If it is identified that some aspects of the works/services are better suited to an Option A but other aspects/sections of the Scope would better lend themselves to Option E, can you split this under one contract or would you need to implement 2 contracts that split those works/services under one Contractor?
In theory you probably could split different pricing options to different sections of work. However, it would be very complicated to draft provisions that would manage that effectively and far easier, cheaper and simpler to have two separate by linked contracts.
As an example, I have seen phased contracts where there is a single over arching contract broken into, say, three phases as 1) feasibility and initial design, Option A, 2) Site clearance and remediation Option E, Construct Option C.
That works where they run consecutively with opportunities to break but running them concurrently in different site location or different types of interlinked delivery while theoretically possible would be very difficult to draft for.
I disagree with Rob ! I think it would be relatively easy to draft something, BUT I think it would potentially be quite hard to administrate as, with the best will in the world :
- the Contractor would naturally want to allocate costs to the option E part as these are fully reimbursable and any savings on the option A part would be 100% profit, while
- the Employer would naturally want the opposite.
And that is with both Parties playing it straight. If one decided to play games, then it would be a recipe for disaster.