IDENTIFICATION AND STUDY OF CRITICAL RISKS ON CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF UNDERGROUND RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IN INDONESIA (CASE STUDY: PT. X RAIL PROJECT).

• Main Author: Rahayu Purwanti, Dwi
• Format: Theses
• Language: Indonesia
• Subjects: Teknik sipil
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/81122
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

PT.X Phase 2 train infrastructure project is a national strategic project. This is one solution to overcome the extraordinary problem of traffic congestion in the capital city. Phase 2 construction began in 2020 with estimated project completion in 2029 for Phase 2A. The progress at the construction stage in Phase 2A for Contract Package (CP) 201 was 61.77%. Implementation and construction costs are more complicated than the previous phase, therefore it is a part of the challenges. Phase 2A is going to be done in the city center where there are many public spaces, government buildings and activities. In this area there are many building utilities that need to be relocated. CP 201 project site is a cultural heritage area. These risks can trigger delays in project progress. However, these risks can be minimized or mitigated by using risk management. The aim of this research is to identify critical risks at the construction stage and develop risk controls to anticipate problems that may occur. The construction period risks reviewed in this research are based on time and cost aspects. The cost aspect research does not examine the influence of risk on the project finances. The risk management method used in this research is qualitative analysis followed by quantitative analysis. Qualitative analysis is carried out to determine the risk ranking being reviewed, then quantitative analysis is carried out at high risk levels. Quantitative analysis uses a synthetic fuzzy method which is used to analyse high-risk levels more sharply, while identifying critical risks. In this research, the fuzzy synthetic method contributes to getting a more detailed assessment of the actual perceptions of respondents, allowing for a more real analysis so as to provide a more real decision on the object of study under review. Qualitative analysis obtained a high level of risk, namely the risk variables of land acquisition problems (R19), problems of construction areas that pass through cultural heritage objects (R1), technical interface problems (R4), changes in building design during construction (R6), contents of multi-interpretation contract documents (R11), and problems on construction management (R8). The results of the fuzzy quantitative analysis obtained critical risks in the form of risk variables for land acquisition problems (R19), problems of construction areas that pass through cultural heritage objects (R1), and technical interface problems (R4). The results of this analysis were then checked by an expert for validation, showing that the three critical risk items were risks that still occur today. Land acquisition problems continue to this day because there are still land disputes. Problems in the construction area at the start of the project had an impact on project delays because there are cultural heritage objects (OCB) that had not previously been detected in detail as well as technical interface problems in the form of coordination between agencies related to licensing, land acquisition, differences in reference standards, including contracts in which OCB was discovered. The impact of these risks, especially critical risks, is delays in project progress which triggers additional costs and time. The solution is to mitigate them in order to reduce the impact of the damage so that they do not happen again. Efforts to mitigate critical risks of land acquisition include conducting an outreach regarding project development plans. Efforts made to mitigate critical variable problems in construction areas that pass through cultural heritage objects (OCB) are conducting initial data collection on construction areas and cultural heritage before the work begins, as well as, conducting geophysical surveys and pit tests to determine the existence of cultural heritage. Meanwhile, efforts to mitigate the characteristic risk of technical interface problems are made by holding joint meetings and inspections with several stakeholders. They have also been conducted by PT.X and will continue to be updated. Experts opinions are also taken into considerations in mitigation efforts, so that possible damages during the construction work can be minimized.