Via e-mail to All & Hard Copy – DHL to MD & 3 others.


The Managing Director,                                                                        30th July, 2017.

Nigeria LNG Limited,

NLNG Road, Amadi Creek,

Off Eastern Bye Pass, PH,

Rivers State, Nigeria.


Att: Mr. Tony Attah


Dear Managing Director,


Contract No. BI30142PPI (Access Control to CCR, Laboratory, Shutdown Village & Gas Plant Area Project.)


Subject: Standby Clauses of Contract Justifying Claim and Request for a Meeting.

Macobarb respectfully request a meeting with you for the simple reason that we may have misunderstood you and your intentions towards our predicament over the above contract and claim, particularly in your silence over our mail to you of 21st September 2016 and some of the ‘facts’ of your mail to the Chairman, Senate Committee on Gas (Senator Bassey Albert Akpan) of 19th Oct. 2016.


However, Macobarb Int’l Ltd (MIL) recent knowledge, two days ago, of the positive changes you have introduced into NLNG Contract processes, significantly different from your immediate past predecessor, suggests a listening ear and a disposition to right wrongs of the past. Particularly noteworthy and really impressive is discarding the ‘lowest bidder’ Policy for a ‘Right Pricing’ one, which is truly revolutionary in the industry. The positive and multiplier effects of this policy will be a game changer in Nigeria Oil and Gas Industry and we thank you, on behalf of Nigerians.


This vision of yours to re-position NLNG for better performance is not only salutary but worthy of emulation and support by all including Macobarb who has always appreciated NLNG in keeping all promises made to Company in the over 60 successful projects delivery in 10 years HISTORY of relationship’.


It is Not True that there are No Contractual Clauses Justifying claim as several NLNG mails have proclaimed and as also contained in your mail Senator Akpan.

(1). Now, in requesting a meeting, kindly permit us to clarify that NLNG, contrary to its claims, did not only fail to do what was reasonable to nip the Macobarb contract abuse in the bud or minimise both parties exposures, but allowed elements responsible for these abuses to assume commanding roles in its resolution. By this error of Judgement, NLNG gave these staffs a free hand to determine how the abuse they fostered on contract was to be resolved and the resultant effects of this error still ripples on to date, as Macobarb computed payment for 1048 Days Standing time on its Personnel and Equipment, as at 13th June 2017 when both parties were to have examined the way out of this impasse under the Umbrella of the National Assembly, has now escalated to NGN1,802,590,000.00 (One point Eight Billion Naira). Enclosure NASS: 001.

We have been told in mails, as you probably also have wondered; how a Contract duly terminated, according to NLNG, since 27th Nov. 2015, be attracting Claim on Equipment and Personnel to date. Macobarb must be ‘hunting for claim’, has been the slogan since Macobarb brought to light, NLNG abuse of its Contract. Sir, while Macobarb has never been averse to considering the date of the alleged Termination or any other date founded on the Contract provisions as bases for Claim ceiling, the notion that Macobarb Claim is frivolous and not founded on Contract provisions is not only unacceptable, but is the main reason for Macobarb recourse to the National Assembly, a third party, for determination.

NLNG, while claiming ‘has done everything possible to help Contractor’, continually avoids meeting with Macobarb, deliberately avoid stating Macobarb references to Contract Provisions, preferring to shove ‘NLNG’ views sentimentally down Macobarb throat and without Contract provisions as references.


At the proposed meeting, we would show you the contractual bases for our claim and the occasional upward reviews. And it is not true that our misconceptions of the NLNG Contract terms and conditions are the issues, as you may have been told. Macobarb challenge NLNG to show the misunderstood Contract Provisions.

(2). Sir, with the sole aim to hide the vindictive interventions that derailed contract in mind, hopefully wishing that Macobarb and its personnel/equipment can somehow be bundled out of NLNG without being wiser on the REMEDY Contract avails Macobarb for the serial abuse in payment denials and consequent claim before NLNG, the only option as conceptualised by the elements behind the derailment, was to summarily terminate Contract and posture that Macobarb has not performed its obligations under the Contract, make pretences about meeting with Macobarb to resolve claim and when writing minutes of meeting which Macobarb is usually not allowed to have a say or challenge, as should be, expunge or be silent about evidence or relevant clauses of Contract that justified claim, as Macobarb may have noted in a meeting.


