FOR three days in December, work stopped at an East Coast Road site where a condominium is coming up.

National Environment Agency (NEA) officers had found the Poshgrove East condo worksite unkempt and littered with water-bearing receptacles that could breed the Aedes mosquito, which spreads the dengue virus.

An NEA spokesman told The New Paper: 'Although no breeding was found on the site, it was necessary for the contractor to stop all work and spruce up the site as there was a dengue cluster in the area.'

Work was allowed to resume on 21 Dec, after the contractor had taken corrective steps.

When contacted, the contractor declined to comment.

Such a disruption is bad news for contractors as each 'non-working' day costs them thousands of dollars.

The number of stop-work orders given to construction sites because of dengue-related issues shot up almost 15-fold last year.

There were 44 such orders last year, compared with just three in 2006. This year, two orders have already been issued.

Of the orders issued last year - which lasted an average of 10 days - 35 were linked to the detection of mosquito breeding. The rest were issued for unkempt worksites.

An unkempt worksite is one with poor housekeeping and haphazard storage of materials and equipment that may cause environmental hazards such as breeding of mosquitoes, flies and rodents.

'Stop-work orders are issued when NEA assesses that immediate corrective actions are needed to clean up the site to prevent conditions which could pose a danger to public health,' said thespokesman.

During inspections, NEA officers look out for littering, improper refuse disposal and potential mosquito-breeding areas such as ground puddles, choked drains, trenches, concrete floors, lift wells, discarded articles, canvas sheets and building materials.

The spokesman said the increasing number of development projects, including en-bloc and rebuilding works, could have led to a rise in the number of stop-work orders last year.

There were 7,337 inspections at construction sites last year compared with 6,769 in 2006.

Mr Michael Thien, project manager of Eng Lam Contractors, said each day's delay has a significant monetary impact.

'We have a lot to lose, including having to pay for all the machinery and manpower on standby,' he said.

Mr Thien said the amount lost per day depends on the size and scope of a project.

He estimated that for a $10-million project lasting two years, the daily cost would be at least $10,000.

'Our reputation will also be affected, and it might be harder to get projects in the future,' he added.

Mr Thien said his company, which does mainly road and drainage projects, has not been issued a stop work order.

He said his workers usually spend an hour at the end of the day cleaning the worksite of any mess or litter.

CONTRACTORS WARY

A senior project manager, with 15 years' experience, said his company is also wary about getting caught.

'We put a lot of emphasis on housekeeping. We spend about two hours a day making sure the worksite is cleared of any debris,' said the 42-year-old, who works at a local firm.

He said the NEA appears to have stepped up inspections, with officers turning up at his worksite in the East every fortnight.

The manager said NEA officers tend to look at the overall situation at a worksite.

He added: 'If the site is generally clean and the problem is isolated, they might let us off with a fine.

'It is quite drastic for them to issue a stop-work order. It means that there is a lot of mosquito-breeding or the whole worksite is untidy.'

His company, which builds Housing Board flats and condominiums, has yet to be given a stop-work order.

Insert caption here

He also said the consequences of stop work orders are huge.

According to him, the estimated loss per day for a large project of about $100 million, with some 500 workers, is at least $150,000.

In addition to the stop-work orders, there were 868 cases of contractors being fined for mosquito-breeding offences at worksites last year, up from 617 cases in 2006.

This year, there have been about 92 cases so far.

Offending firms are liable to be fined for the first three offences and hauled to court from the fourth onwards.