date, which is what the contractor gets paid works. We consider the works that have been The contractor has requested for half retention each assessment (see clauses 50.2 and 11.2(29)), stopped represent ‘substantial’ work under clause to be released for the areas taken over by the and the total of the prices, which is the original 91.6. We would, however, like to continue with employer. However, my understanding of the tendered total of the prices plus or minus things the remaining works − is this possible? contract is that release of half retention is only like compensation events, and is commonly linked to the completion of the whole of the called ‘the target’. These two only come together, works, or the employer taking over the whole of so to speak, after completion, when the project Answer the works. I cannot find any clause that states manager has to calculate the contractor’s share – The simple answer to your question is no, retention can be reduced upon some areas being see clause 53. you cannot terminate a part of a contract − it is taken over by the employer, unless these areas If the contractor is required by the adjudicator all or nothing. It seems likely that the stopped are the sections identified within option X5. Will to make a further payment to the subcontractor, works will be substantial and therefore likely it therefore be correct to advise the contractor then that is an ‘amount of payments due to to give you the right to terminate under clause that half retention will only be released following Subcontractors’ and therefore falls within the 91.6, as long as it was not caused by your default. the issue of the certificate of completion, with first bullet point of the definition of defined cost However, which of the reasons would apply (R19 the remaining half to be released after the issue in clause 11.2(23). It is therefore payable as part or R20) will depend upon the circumstances, of the defects certificate? of the price for work done to date in accordance and the amounts you get paid will depend upon The contactor has also requested confirmation with clause 11.2(29). which of those reasons apply. But whichever that the defects period for these areas should However that does not mean that it will be reason applies, clause 90.1 makes it clear you are start from the take over certified date, but again added to the total of the prices as well. That will terminating your obligation to provide the works I can find no reference in the contract that states depend upon whether or not it is a compensation and, from the definition of that term in clause this. The guidance notes for option X5 state event. Making a payment to a subcontractor 11.2(13), that means all of those obligations, not that completion of a section of the works does because an adjudicator has said you should is not just some. not affect the defects date, which is defined a listed compensation event. However, it is also important to understand by reference to completion of the whole of the that an instruction to stop part of the works is works. While I am aware that I am not able to use a compensation event under clause 60.1(4). In this as a reference (as the contract does not use Implementing compensation events those circumstances the project manager should option X5), I am wondering if the same notion Question have already notified you of that compensation will apply for areas taken over? Our ECC contractor is suggesting it will event under clause 61.1, and instructed you to only begin installation of additional instructed provide a quotation. As part of that, the project Answer works once the cost and time elements of the manager should have instructed you as to what assumptions are to be made for that quotation − Your understanding is correct as to when associated compensation event have been see clause 61.6. retention is released. However, completion and agreed. My understanding is that the contractor take over are two different things with different must act upon a formal instruction from our It seems the best action here is really to be tests, and using words from other contracts project manager, and that there is no provision discussing the matter with the project manager such as ‘partial possession’ will not help. for the process the contractor suggests. I and pointing out how much it could potentially Completion is about what state the works are believe the compensation event process and cost the employer by keeping your resources in – see clause 11.2(2). Take over is about who ‘implementation’ do not refer to the actual on indefinitely while the employer makes up its is using the works – see clause 35. Take over is physical works but just their change in status to mind, the defined cost of which will be included important to the contractor because up until a finalised compensation event. Am I correct in in the assessment of the compensation event and that time it remains liable for any damage to the this assumption? therefore added to the target. ● 8 NEC users’ group Newsletter•No.75•November 2015 telephone: +44 20 7665 2446 email: [email protected] wEB: neccontract.com

