Case Study Report: Defense & Justification on Civil and HSE NCRs Rejected SIRs and Project

Manager Disqualification

Project Title:
Constructition of G+2P+8F+Roof Residentitial Building
Project Locatition: Jumeirah Garden city, Al Satwa Dubai,
UAE Client : REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS
Consultant: ARCHITECTURAL
Main Contractor: Building Contractiting LLC
Report Prepared By:
Date: June 2025

Table of Contents

1. Executive Summary

2. Introduction

3. Summary of NCRs

4. Detailed Analysis of Civil NCRs

5. Detailed Analysis of HSE NCRs

6. Evaluation of Project Manager Disqualification

7. Contractor’s Corrective Measures

8. Consultant-Contractor Communication and Gaps

9. Supporting Documents & Records

10. Conclusion & Recommendations

11. Appendices
1. Executive Summary

This case study is prepared to present a factual and fair review of the 42 civil and 13 HSE NCRs
raised by the consultant, and the attempted corrective actions of the project manager. It
demonstrates that the majority of NCRs stem from misinterpretation of specifications or over-
stringent inspection processes not aligned with the approved ITPs or method statements. The
document also addresses that the project manager remains valid under contract and cannot be
disqualified arbitrarily.

2. Introduction

• Project Start Date: January 31, 2025

• Project Duration: 17 months

• Current Elapsed Duration: 134 days

• Scope: G+2P+8 Floors + Roof Residential Building

The contractor has maintained compliance with the approved project schedule, quality
standards, and safety regulations. Despite this, an excessive number of NCRs have been issued,
impacting progress, morale, and reputation.

3. Summary of NCRs

Type of No. of Contractor View

NCR NCRs

Civil 42 70% Unjustified; Unnecessary intervening, repetition of the same

Works query been unnecessary or overly disruptive to the contractor

HSE 13 85% Unjustified; Overlapping observations and minor issues treated

as NCRs
4. Detailed Analysis of Civil NCRs

Below is a structured defense and justification for each Non-Conformance Report (NCR),
addressing why many of them may have been unnecessary or overly disruptive to the contractor.
These responses aim to satisfy the consultant’s concerns while defending the contractor’s
operational realities.

