Drainage Board may sue Govt

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33964, 3 October 1975, Page 3

Drainage Board may sue Govt

The Christchurch Drainage Board might take legal action against the Government as a result of delays — for which the board holds the Government responsible —to the extensions at the Bromley sewerage works.

Mr C. H. Russell/ chairman of the board’s construction and treatment works committee, said yesterday that its solicitors had been instructed to “take whatever steps were necessary to bring the whole matter to a quick and satisfactory conclusion.”

The delay and argument have arisen over a decision by the Department of Trade and Industry to cancel the import licence for a plastic medium to be used in two new tower filters at the works.

The licence was granted for the plastic, which consists of flat and corrugated PVC sheets layered and bonded together to form modules, in August, 1974. In February last, the licence for flat sheet was cancelled, on the basis that suitable material was now available from New Zealand manufacturers. “No reply” The board has asked the Minister of Trade and Industry (Mr Freer) either to restore the licences to the contractor, ICI Australia Petrochemicals, Ltd, or to meet the added costs which accrue as a result of the Government’s decision to cancel the licence. The board says that the cost will inevitably in-

1 crease day by dav, with ’further delay.

‘‘No reply has yet been received which leads in any way to a resolution of this , problem,” said Mr Russell.

He could not say when the extensions at the works .would begin, or when they were likely to be finished. ‘‘lt all hinges on the Government, and if it will help financially,” said Mr Russell.

“It is a very urgent project,” he said. “We gave assurances to the residents and ratepayers in the area that this work would be done, to reduce the smell. We are finding it hard to meet these assurances, but it is essential that the work be carried out with a minimum of delay.” The modifications are essential at the works, particularly during autumn and winter, to correct overloading of the present filtration system. The board has already applied to the Regional Water Board for the right to bypass the plant and discharge up to 10 million gallons of effluent :a day into the Estuary. This ■effluent would be only partly treated, but would be discharged only in an emergency. The contractor accepted a tender of $2,463,590 in June, 1974. This was to be part of a ssm modification of the plant.

The tender was submitted on the basis that the flat PVC sheet and the formings required for the work should

be made in Britain and shipped to New Zealand for subsequent assembly into modules of filter media.

Firm bookings When the licence was cancelled, all the flat sheets required had been made and some of them shipped. Firm shipping bookings had been made for the balance, Mr Russell said. “On June 26, the contractor submitted to the board a statement setting out the cost implications of the department’s decision, which was to the effect that the contractor and the board would be seeking reimbursement of increased costs totalling some $470,000.

In arriving at the sum, due allowance had been made, for any increased costs which would follow the devaluation of New Zealand currency, Mr Russell said. Some of this added cost related to the higher cost of New Zealand manufacture and some to cancellation charges faced by the contractor because of the fact that his principal subcontractor had, in good faith, proceeded with the production of the material in Britain.

“The board believed, and still believes, that these added costs should be met by the Government; and detailed submissions have been made to the Minister and his department," Mr Russell said.