ICE Register of Accredited NEC3 ECC Project Managers NEC Users’ Group members Chun Wo Construction & Engineering Co Ltd A warm welcome is extended to all new members, Civil Engineering & The following individuals are listed on the Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) Register highlighted in bold in the membership category lists below. Development Department, of Accredited NEC3 ECC Project Managers at nec3eccprojectmanagers.ice.org.uk. The HKSAR PLATINUM SILVER Black & Veatch Ltd CLP Power Hong Kong Ltd register has been set up to recognise the technical and practical skills required of a project AWE Plc Aberdeenshire Council Blake Newport Associates Continental Engineering Dounreay Site Restoration Ltd Alan Auld Group Ltd Bowdon Consulting Ltd Corporation manager using the NEC3 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC). The individuals on High Speed Two (HS2) Anglian Water Services Ltd Brachers LLP Deacons the register have completed the ECC Project Manager Accreditation programme and have Highways England Co Ltd Angus Council Caledonian Maritime Assets Development Bureau, HKSAR Lafarge Tarmac Aquila Nuclear Engineering Ltd (CMAL) Dragages Hong Kong Ltd Ltd successfully passed the stage 1 and stage 2 assessments. Magnox Ltd Castle Hayes Pursey LLP Drainage Services Milton Keynes Service Avon & Wiltshire Mental CEMAR Department, HKSAR Partnership LLP Health Partnership NHS Austin Addison- Joe Dowds Mark Kitchingman George Reid Trust Chandler KBS Driver Trett (Hong Kong) Ltd Parliamentary Estates Conject Gammon Construction Ltd Directorate Balfour Beatty Smyth Simon Dow Tim Knee-Robinson BAM Construct UK Ltd Construction Dispute Highways Department, Andrew Reid Pinsent Masons LLP Resolution Barhale Plc HKSAR Shazad Akram Mohit Kumar RWE Innogy UK Ltd Crummock (Scotland) Ltd Kenneth Douthwaite Paul Romanko Bezzant Ltd Hogan Lovells (Hong Kong) SJs Property Services Ctori Construction Ada Albert Borough of Poole Hong Kong Construction Barry Drewett Edward Lax Jeremy Robinson Southend Borough Council Consultants Ltd Boskalis Westminster Ltd Industry Council Surrey County Council Deane Public Works Ltd Alan Apps Ian Drummond Ying Shun Lee Hsin Chong Construction Dylan Roberts Bournemouth Borough Department of Health Transport for London Council Group Ltd Allan Armstrong Jeff Dutton Timothy Lewis West Yorkshire Councils ProCure21 Matthew Rowton Brink Management & Advies Diamond Light Source Ltd Institution of Civil Engineers (Hong Kong) Tim Arianpour Neil Farmery Eric Lo Cambridge City Council Docté Consulting Andrew Ryder GOLD Kum Shing (KF) Construction Daniel Barnett Canal and River Trust Doig & Co Manuel Fernandez Paul Lynchehaun AECOM Professional CH2M Hill UK Co Ltd Steven Sanzone Services LLP Dumfries & Galloway Council Kevin Bell de la Concha Connect Plus (M25) Ltd Leighton Contractors Duncan MacKillop Aggregate Industries UK East Lothian Council (Asia) Ltd Ian Shaw Cornwall Council Paul Bell Rebecca Fleming AMEC Foster Wheeler Engineering Contract M Y Cheng & Co Alasdair Macniven Currie & Brown UK Ltd Strategies Amey Local Government (Engineering) Ltd Thomas Shearn DarkStar Surveying Ltd FP McCann Ltd Christopher Benford Gary Frost Kerry Martin Areva S.A Mace Ltd (Hong Kong) Dee Valley Water Plc Gearing Consulting Carl Sperke Atkins UK Maka Consulting Company Martin Belshaw Alistair Gavins Helen Matheson Defence Science & Technology Services Ltd Babcock International Group Ltd Jason Bibby Nicola Gemmell Dexter Matsell Andrew Stephenson Laboratory George Corderoy & Co Balfour Beatty Major Civil DLA Piper UK LLP GHA Livigunn Ltd Mannings (Asia) Engineering Consultants Ltd Kenneth Birch Paul Gibbs Nick Smith Dyer & Butler Ltd Glasgow City Council Craig McGowan Balfour Beatty Regional Mayer Brown JSM East Ayrshire Council H A Goddard & Sons Balfour Beatty Utility Solutions Meinhardt Infrastructure & Demawu Bng Paul Gorge David Meller Barry Trebes East Riding of Yorkshire Hanover Housing Association BAM Nuttall Ltd Council Environment Ltd Andrew Griffiths HLG Associates Ltd Piotr Bogusiewicz Stuart McArthur Rajneesh Verma Barnsley