Civil NCRs Justification

NCR Issue Raised Contractor Justification & Defense
No.
001 Unsafe & Unprotected Initial excavation was temporary and guarded by
Excavation supervised access. Full protection was planned during
permanent shoring installation. No accident occurred,
making the NCR disruptive.
002 Inadequate Site Fence Temporary fencing was aligned with site phasing plan.
Alignment & Unsafe Proper access was ensured by marshals. Realignment was
Access ongoing during inspection.
003 Lack of Safe Access to Excavation was cordoned off. Designated safe routes were
Excavated Areas established. Observation likely occurred before signage
installation.
004 Unacceptable Finishing Minor surface imperfection that didn’t affect structural
for PCC performance. Cosmetic issue only. No rework was
necessary.
005 Repairing Concrete Emergency repair using equivalent material. Approval
with Unapproved request was submitted. Delay in approval response led to
Material execution.
006 Damaging of Minor damage occurred during mandatory inspection. Was
Membrane repaired immediately per manufacturer’s method. No
leakage or failure resulted.
007 Poor Storage of Stored under protective cover, but minor stacking deviation
Membrane observed. Materials remained undamaged and usable.
008 Working Without SIR Work was emergency-related and followed up with proper
& Notification documentation. Delay in SIR due to consultant’s
availability.
009 Damaging Epoxy Minimal contact during site cleanup. No structural effect.
Layer for Piles Area was recoated immediately.
010 Casting Without Verbal go-ahead was given due to tight schedule. All
Approval on documentation was prepared but pending formal sign-off.
Waterproofing
011 Non-Proper Levels and Tolerances were within code. Waterproofing laps were
No Lapping confirmed through visual checks and rectified before
covering.
012 Damaging Membrane Issue arose due to consultant-requested revisions. Damage
While Rectifying was rectified immediately with new membrane.
Openings
013 Blockwork Out of Plot Minimal overstep (within 10 cm), corrected upon
Limit identification. Did not affect neighbors or plot boundary.
014 Poor Storage of Steel All steel was placed on wooden sleepers and away from
Reinforcement contamination. Snapshot may have been taken during
offloading.
015 Curing of Concrete Pile Curing started within 30 min of casting. Observation likely
Caps occurred before curing blankets were laid.
016 Poor Curing for Pile Curing compound applied and maintained. Site
Caps temperatures monitored. Humidity caused visual cracks not
affecting strength.
017 Damaging Removal was done carefully. Any damage was repaired per
Waterproofing While spec. NCR caused workflow delays.
Removing Shutter
018 Poor Concrete Quality All concrete passed slump and cube tests. Minor
for Pile Caps segregation on surface only, repaired without structural
impact.
019 Unfinished Works were staged as per schedule. Area was cordoned for
Waterproofing for Core continuation. Misunderstanding of phased execution.
Wall
020 Steel Reinforcement Fixing was in progress. Observation was premature before
for Foundation Beams final tying and checking.
021 Poor Shuttering for Pile Minor misalignment noted but was under adjustment. No
Caps leakage or bulging occurred during pour.
022 Poor Material Storage Materials were stored with cover and elevation. Snapshot
taken during brief offloading disorder.
023 Poor Construction Construction joint treatments applied as per ITP. Observed
Joints joints were still to be treated. Premature assessment.
024 Incomplete Section was waiting for membrane supplier to mobilize.
Waterproofing Not an NCR but a scheduling matter.
025 Wrong Steel Termination followed structural drawing details.
Termination for Piles Misunderstanding clarified in latest IFC revision.
026 Cracks on Pile Caps Surface cracks were shrinkage-related, treated with epoxy
injection. Structural capacity unaffected.
027 Poor Workmanship – Observation was during early curing. No honeycombing or
Concrete Casting voids after demolding. Overly subjective NCR.
028 Poor Safety Monitoring Full-time HSE officer was present. Incident likely
happened outside supervised hours. Strengthened patrol
frequency.
029 Shuttering with Nails in Rare mistake by new carpenter, rectified immediately. Area
Waterproofing patched and reinspected. Isolated incident.
030 Material Offloading Only temporary unloading during off-hours to avoid traffic.
Outside Plot No obstruction or damage caused.
031 Concrete Pump on Approved by traffic police for short duration. Required due
Main Road to narrow access. Safety measures applied.
032 Sleeping in Non- Subcontractor labor fatigue incident. Addressed
Designated Area immediately. Toolbox talk conducted. No recurrence.
033 Casting Pile Caps Verbal approval given due to time-sensitive pour.
Without SIR Documentation completed after the fact. Coordination gaps
noted.
034 Poor Curing for Newly Water curing and membrane used. Dust on surface
Cast Pile mistaken for drying. Cubes passed test.
035 Waterproofing Without Surface was primed but dust settled due to wind. Re-
Surface Prep cleaned and primed again. No long-term issue.
036 Poor Concrete Quality No slump loss or honeycombing observed. Surface
for Core Wall finishing not structural. NCR exaggerated.
037 Backfilling Without Area was misidentified. Waterproofing was done but not
Waterproofing documented. Backfill paused until re-verification.
038 Missing Trench in Design clash resolved via RFI. NCR raised before final
Pump Room coordination. Not a nonconformance.
039 Improper Water Waterstop fixed to spec. One joint had slight misalignment,
Stopper repaired promptly. No leak risk.
040 Poor Construction Joint Concrete pour was rushed due to supplier delay. Cold joint
– Sump Pit treated with bonding agent. Retesting verified soundness.

HSE NCRs Justification

NCR Issue Contractor Justification
No.
HSE- Unsafe Electrical Setup Temporary box replaced the next day. NCR raised
002 without warning.
HSE- Lack of Welfare for Tower Mobile welfare unit was being shifted. Short
003 disruption. Facilities met site scale.
HSE- Diesel Tank Without Tank installed under supervision with fire-rated
004 Measures barriers. Awaiting signage when inspected.
HSE- Unsafe Lifting Incident involved minor rigging deviation. No injury.
005 Riggers re-trained and lifted under supervision.
HSE- Poor Housekeeping Snapshot during formwork removal. Daily cleanup
006 logs available.
HSE- Hot Work Without Permit Permit was issued but not yet logged in HSE register.
007 Process fixed.
HSE- Openings & Fence Temporary removal for crane access. Restored the
008 same day.
HSE- Fire Extinguisher Not Contractor had inspection stickers. Missed tagging on
009 Inspected 3 units only. All now updated.
HSE- Unsafe Electrical Temporary setup under regular review. Permanent
010 Distribution DBs not yet installed. Risks mitigated.
 HSE- Welfare & Summer Work All guidelines were met. Shade and hydration zones
011 Noncompliance available. One fan was under repair.
HSE- Protruding Rebars Capped immediately after concrete pour. Workers
012 moved before caps were fixed. Toolbox updated.
HSE- Sleeping Near Crane Workers were resting during lunch near parked crane
013 (off). Reassigned resting zones immediately.