(3). Having known that even if an ‘Angel’ had shown all relevant Standby clauses  and  Remedy Contract avail Macobarb for the delay and Costs deliberately fostered on Contract, at those times, Just as NLNG Executive Management decisions of 09/07/2015 for Macobarb to be immediately paid for Materials delivered on Contract were set aside, Just as all the contract compliant decisions of the Contract Holder/Team were ignored to actualise the stated objective of a staff to terminate Contract (which EM says was not an option for NLNG), so also, these Standby Clauses which were made known to NLNG severally were conveniently ignored, while in mails and actions maintained there were no justification for Macobarb Standby Claim. It is our hope that you may now see the clauses they refused to acknowledge and do the needful.

(4). Sir, for the faith we have in you by recent disclosures and Macobarb suspicion that you may have been presented document you signed in genuine error, Macobarb categorically states that NLNG mails claiming there are no clauses in the Macobarb Contract No.(B130142PPI), supporting or justifying Macobarb Standby claim, are Not True. Macobarb MD, as Representative of Contractor and who has personally written most mails regarding the issue (including this one), will in the meeting and with the NLNG original Contract documents, show you conclusively, all such supporting clauses.


(5).As an example, we highlight some below: Contract doc. of Section 7, Pg31 of 48, Article 13.0 (Construction),

Clause 13.2, says: ‘The Contractor shall be responsible for taking due account of the site conditions, climate and incidence of inclement in weather on the Site, which may include periods of very heavy rainfall and a high level of ground water. The Company shall not make any additional payments, or pay for any standing time for personnel and equipment if the contractor encounters such conditions unless such site Conditions are considered as being exceptional and unforeseeable by an experienced Contractor’.

In the clause above, the NLNG Contract did not only show Standby Clause as existing, but agrees to pay Macobarb Standing time for its Personnel and Equipment under exceptional and unforeseeable site conditions, even when caused by an act of Nature, as rain. How then could NLNG refuse to accept responsibility for such an exceptional and unforeseeable Persistent payment denials caused by a staff, deliberately, and against clear contract provisions that forbid such? 


How could Macobarb have foreseen that a world class Company as NLNG would repeatedly & intentionally deny Macobarb Payments for Work done on its Contract that has been duly Valued and Certificated by NLNG Representative? It is mind bungling!


(6).Again: Section 3 (General Conditions of Contract For NLNG Ltd -15 Oct. 2012)-GCC.

SECTION II (Programme):

Article 3, Clause (iv) Pg 5 of 23: ‘The Contractor shall keep the Contract Holder fully informed in advance about all details of the Contractor’s intended processes and procedure in the performance of the Contract’.

Macobarb did just the above in NLNG Representative being fully informed of processes and procedures towards actualisation of Contract within schedule, even in record time of one year Schedule, including Diamond Bank funding. Macobarb also informed the Contract Holder/Anene Promo of CPM that the part-payment for work done (forbidden by Contract provisions), as being insisted by Head Project support services would skew Macobarb cash flow on Contract.

(7).Another Standby support: Clause (vi) of GCC, same Article and page as above says:

Immediately the Contractor determines that there is a likelihood of delay to the programme the Contractor shall notify the Contract Holder in writing of the circumstances that have lead or will lead to the likelihood of delay and the actual or estimated duration of the delay and what remedial action the Contractor has taken or will take to avoid or minimise the delay’.

Macobarb with others exhausted efforts to prevail on Mr. Adenrele to pay Macobarb valuation as done by Contract Holder, which failed. CPM efforts to provide alternative source of funds to Macobarb under the NVFS (Encl. No.10 &11) also failed and on the 30th of July 2014, Macobarb formally informed NLNG via Contract Holder & CPM-contract department (Encl. No.12) ::::::: As the situation now stands, our carefully laid out construction plan in respect of project is in complete disarray and our fear of serious completion schedule derailment and financial loss is real::::::::::::::  I seek your urgent intervention in determining the way forward. :::::::::: The consequences of this situation is multi-dimensional as we are now unable to pay salaries, further procure any construction materials and our workers and equipment are idle and consequently on downtime.  ::::::::::: Not knowing when the situation would normalise, it is easy to recognise the negative impact of the situation on our construction schedule :::::::::::: We verily appreciate the critical nature of this project to our client, Bank and ourselves and a quick resolution is in everybody’s interest.

