| Work Detail |
EconoJournal has had access to a series of letters that the Techint-SACDE and BTU UTE sent to Enarsa last month. They state that the reversal of the Northern Gas Pipeline presented greater difficulties than expected and blamed the state company for what happened. Although in the notes they raised the possibility of a delay in the deadlines, sources from the companies assured this newspaper that they increased their efforts to meet the September delivery date, although they agreed that the cost will be higher than initially budgeted.
The Techint-SACDE and BTU UTE informed Enarsa last month, through a series of letters to which EconoJournal had exclusive access, that the reversal of the Northern Gas Pipeline presented greater difficulties than expected and blamed the state company for what happened. Although the notes raised the possibility of a delay in the deadlines, sources from the companies assured this newspaper that they increased their efforts to meet the September delivery date, although they agreed that the cost will be higher than initially budgeted.
The project is key due to the decline in production in the Northwest Argentine Basin and the drop in imports from Bolivia. The objective is to bring Vaca Muerta gas to the provinces of Córdoba, Tucumán, La Rioja, Catamarca, Santiago del Estero, Salta and Jujuy for the generation of electric energy, supplying homes, industries and the development of new activities on a large scale, such as lithium mining, in addition to exporting gas to countries in the region.
Enarsa also confirmed to EconoJournal that it is working to ensure that the deadline for the completion of the work is met. “Since the beginning of the current administration, Energía Argentina SA has been working to re-tender the work that the previous administration had left unawarded and whose declaration of deserted was the only possible alternative, due to errors in the bidding process. Thus, Enarsa decided to redefine the process and the official budget, knowing that the deadlines and execution of the work were very demanding. Since the award, work is being done with the objective of meeting the deadlines and contractual times established. Therefore, the company is constantly monitoring the situation and the compliance of the contractors within the established deadlines, seeking to mitigate the situations that normally arise in this type of work,” they stressed.
How the work was divided
The reversal of the gas pipeline was initially divided into three parts:
-Line 1 included the reversal of four existing compressor plants in Córdoba, Santiago del Estero and Salta, the laying of two loops parallel to the 62-kilometer-long Northern Gas Pipeline and the construction of the final 22 kilometers of the Tío Pujio-La Carlota gas pipeline.
-Row 2 covered the route from kilometer 0 to 50.
-Line 3 covered the section from kilometer 50 to 100, to be built between Río Pujio and La Carlota in the province of Córdoba.
Lines 2 and 3 were put out to tender and awarded to the Techint-Sacde UTE, while the tender for line 1 was complicated because the offers received had exceeded the maximum budget authorized by the previous government in the bidding document. As a result, the current administration rejected the offers and divided part of the work into two new tenders. Tender 01/2024 included a first line with the 22 kilometers of the Tío Pujio-La Carlota gas pipeline that had yet to be awarded and a second line with the 62 kilometers of the loop to the Gasoducto Norte, while tender 02/2024 included the reversal of four compressor plants. The two new lines of tender 01/2024 were won by BTU and the reversal of the compressor plants was left to Esuco.
Techint-SACDEs claims
On July 12, the Techint-SACDE UTE sent a note to Enarsa stating that "the shift in the APF (Fit for Operation) date is a consequence of the successive modifications unilaterally introduced by Enarsa in the project, specifically in the La Carlota compressor plant."
The letter sent by the UTE Techint SACDE to Enarsa.
The main modification they refer to is the moving of the launcher trap. In the text they maintain that the first presentation by the engineering company with the arrangement of the scraper trap was on February 16, without it having been objected to in the qualification of March 7. They then state that on March 18 the second presentation was made without modifying its location, which was not objected to in the qualification of April 8. The third presentation was made on April 18 and maintained the original location, but they affirm that it was objected to by Enarsa in the qualification of May 14. That same May 14, the UTE requested a meeting to analyze the issue, which was held on June 6.
“In summary, the delay in defining the location of the scraper trap, due to the client’s (Enarsa) lack of definition, was a total of 110 days, of which 88 correspond to the period from February 16, the date of the first presentation, to May 14, the date of the observation, and the other 22 to the period from May 14 to June 6, which is the period that required holding the meeting requested by the UT on an urgent basis,” states the Techint-SACDE note.
The UTE points out that the problem of delays in the qualification of the engineering has been a recurring issue since the signing of the contract and was warned about on repeated occasions. “In a project that must be completed within a time frame as tight as the present one, it is undeniable that this action had an impact on the development of the engineering with the consequent impact on costs and deadlines,” they stated. In addition, they point out that the modifications introduced by Enarsa are outside the scope of the contract because they were incorporated only “in the launch meeting on February 1, greatly modifying the documentation presented in the tender document.”
Since the letter was dated almost a month ago, EconoJournal consulted the UTE to find out if they will be able to meet the deadlines. “The letter sent is part of an exchange with the client that refers to the terms of the contract and its conditions of compliance, normal in this type of project. Regardless of this, and if there are no inconveniences, our estimate is that the UTE will comply with the times established in the contract for the Ready to Operate (Line 2: 05/09; Line 3: 15/09). In fact, progress is being made with the metal closure of the duct and the hydraulic tests continue, with the last three tests remaining with a completion date for mid-August. The ready to operate is planned for September, when a welding will be carried out to close the hydraulic test,” they stressed.
BTU claims
In its July 8 note, BTU states that “the 30” pipes supplied by Enarsa show a deviation in the cut back length, which exceeds the dimensions accepted by the technical specification.” The company notes that it warned Enarsa about this problem on May 28 and proposed using heat shrinkable blankets as an integral covering for the pipe to solve the problem. “The same situation occurred in some 36” pipes in the GPNK, which was resolved without problems with the application of double blankets,” it noted.
One of the letters sent by BTU to Enarsa, which EconoJournal had exclusive access to.
BTU says that TGN initially communicated that it did not accept the use of double blankets and proposed another method that the firm headed by Carlos Mundin refused to adopt because it considered it was not the most effective option. After a series of back and forth, it was finally decided to apply 323 additional blankets to those planned, but between the time it took to debate and the subsequent solution, 35 days were lost. “This whole situation derives from the delivery of pipes by Enarsa, which presents a normative deviation which is not the responsibility of BTU,” the firm stressed.
An additional problem arose from the identification of four future water courses that had not been detected during the visit to the area or with the planialtimetric survey, since they did not exist at that time. The additional works delayed the deadlines and in turn increased the costs since they were not foreseen in the initial tender.
Finally, BTU also questioned Enarsa in the aforementioned note for the lack of response to a series of technical queries and for multiple deviations in the deadlines for approval of the detailed engineering.
Beyond all the claims made in the letter, EconoJournal consulted company sources on Monday to find out if they will be able to meet the original deadline. “Since all these events occurred, a lot of mitigation measures were taken because both the client and we know the need for the work. We put in double the staff to apply the coatings and added equipment to guarantee the crossings of the channels. We took a lot of measures that were not originally planned and that have an additional cost. Because of this, we believe that we will be able to meet the dates originally planned,” they responded.
Esucos compressor plants
The project also includes the reversal of four compressor plants, a tender that was won by Esuco. Although it is expected that the pipeline can begin to operate even without these compressor plants, Econojournal consulted the company to find out the degree of progress of these works.
“On our side, we have contractually set the delivery for next year in this order: March for two plants and June for the other two. We are working against the clock and intensively on engineering with Enarsa, launching the purchase of all possible materials and seeking to shorten all delivery times for materials to arrive sooner, if possible,” said company sources. |