Metropolitan East Sussex County Council Mott MacDonald Hong Borough Council Hydro International Kong Ltd Stuart Brown William Halliday Richard McLellan Eastern Solent Coastal (Wastewater) Ltd Richard Yates Belfast City Council Partnership Navigant Consulting (Hong Ironside Farrar Ltd Desmond Brown Philip Harrison Bolton Metropolitan Borough EnServe Group Ltd Kong) Ltd Mark Mclinden Martin Young J Breheny Contractors Ltd Council Environment Agency Paul Y Construction Anthony Brady Mark Harvey JJL Consultancy Ltd Charles Morris Bracknell Forest Borough Faithful+Gould Company, Ltd Tim Waite Council John F Hunt Demolition First Choice Homes Oldham Pinsent Masons Oliver Brewster Thomas Haley Donald Morrison Bristol City Council John Papworth Ltd Lee Webster Flagship Housing Shun Yuen Construction Caulfield Contractors Ltd Lancaster City Council Derek Brydon Stuart Hancocks Allen Murray Gleeds Corporate Services Ltd Co. Ltd Simone Wyatt CCS Group PLC Lindford Consulting Ltd Gary Buick Ian Hedley Sean Ng GVE Commercial Solutions Sum Kee Construction Ltd Central Procurement MacKenzie Construction Ltd The Contracts Group Ltd Gareth Wright Directorate Heathrow Airport Holdings Ltd McAdam Design Adrian Ceney Nicholas Hilder Terence O’Connor City of Edinburgh Council The Hong Kong Construction Justin Wright Hill & Smith Ltd T/A Techspan Met Office Association Ltd CNS Planning Ltd Hei Wing Cheung Clarence Ho Teresa O’Sullivan Systems Mon-Arch Turner & Townsend (HK) Costain Ltd Antony Chow Kerry Hutchings Rhodri Owen Peter Wilkinson IPP Contracting Ltd Natural Resources Wales URS Hong Kong Ltd Cubic Transportation Systems Jacobs UK Ltd Newcastle City Council ITMS VSL Intrafor (HK) Li Yan Chun Lesley Hunt Dylan Parry Gerallt Williams Jamieson Contracting North Yorkshire County Cumbria County Council (Mcr) Ltd Council Water Supplies Department, HKSAR Robert Corbyn Joel Jackson Richard Patterson Glyn Williams Dover Harbour Board JN Bentley Ltd Nottinghamshire County Driving & Vehicle Standards John Sisk & Son Ltd Council Alan Doherty Julie-Ann Janko Tina Parmar Alan Wilson Agency Knowles Ltd Novi Projects AUSTRALASIA Dundee City Council Alex Dovey Patrick Johnston Christopher Prior Sarah Wilson Land Engineering (Scotland) Nuclear Decommissioning Advisian Pty Ltd Eurovia Group Ltd Authority Leicestershire County Council AECOM Farrans (Construction) Ltd Nuvia Ltd London Borough Of Arrow Strategy Ltd Fife Council Hillingdon Orkney Islands Council Auckland International Foreign and Commonwealth Management Process Oxand Ltd Airport Ltd Office Systems Ltd Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd Christchurch City Council FTI Consulting Mott MacDonald Ltd Patronus Consulting Ltd City Care Ltd Galliford Try Infrastructure Mouchel Group Plc pdConsult Coffey Projects Ltd 02 November ECC project manager accreditation Hong Kong GrowHow UK Ltd MWH UK Ltd Peter Brett Associates Constructing Excellence NZ Guys and St Thomas NBS Services Peter Cousins & Associates NHS Trust Cuesko Ltd 03 November ECC supervisor accreditation London Nexus Rail Portsmouth City Council Hanson Contracting Donald Cant Watts Corke North Ayrshire Council Procom-IM Ltd Health Facilities Scotland Dow Airen 05 November ECC programming workshop Birmingham Northern Ireland Housing Project Enquirer Ltd Horizon Nuclear Power Executive InfraSol Group Pty Ltd Services Ltd Pyments Ltd 05 November NEC Users' Group conference Christchurch, NZ Northern Ireland Water Meridian Energy Ltd Hugh LS McConnell Ltd Quigg Golden Ltd Northumberland County Minter Ellison Rudd Watts Interserve (Facilities Council R A Gerrard Ltd 10 November NEC Users' Group conference Hong Kong OSPRI New Zealand Ltd Management) Ltd Osborne Clarke Ramsden Enterprises Ltd PBA Ltd 17 November NEC Users' Group workshop Belfast Interserve Construction Ltd PD Group Management Ramskill Martin J Murphy & Sons Ltd Pick Everard Rex Procter & Partners RICS Oceania Jackson Civil Engineering Playle & Partners Ridge & Partners Watercare Services Ltd 19 November Introduction to ECC London Group Ltd Prysmian Cables & Royal Haskoning DHV Ltd Kelda Water Services Systems Ltd RSK Environment Ltd REST OF WORLD (Defence) Ltd 23 November Administering NEC3: lessons learnt London R J McLeod (Contractors) Ltd Russell Scott Ltd Aquaterra Consultants Ltd Kier Infrastructure and Overseas Ltd Ramboll UK S F Stefan Civil Engineering Benson Consultancy 23 November ECC project manager accreditation London Renfrewshire Council & Utility Contractors Ltd (HK) Ltd Lagan Construction Ltd Selwood Ltd Resolute Project Services Ltd Cementation Canada Inc Laing O’Rourke Shropshire County