Macobarb begged everybody beggable in NLNG to intervene and prevail on Mr. Adenrele to pay Macobarb Valuation and showed Contract Holder as well Mr. Anene Promo of CPM that the part-payment of the Macobarb Valuation will negatively impact project schedule. Apart from the long & persistent project team efforts to intervene, some NLNG personnel, at the instance of Macobarb MD, who truly made efforts at resolution include:

(a). Engr. Ugo Igboelina, who  to the knowledge of Macobarb MD, went twice to Mr. Adenrele and even sought Bayo’s permission to make a presentation over the issue before CTC to no avail. (b)The present General Manager, Mr Tayo Ogini, whom Macobarb MD also approached for intervention, expressed surprise that a minute of meeting duly signed off by both parties (NLNG & Macobarb) regarding the schedule of payment for NLNG requested Materials existed and yet being violated by Mr. Adenrele. (c). Even the office of the King of Bonny in the person of the ‘Prime Minister’, called Mr. Chima Isilebo, former General Manager Production in the presence of Macobarb MD, and all to no avail. (d).When the Contract Owner, Schouten Jan, to whom Macobarb MD sent a staff to mediate also threw in the towel with the disclosure that Mr. Adenrele was determined to chase Macobarb out of NLNG over a Design, (Encl. No.50), Macobarb was shocked with hopelessness.


(8). Again, see Contract doc. Section 7, Article 5.0 (REPRESENTATIVES), Pg 28 of 48 of Contract doc, Clause 5.11 says: ‘If, by reason of any failure or inability of the Engineer (Dweller. F;- Pjrt Principal Engr.), the Company’s Representative (Dweller .F.; Pg 9 of 48- Brief list of Cont. Info) and/or the Company (NLNG) to issue within a time reasonable in all the circumstances any drawing, instruction, approval (as request to approve payments) or the like for which notice has be given by the Contractor (notice as Valuation to be paid of 20/06/2014), the Contractor surfers delay (as we have suffered since 30th July 2014 standby notification to date) and/or incurs costs (as we have in Key Personnel & Equipment being idle on Contract that forbid us removing them from site even if we wanted, without NLNG Permissions), then the time for the execution of the Works shall be extended accordingly and the amount of such costs shall be added  to the Contract Sum’.

(9). While Macobarb will show other clauses in the proposed meeting, meanwhile, how sir, in the face of these facts above known to NLNG, the former MD who waited one year to intervene after our protest to him, in his “Without Prejudice” understanding of the 2nd June 2016 Meeting with Macobarb, re-award back the remaining portion of the contract (Extended time for the execution of the Works) under the same conditions as Contract was bided in 2013, regrets not being able to offer Macobarb Advance payment in the face of Contract (which Contract forbids, in any case) and then failed to add the Costs incurred (in Equipment & Personnel to date – 2nd June 2016) to the Contract Sum as the clause 5.11, Pg28 of 48 of the NLNG Contract mandatorily demanded. The provisions of the clause is Not discretional. Excerpts of the NLNG ‘Without Prejudice’ understanding of meeting with Macobarb says: :::::::::::::’

  • Due to Governance requirements, NLNG will be unable to offer any advance payments to Macobarb for the purpose, unless Macobarb is able to provide an advance Payment Guarantee from a bank acceptable to NLNG, in line with established procedures. Governance requirement provides Macobarb be paid its Standby Claim.
  • NLNG is however willing to discuss and explore, with Macobarb, any other workable options that would be within the contemplation of the Company’s contracting framework, and which will not put the Company’s funds or its assets at risk.
  • Where the foregoing is acceptable to Macobarb, and any concrete proposals are reached between Macobarb and NLNG Business Owner/Team as short a time as possible, necessary recommendations can be made to the appropriate Tender Committee for approval ::::::::.


These, seeming magnanimity expressed above, which spanned two (2) years (June 2014 when Macobarb noted abuse/signalled Standby to NLNG to June 2016 – of “Without Prejudice” Meeting) before NLNG deductions as above, a scrutiny of the summation of the NLNG understanding as captured above, in our modest view, was not only a side-stepping of the NLNG Contract provisions of claim, but a further charade of the motion and no movement (Abracadabra) policy , in referring Macobarb again to NLNG Business Owner/Team which ipso facto, means Mr. Adenrele Bayo, who was to oversee and  supervise the recommendation Mr. Omotowa was to make. Why do we say this? The Business owner, by Contract award letter dated 9th January 2014, is Dweller Francis, who is also Contract Holder, Principal Project Engineer and NLNG Representative on Contract. By Team as referred in the “Without Prejudice” mail in reference, we assume, is the NLNG Project Team supervising the Macobarb Contract. But this Team and Contract Holder are under the supervision of Mr. Adenrele as Head Project Support Services, a position from which he has consistently undermined the Contract detrimentally, generated most mails to Macobarb and declared Macobarb liable, but himself. What do you think sir, would have been the recommendation under this Mr. Adenrele setting? Macobarb rightly feared it would mirror the charade that went on for over two (2) years and which has taken the parties no where to date.