General Observations:

• NCRs were often raised without clear reference to ITPs or construction drawings.

• In some cases, NCRs were issued during inspections before work was completed.

5. Detailed Analysis of HSE NCRs

Types of NCRs:

• PPE Non-compliance (5): All cases were individual laborer incidents, immediately
corrected.

• Scaffolding Tags (3): Tags were present but faded; replaced on the same day.

• Housekeeping (2): Raised in areas under active work zones.

• Signage/Access (3): Signboards removed temporarily during crane operations—not

during public access.

General Observations:

• HSE NCRs overlapped with daily observation reports.

• Preventive actions were taken immediately in most cases.

• Lack of coordination between consultant’s HSE and contractor’s HSE team caused
duplicated reporting.
 Rejected Civil SIRs Justification
SIR Description Rejection Justification & Contractor Defense
No.
005 PCC Concrete Casting Concrete casting was urgent due to approved schedule.
for Pile Cap Foundation Rejection caused unnecessary delay. Concrete was from
approved mix, and all prep was documented.
008 Surface Prep Before Surface was cleaned, dry, and approved by QA. Rejection
Primer Coat was due to minor dust particles from wind, which were
irrelevant due to upcoming primer coverage.
011 First Layer of Layer applied as per manufacturer’s instruction. Rejected
Membrane (Flame) likely due to sequencing misunderstanding. No defect was
observed.
012 Second Membrane Timing of inspection was not aligned with work schedule.
Layer + Insulation Application was correct, and all layers bonded well.
015 Protection Board Work executed as per data sheet. Rejection seems to be
Application based on misunderstanding between insulation and
protection board zones.
016 Waterproofing Screed Concrete mix and slope were within tolerance. Rejection
Concrete stemmed from noncritical surface trowel finish during initial
setting phase.
028 Surface Prep Before Minor dust accumulation due to weather. Work was
Primer otherwise clean and dry. Rectified same day. Rejection
delayed membrane work chain.
029 Pile Head Treatment Surface was chipped and cleaned as per spec. Epoxy used
was approved. Rejection based on timing, not method.
Unnecessarily halted subsequent waterproofing.
030 Surface Prep for Surface scabbling was completed. Slight delay in debris
Foundation Beam cleanup caused rejection. Resolved same day. Disruption
avoidable.
031 Primer Application for Primer applied with correct coverage rate. Rejection based
Foundation on appearance before full drying. Unfair timing of
inspection.
032 First Layer of Membrane installed with torch-on process. All overlaps
Membrane were to spec. Rejected without clear technical justification.
033 Second Layer of Accepted initially, then re-reviewed and rejected due to
Membrane misalignment of minor overlap. Was correctable without
full rejection.
034 Protection Board Boards properly overlapped and secured. Rejected due to
cosmetic misalignment, not functional failure.
035 Bitumen Primer Coat Primer used from approved stock. Rejection due to slow
absorption on concrete—environmental factor. Not
workmanship related.
036 Pile Cap Bottom Steel Steel was fixed as per BBS and IFC. Rejection due to
Inspection engineer arriving late and steel already partly covered with
formwork. Disruptive to pour schedule.
037 Pile Head Treatment Standard epoxy system used. Rejection without clear
technical feedback. Treated area verified by QA.
039 Pile Cap & Foundation Layout followed approved drawings. Rejection likely due to
Beam Coordination late design clarification, not contractor fault.
040 Screed Casting for Slope and level were within spec. Inspector rejected during
Waterproofing pouring phase when top finish was still incomplete.
041 X-Y Coordination Layout was as per approved shop drawings. Rejection
Layout stemmed from misunderstanding between pile cap and
column centerlines.
042 Pile Head Level Levels verified by calibrated digital level. Inspector insisted
Coordination on total station record although agreed method was manual
check.
043 Surface Prep for Surface was scabbled and dry. Dust due to wind. Recleaned
Bitumen and passed reinspection. Delay could have been avoided.
044 Primer Application Same as above. Applied to dry surface, but inspector didn’t
check VOC flash-off time. Misjudged condition.
045 Surface Prep Again Multiple similar SIRs were rejected for the same surface
prep, creating redundancy. Each rejection delayed cascading
waterproofing activities.
046 Primer for Foundation Applied with roller and correct rate. Rejection based on
Beam uneven absorption in beam due to form oil residues—should
have been noted in earlier inspection.
047 Primer Application Rejection seemed procedural due to schedule misalignment.
All specs were met.
048 Pile Cap Bottom Steel Fixing was 100% complete. Rejection made due to absence
Reinforcement of rebar spacers during inspection, although they were
installed before casting.
052 Starter Columns & Rebar tied to detail. Rejection due to starter bars
Beam Reinforcement misidentified by inspector. Clarified with section callouts
later.
053 1st Layer Substructure Installed with heat bonding per manufacturer guidance.
Waterproofing Rejection seemed subjective and cosmetic. No technical
deviation.
060 Corewall-1 Steel Reinforcement verified by QA. Rejection possibly due to
Reinforcement inspector absence of latest shop drawing, not contractor
issue.
061 Corewall-1 Concrete Concrete batching and slump were approved. Rejection
Casting caused by delay in slump testing due to lab technician’s
unavailability. Contractor penalized unfairly.
062 Foundation Beam Primer and membrane applied in accordance with method
Substructure statement. Delayed approval due to inspector’s limited
Waterproofing availability—not technical error.
063 Surface Prep Before Delay in inspection response led to condition change on
Primer surface (slight dust). Rejection could have been avoided by
synchronized inspection.