Council 25 November Preparing and managing the ECC London Salvation Army Contract Communicator Lend Lease Consulting Solomons Europe Ltd (EMEA) Ltd Scottish Water Exarchou and Rosenberg 01 December TSC service manager accreditation London South East Water Ltd. Specialist Engineering International Lincolnshire County Council Contractor’s Group South Lanarkshire Council LLW Repository Ltd States Property Services Fulton Hogan Ltd 03 December Introduction to the PSC Birmingham South West Water Ltd Mace Group Suffolk County Council IGS Consulting Engineers Spie Ltd Ministry of Justice Synergie Training John Geddes 08 December Introduction to the ECC Birmingham States of Jersey Moreton Hayward Ltd Sypro Management Ltd Nuclear Consultants Sweett (UK) Ltd Morgan Sindall Group Plc T & N Gilmartin International 09 December ECC supervisor accreditation Birmingham Thames Tideway Tunnel National Grid Plc Taylor Wessing LLP Simpson Grierson The Capita Group PLC Network Rail Telford & Wrekin Council Thurlow Associates 10 December NEC in action: Happy Valley scheme Hong Kong The Orange Partnership NG Bailey The Big Red Apple VGI Consulting Inc Thorntask Ltd Northumbrian Water Ltd Company Ltd WorleyParsons RSA 18 January ECC project manager accreditation Birmingham NWSSP Specialist Estates Turner & Townsend The Highland Council Services University of Glasgow The Sheffield College ACADEMIA 26 January Introduction to the ECC London Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Volker Rail Ltd Trowers & Hamlins Anglia Ruskin University Perth and Kinross Council Walter Thompson University Of Cambridge 28 January Commercial management using the ECC Birmingham QinetiQ Ltd (Contractors) Ltd Glasgow Caledonian Veale Wasbrough Vizards LLP University Rider Levett Bucknall Wardell Armstrong LLP VHE Construction Plc Kingston University, UK 01 February TSC service manager accreditation Birmingham RPS Consulting Engineers Wheeler Group Consultancy Viridor Waste Management Leeds Metropolitan University Schofield Lothian Ltd Worcestershire County Ltd Council Siemens Loughborough University 09 February Preparing and managing the ECC Birmingham Yorkshire Water Services Ltd Wallace Stone LLP Skanska Construction UK Ltd WDR & RT Taggart Oxford Brookes University 11 February ECC compensation events workshop Birmingham South London & Maudsley Weir Power & Industrial The College of Estate BRONZE Management NHS Trust Wiltshire County Council Springfields Fuels Ltd 4Projects University of Birmingham 17 February Introduction to the PSC Birmingham AJK Quantity Surveying Ltd SSE Plc ASIA-PACIFIC University of Central AMEC Foster Wheeler Lancashire 23 February ECC supervisor accreditation Birmingham The British Museum Environment & Infrastructure Advisian Ltd University of Greenwich The Coal Authority Andrew Sinclair Ltd Airport Authority Hong Kong University of Northumbria 25 February Introduction to the ECC Birmingham UK Power Networks Ltd Anthony Collins Solicitors LLP APM (HK) United Utilities Water Plc Ardent Consulting Ltd Arcadis (Asia) University of Salford 29 February ECC project manager accreditation Hong Kong Vinci Construction UK Ltd Argyll and Bute Council Atkins China Ltd University of the West of England Volker Wessels UK Ltd Beattie Communications Beria Consultants Ltd University of Ulster Key: Bold - NEC Users’ Group events, ECC – Engineering and Construction Contract, VPI Immingham LLP Bennetts Associates BK Surco Ltd Warwickshire County Council Bilfinger Industrial Services Chinese University of University of Ulster PSC – Professional Services Contract, TSC − Term Service Contract WYG Management Services Uk Ltd Hong Kong University of Wolverhampton

All articles in this newsletter are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NEC. Only NEC’s wholly-owned products and services are endorsed by NEC, so users need to satisfy themselves that any other products and services referred to are suitable for their needs. For ease of reading, all NEC contract terms are set in lower-case, non-italic type and their meanings (unless stated otherwise) are intended to be as defined and/or identified in the relevant NEC3 contract. Constructive contributions to the newsletter are always welcomed and should be emailed to the editor Simon Fullalove at [email protected] (telephone +44 20 8744 2028). Current and past issues of the newsletter are also available in the MyNEC area of the NEC website at www.neccontract.com. All other enquires should be made to the NEC marketing manager Phillip Butler, NEC, 1 Great George Street, London, SW1P 3AA, telephone +44 20 7665 2305, email [email protected].