(10). This request for a meeting with you is Contract compliant by reason of Article 37of GCC, Pg 20 of 23: Termination Generally says: ‘The termination of the Contract in respect of all or any of the Works shall not prejudice any rights or remedies accruing before, at or in consequence of the termination or any proceedings with respect to any such rights or remedies’.

By the provision above, even when in court or before the National Assembly, with Contract terminated as this instance, the Contract provides both parties can address the matters of rights and remedies. Macobarb may have been manoeuvred to appear to be fighting NLNG, nothing can be further from the truth than this. This is only so because of elements in NLNG who desperately want to absolve a staff of guilt by Making Macobarb liable. This is impossible.  Our rights in the Contract have been abused and the remedy contract avails Macobarb for these abuses need be applied as provided.


(11). While it is not necessary to tell you how three legal Chambers in Port Harcourt (one with 2 SANs) who expressed horror at seeing Macobarb documents regarding the NLNG ordeal surprisingly stayed away from Macobarb after calls from or to NLNG, or the reason Macobarb disengaged Intellegal Partners Services even after paying NGN2.2 Million for their Arbitration/Mediation services. Macobarb have been threatened to be delisted from the NLNG/IOCs data base, warned to be prepared for 100 years legal tussle with NLNG, Macobarb emails and phone compromised, strange mail from Adedayo Kayode of ICPC. While these should not be, Macobarb is not perturbed and gladly look forward to a fruitful meeting with you.


The proposed meeting, if acceptable and subject to a date of your choice will be attended by Macobarb MD and two others.



Yours Faitfully,

For Macobarb Int’l Ltd

Shedrack D. Ogboru   

Managing Director


(1). Distinguished Senator Ovie Omo- Agege

(2). Hon. Emmanuel Ekon

(3). Hon. Emmanuel Egoh

(4). Deputy Managing Director: Mr. Sadeeq Mai-Bornu

(5). Head Legal Services: Bilikisu Belgore

(6). General Manager Production: Tayo Ogini

(7). Mr. Chinedu Iwu: Manager, Project Delivery.

(8). Contract Holder: Dweller Francis




(i). How has Macobarb Gone Wrong in the Contract B.130142PPI to warrant termination of Contract.

(ii). Who is the NLNG Representative on Contract & What are his Role in Contract?

(iii).Did the NLNG Contract says anybody and all NLNG staffs can write or give instructions to Macobarb on Contract? Did the Contract also say anybody or every body in Macobarb can also write or give instructions to NLNG regarding Contract?

(iv).What is the Complain against Macobarb by the NLNG Representative (Dweller Francis), who NLNG assigned to manage all aspects of the Contract on behalf of Company? When did NLNG notice the alleged defaults in its Notice of default and Termination on Contract and where or how in the contract is Mr. Emeka Ohiri empowered to so act?

(v).Did Contract say NLNG should support Contractor financially on Contract with Advance Payment? Why is NLNG suggesting giving Macobarb Advance Payment on 2nd June 2016 (One & half years into Contract to avoid the Standby Claim) after Macobarb had complained of persistent payment denials since June 2014? In over 10 years of Macobarb Contract HISTORY of over 62 meritoriously executed Contract for NLNG, has NLNG ever assisted Contractor financially other than paying Contractor? But the NLNG Contract says there shall be no Advance Payment on page 39 of 48, clause 4.3 or is it the usual practice in NLNG to change Contract terms it crafted any time it liked to suit it purposes and at the expense of Contractors?

(vi). When Macobarb noted to NLNG on the 30th of July 2014 that it was no longer able to fund Contract as a result of Mr. Adenrele’s refusal to sign his portion of payment Certificate to facilitate Macobarb payment , signalling Downtime/ Standing time of its Equipment and Personnel on contract, what did NLNG do? Why didn’t NLNG suggest Advance Payment to Macobarb then?