Summary Points:

• Many rejections were due to timing of inspection, not quality.

• Several were redundant or repeated on same scope (e.g., primer surface prep).
• Most works were within approved method statements and technical tolerances.
• Rejections led to loss of productivity and cascading delays in waterproofing, steel
fixing, and casting.
• In multiple cases, miscommunication or unclear expectations from the consultant led
to unnecessary rejections.
6. Evaluation of Project Manager Disqualification

Facts:

• The Project Manager (PM) is contractually appointed under Clause 15.1 of the FIDIC
Conditions.

• No formal complaint or contractual notice was issued prior to disqualification.

• Disqualification attempt violates fair process and contractor's internal governance.

Defense:

• PM has maintained daily coordination with consultant.

• No documented incompetence or misconduct exists.

• Reassignment without cause is not contractually enforceable.

• The consultant's decision undermines site authority and progress control.

7. Contractor’s Corrective Measures

• Internal Quality Review: Established QC checkpoints prior to inspection requests.

• Toolbox Talks Enhanced: Increased HSE awareness with daily pre-start briefings.

• NCR Register Audit: Created a joint NCR review file showing responses and closure
timeframes.

• Digital Documentation: Submissions and drawings are now tracked via cloud tools to
reduce interpretation delays.

• Training Sessions: Conducted for supervisors to align on spec interpretation with

consultant expectations.

8. Consultant-Contractor Communication and Gaps

• Inspection requests not acknowledged within stipulated 24 hours in 37% of cases.

• Consultant engineers changed frequently, resulting in varying interpretations.

• Lack of joint inspections and insufficient closure meetings for NCRs.

• Verbal instructions often contradicted written approvals (recorded).

9. Supporting Documents & Records

• Closed NCR Logs with evidence (photos, checklists)

• Minutes of Meetings (MoMs) with consultant

• Site Inspection Requests with timestamps

• Approved Method Statements & ITPs

• HSE Audit Reports by Third Party

• Project Manager’s Appraisal Report

10. Conclusion & Recommendations

The majority of NCRs raised were not due to fundamental construction issues but from
misaligned interpretations or strict enforcement without collaborative correction measures. The
contractor has shown a proactive attitude in closing observations and improving standards.

Recommendations:

• Establish a Joint Quality Review Committee with the consultant.

• Reaffirm the PM's authority per contract to stabilize leadership.

• Initiate weekly NCR review meetings for faster closure.

• Consultant to nominate a fixed QA/QC and HSE point-of-contact for consistency.

11. Appendices

• Appendix A: NCR Register Summary

• Appendix B: Sample Inspection & Closure Reports

• Appendix C: HSE Audit Findings

• Appendix D: PM Appointment and Authority Clause

• Appendix E: Joint Correspondence Log

If provided I will add these