-3-
3.3 Progress
It was difficult to assess the rate of progress without a detailed knowledge of the
construction programme. Some GEC personnel commented that progress was significant compared with the last set of progress photographs which they had seen. However, they also noted that whilst they had been pressed to deliver built-in items to site (drain pipes etc), these would probably not be incorporated into the permanent works
for another 2 3 months based on the level achieved so
far.
-
The level of activity and number of workers engaged on the construction was less than anticipated and the general atmosphere did not create the impression that efforts are being made to catch up. (The programme was delayed due to late contract award and due to some
reinforcing having been omitted from Reactor 1 sub-
base. This latter problem had been resolved by the time of the visit).
At the subsequent co-ordination meeting the JVC acknowledged that the civil construction programme was behind schedule but stated that they intended to retrieve the situation by double shift and overtime
working over the next few months.
3.4 Quality
These comments must be regarded as subjective and are not made by a civil engineer.
The
The quality of the civil works appeared good. layout and fixing of the exposed reinforcing was neat
and the surface finish of the concrete after removal of
the shuttering was smooth with a regular appearance.