(vi).Where in the Contract is Mr. Adenrele empowered to supervise Contract and in What Capacity? If NLNG claims he is Contract Owner as they did in a mail to Senator Akpan, where is it stated in Contract and if not, by what mail did they introduce or nominate Mr. Bayo to Macobarb as stipulated in Contract? Then who is Mr. Schouten Jan the Contract introduced in page 25 0f 48 as Contract Owner?

(vii). If Mr. Adenrel is contract owner, as being claimed by NLNG even though not stated anywhere in Contract, he appointed Contract Holder – Dweller Francis as defined in Contract Section 2, page 5 of 48. Is he not bound by any and all decisions taken by his appointee, who is to manage all aspect of the Contract on behalf of NLNG? Then why is he working at cross purposes against decisions of Contract Holder whose decisions are in complete agreement with Contract Provisions? Mr. Adenrele premeditated decisions on the other hand, are at variance with the Contract provisions as crafted by NLNG.

(viii). When another opportunity to progress the Project with the arrival of NLNG requested Materials was delivered and received by NLNG February 2015, another 33Million Naira certificate was raised for signatures and all else signed, why did Mr. Adenrele refuse to sign knowing Macobarb and the Contract was hurting financially by his 1st refusal to pay the 27Million certificate in June 2014? Is there any doubt at this point that Macobarb Complain about Mr. Adenrele deliberate intention to cripple Contract financially is true?

(ix).Where in the Contract is Mr. Adenrele mandated to counter the decision of the Contract Holder, Dweller Francis? Has he ever held any Bi-weekly Contract progress review Meetings with Macobarb on the project, as directed by Contract? Therefore, how is he in position to interfere on administering Contract only when it comes to Macobarb’s payment and with no regards to other NLNG Staffs who are in daily contract relationship with Macobarb on project, as the Project Engineer/ Contract Holder, Senior Construction supervisor, etc?

(x).When Contractor did the whistle blowing on the Mr. Adenrele intention to derail his Contract by repeated payment denials (Protest Mail to NLNG MD of 2nd June, 2015), NLNG Executive Management, by Minutes of Meeting No.17 of 09/07/2015 prepared and signed by NLNG Representative and Contractor, NLNG Executive Management directed that Contractor should be paid immediately for Materials it has delivered to NLNG and project Team to discuss with Macobarb on Progress options for the Work. Where is the Minutes of Meeting where the NLNG project Team discussed with Macobarb as directed by NLNG Executive Management?

But Contractor, Macobarb claims that other NLNG staffs different from the Contract Team came with an Agenda on the 28th July, 2015 Meeting to change Contract Payment Terms one and half years into Contract and thereby hide NLNG Payment denials because Contractor has requested the remedy (NGN646,101,360.00) Contract gave to it in Standby of it Equipment and Personnel. (Encl. No.21). Why was the project team not made to discuss with Macobarb as directed by NLNG Executive Management? Why is NLNG changing the payment terms of its Contract 18 Months into Contract Execution when Contractor had complained of repeated payment denials? Can the NLNG MD even do this in a Contract at his whims with imposition of conditions to Contractor? Who constitute Executive Management in NLNG and why are their instructions on Contract not obeyed?

(xi).What is the NLNG Contract payment Conditions? Did the Contract say Macobarb should be paid a one-off payment at the end of Contract? Why did the Contract Document made provision for Progress Payments based on the value of work done which are the basis for the two interim certificates raised that Mr. Adenrele refused to honour?

  • The Contract says Macobarb shall submit invoices on page 38 of 48 of GCC (General Conditions of the NLNG Contract) and not just One Invoice.

(xib).Did the Contract say that Macobarb shall submit only one invoice for payment at completion of the entire project after one and a half years?

(xii).What is the NLNG Contract Payment Terms?

  • The Contract says on page 39 of 48, Clause 4.3 that: There shall be no advance payment, part payment or payment for part Completed Job.

(xiii).Why was Macobarb part-paid 8Million for Work done NLNG Representative valued for NGN27 Million?

(xiiib).Macobarb was given instruction by Minutes of Meeting No.04 of 26th March 2014. Why was NGN19,161,894.80 not included in his 1st payment certificate?

  • Contract in page 28 of 48 that Contract Shall be Administered by Meetings which shall be Minuted & signed off by both Parties.

