skip to main content

Evaluasi Pelaksanaan Dalam Kajian Biaya Lebih Pada Pekerjaan PLTU dengan Jenis Kontrak EPC: Studi Kasus Pekerjaan PLTU Oleh PT.X

*Sony Haryono  -  , Indonesia
S Silviana  -  Program Studi Program Profesi Insinyur Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Diponegoro,, Indonesia
Haryono Setyo Huboyo  -  Program Studi Program Profesi Insinyur Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Diponegoro,, Indonesia
Received: 6 May 2023; Revised: 10 Jun 2023; Accepted: 30 Jun 2023; Available online: 17 Aug 2023; Published: 19 Aug 2023.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Coal Fired Steam Power Plant (CFSPP) Project is a complex project that requires multidisciplinary knowledge in its implementation. As a result, cost overruns often occur in its implementation. In Indonesia, most power plant projects are using EPC contracts (Engineering, Procurement, and Construction). The contractor is fully responsible for any failures that may occur during the work implementation period. The aim of this study is to compare the realization of completion costs for CFSPP projects with Bill of Quantity (BoQ) and the factors that influence deviations. This research was conducted qualitatively based on the data obtained. Deviations are calculated based on the difference between completion costs and BoQ. Discussions and interviews were conducted with Project Managers and Site Commercial and Risk Managers who were directly involved in construction phase to determine the causes of cost overruns. The result is that the actual cost incurred in the CFSPP project is 3x the cost listed in BoQ. There are cost overruns in each work group including Civil Works, Mechanical Works, Electrical Works and Others Works. Indirect cost realization is 29.84% of total completion cost. The factors that influence cost overruns are: (i) Contractors do not understand the details of the work to be done, (ii) Changes in design and (iii) Realization volume exceeds initial planned volume. The results of this study are expected to be input in preparing owner estimate for CFSPP projects and adding new risk factor lists in CFSPP during construction phase.

Fulltext View|Download

Article Metrics:

  1. Asem, M., & Abdul-Malak, U. (2002). Process Model for Administrating Construction Claims. Journal of Management in Engineering - J MANAGE ENG, 18. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2002)18:2(84)
  2. Ashton, P., & Gidado, K. (2001). Association of Researchers in Construction Management (Vol. 1)
  3. Cheung, S., & Pang, K. (2013). Anatomy of Construction Disputes. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000532
  4. Creedy, G. D., Skitmore, M., & Wong, J. K. W. (2010). Evaluation of Risk Factors Leading to Cost Overrun in Delivery of Highway Construction Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(5), 528–537. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000160
  5. El-adaway, I., & Kandil, A. (2010). Construction Risks: Single versus Portfolio Insurance. Journal of Management in Engineering - J MANAGE ENG, 26. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0742-597X(2010)26:1(2)
  6. GUOI, Q., XUI, Z., Zhang, G., & Tu, T. (2010). Comparative analysis between the EPC contract mode and the traditional mode based on the transaction cost theory. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIEEM.2010.5646643
  7. Hadikusumo, B. H., & Tobgay, S. (2015). Construction Claim Types and Causes for a Large-Scale Hydropower Project in. In Journal of Construction in Developing Countries (Vol. 20, Issue 1)
  8. Hale, D., Shrestha, P., Gibson Jr, G., & Migliaccio, G. (2009). Empirical Comparison of Design/Build and Design/Bid/Build Project Delivery Methods. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 135, 579–587. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000017
  9. Hanak, T., Hermanová, L., & Hanák, T. (2017). An empirical analysis of overhead cost management in the Czech construction industry. In TECHNICAL JOURNAL (Vol. 11). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321938344
  10. Haryono, S., Susanty, B., Toyfur, M. F., & Co, S. (2022). Analisis risiko kontrak turnkey pada proyek konstruksi transmisi di Indonesia. 27(02)
  11. Islam, M. S., Nepal, M. P., & Skitmore, M. (2019). Modified Fuzzy Group Decision-Making Approach to Cost Overrun Risk Assessment of Power Plant Projects. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 145(2). https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001593
  12. Islam, M. S., Nepal, M. P., Skitmore, M., & Kabir, G. (2019). A knowledge-based expert system to assess power plant project cost overrun risks. Expert Systems with Applications, 136, 12–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.030
  13. Oztas, A., & Ökmen, Ö. (2004). Risk analysis in fixed-price design–build construction projects. Building and Environment, 39, 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2003.08.018
  14. Patrick Ogbu, C., & Ehigiator-Irughe, R. (2020). Cost Over-Run in Civil Works: A Case-Study of Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) Gas Depot Construction Projects in Nigeria. European Journal of Environment and Earth Sciences, 1(4). https://doi.org/10.24018/ejgeo.2020.1.4.54
  15. Senouci, A., Ismail, A., & Eldin, N. (2016). Time Delay and Cost Overrun in Qatari Public Construction Projects. Procedia Engineering, 164, 368–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.632
  16. Shen, W., Tang, W., Yu, W., Duffield, C. F., Hui, F. K. P., Wei, Y., & Fang, J. (2017). Causes of contractors’ claims in international engineering-procurement-construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 23(6), 727–739. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2017.1281839

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.