The main contractor required a particular type of steel for the reinforced cages that were being built, however they did not state any further specification aside from it having to be GFRP (glass fibre reinforced polymer).
The subcontractor assumed a lower grade of this material, which only gave it a 60 year life span, within their tender submission. However there is no clarification / assumption within the WI - in fact there is no mention of this specification or any specification within the WI.
The tendered price was accepted. During design meetings, the main contractor provided a steel specification document stating that in fact the GFRP had to be of a higher grade (120 year life span).
This is new / additional information to the WI but not necessarily new scope (as the subcontractor was always down to use this material). However can the subcontractor refer to clause 60.1 (1) as isn’t the WI being changed by this additional specification being added in? Or is it that as it was assumed at time of tender, now that the actual specification has been provided, it’s a matter of recovering the defined costs but not a change in the Total of the Prices? Because if it was the other way around e.g. the higher grade of GFRP had been assumed but the lower grade was actually required, would the subcontractor then be required to generate a negative CE reducing the Total of the Prices?
This is based on an NEC 3 Option C.
Your assistance on this matter would be greatly appreciated.