(xiv).Why does NLNG not respect its Minutes of Meeting in this Contract as represented by Minutes of Meetings showing Macobarb level of Works Done on Contract (Minutes of Meetings No. 04/03/2014 where parties agreed on Payments Schedule for Turnstiles & Vehicle barriers requested by NLNG; Minutes of Meeting No.08 of 26/06/2014 Showing Excellent Progress on Engineering Design, Procurement & Construction having accomplished all mobilisation of Equipment, Personnel and Materials for project and Minutes of Meeting No.17 of 09/07/2015 where Executive Management of NLNG instructed that NLNG should Pay Contractor immediately for Materials delivered to Sight, and that Cancellation of the Macobarb Contract was not an option for NLNG?

  • The NLNG Contract in page 28 of 48 says “If, by reason of any failure or inability of the Engineer, the Company’s Representative and or the Company to issue within a time reasonable in all the circumstances any drawing, instruction, approval or the like for which notice has been given by the contractor, the contractor suffers delay and or incurs costs, then the time for the execution for the Works shall be extended accordingly and the amount of such costs shall be added to the Contract Sum”.

This provision of the Contract is mandatory and not discretional. It did not say NLNG may extend the Contract execution period or that the cost incurred by Contract may discretionary be added to the Contract Sum.

Combine the provision of the NLNG Contract in page 5 of 23, Section II (Execution of Works), Article 3, clause (vi) which says

  • “Immediately the Contractor determines that there is likelihood of delay to the programme the Contractor Shall notify the Contract Holder in Writing of the circumstances that have lead or will lead to the likelihood of delay and the actual or estimated duration of the delay and what remedial action the contractor has taken or will take to avoid or minimise the delay”.

Contractor informed NLNG through Contract Holder on 30th July 2014 (Encl. No.12) of NLNG derailing its carefully laid out financial cash flow plan on Contract and how NLNG intended NGN8 Million naira part-payment will lead to Contractor Equipment and Personnel being idle and on Standby till date.


Note: In different sections of Contract as quoted below, the NLNG Contract forbids Macobarb from removing its Equipment (Encl. No.4a and or Personnel-Encl. No.4b) from the Contract/Site.

Plant and Materials on Site (Page 7 of 23 of GCC), Article 8 (i) says: “Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Company (NLNG), all Plant, Materials or Temporary Works owned by the Contractor (Macobarb) or the Contractor subcontractor or by any firm or corporation in which the Contractor has a controlling interest shall for the duration of the contract when upon the site be used solely and exclusively for the purpose of the Works. Such Plant, Materials and Temporary Works shall not be removed from the Site without the consent in writing of the Contract Holder, which Consent shall not unreasonably be withheld”.

Key Personnel: Section 7(GCC), Page 27 of 48.

Key Personnel shall be employed solely for this Contract, and the Contractor shall not reassign or reclassify or remove or replace any key personnel without the consent of the Engineer.

NLNG, against clear contract provisions poached on Contractor’s key personnel (Encl. No.22 & 23) deliberately.

    • Construction: Page 31 of 48 Article 13.0, Clause 13.2 says: “The Contractor shall be responsible for taking due account of the Site Conditions, climate and incidence of inclement weather on Site, which may include periods of very heavy rainfall and a high level of ground water. The Company (NLNG) shall not make any additional payments, or pay for any standing time for personnel and Equipment if the Contractor encounters such conditions unless such site conditions are considered as being exceptional and unforeseeable by an experienced Contractor.

(xvi).Why would NLNG pay for Standing time for Equipment and Personnel for an unforeseeable  and exceptional weather conditions and not pay for Macobarb standing time for Equipment and Personnel when NLNG subjected Macobarb to exceptional and unforeseeable payment denials which consequences of accruing bank interest on loan taken to realise Contract has lasted to date?


Macobarb Standby Notification of 30th July 2014 ends 13th July 2017 with involvement of NASS (Local Content Committee) to intervene between the parties- NLNG & Macobarb.

Administration Procedure-GCC: Article 3.0, Pg 25 of 48,

  • Clause 3.1 Says: “The Contract Owner in connection with this Work is Schouten, Jan Ind PP, Tel.08039055904. However, the Company may nominate other Company Personnel to act on behalf of the Contract Owner. The Contract Holder in connection with the Works is Dweller Francis PPI/1 (Telephone 0803 905 5815)
  • Clause 3.2.2 (Page 25 of 48) says “Oral Communication of instructions or information in connection with the Contract shall not be binding until confirmed in writing. Minutes of Meeting may comprise a written instruction”.
  • All Correspondence to the Company (NLNG) shall be addressed and delivered to the Contract Holder and all correspondence to the Contractor shall be addressed and delivered to the Contractor Representative nominated by the Contractor for this.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *