Company construction company Odebrecht assured in a reply signed by director Erlon Afellio, sent to this newspaper, that as the construction company of the Pascuales Cuenca project had no legal obligation to carry out soil studies at the Pascuales Cuenca terminal, part of the Pascuales Cuenca pipeline system, but which warned in 2014 Petroecuador, about the existing problems in the design and study of the soil that was carried out previously Caminosca, However, he also claimed that Petroecuador requested the continuation of the works. This happened in 2015, during the government of Rafael Correa and the administration of manager Marco Calvopiña.

In a letter dated March 28, Odebrecht Ingeniería y Construcción (OEC) explains that a previous note published on March 23 in the newspaper EL UNIVERSO incorrectly stated that the damage that occurred at the Cuenca terminal Pascuales Poliducto Cuenca was caused by Odebrecht “did not carry out the necessary soil surveys and after the gas balls were built, the land started to sink.” The note alluded to the transfer of spheres that will now go to the Chorrillos sector and the reasons for this transfer, all based on Petroecuador’s explanations.

However, Odebrecht clarified that in Ecuador, contracts for the execution of public works are carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Organic Law of the National Public Procurement System (Losncp): “Before starting the pre-contractual procedure, in accordance with the nature of contracting, the entity must have complete, final updated studies and designs, plans and calculations”.

In this sense, it is understood that the contractor does not design the works, does not make studies, because they must be made by another company before the start of the construction of the project. In the case of changes or adjustments to the design or project, “the contracting party or the inspection shall submit new drawings or adjustments”. Therefore “Odebrecht never had any obligation to carry out any kind of design or study, but should have built the work based on the design previously prepared by a third party and delivered to EP Petroecuador under its responsibility for the bidding, contracting and construction of the Pascuales Cuenca multi-channel pipeline”, he says. company.

In addition, the private company said that despite the fact that Odebrecht does not, nor has it had any obligation to carry out any kind of study or design, It conducted several geotechnical campaigns and “warned EP Petroecuador in a timely manner about the poor design and soil conditions present in the Cuenca terminal.”

In this regard, he cites the official letter of the ODB EPP 111 04 16 2014 in which the company is told that “given the conditions of uncertainty and instability, the project delivered by Caminosca is not sustainable. Therefore, considering that the Cuenca terminal is a critical route, we repeat the request for the approval of one of the alternatives presented through the official letter ODB EPP 093 03 04 2014, with the scope sent by the official letter ODB EPP 103 09 04 2014″.

Odebrecht also clarifies that these The state company ignored the warnings and decided to continue with the project. For this purpose, it cites another official letter numbered 11056 PRY TRA 2014 dated May 5, in which Petroecuador states: “Attached to this document is official letter 07/073/230414, through which the contract inspection 2013299, EGIS International, sends a report on the geotechnical review of the Cuenca terminal and the conclusions submitted by Odebrecht, based on whose conclusions It was agreed to continue with the existing implementation and that is part of the contract”…

It also shows that work on the Cuenca terminal has been completed from May 2014 to May 2015 without damage or water leaks and they remained stable until March 2016, when a spot of moisture appeared on one of the slopes, which was quickly repaired. Starting with the April 2016 earthquake and successive aftershocks, other sources of water began to appear in other areas (slopes) of the Cuenca terminal.

Both Odebrecht and Nadzor reported, Odebrecht says, in writing to EP Petroecuador, about the need to carry out additional geotechnical analyzes and studies to correct these unforeseen instabilities in the projects submitted by EP Petroecuador under its responsibility, but the state company did not have the resources nor did it define solutions or take corrective action, citing that it did not have a budget line for it, “leaving a latent problem that Petroecuador was clearly aware of since 2016,” he says.

In October 2017, EP Petroecuador decided to unilaterally terminate the construction contract and executed a performance bond in the amount of $18.5 million. “It is unknown how EP Petroecuador used these resources,” he says.

In the end, Odebrecht indicates that the problems that appeared at the Cuenca terminal could be easily corrected, and the only reason for this is the indifference shown by the EP Petroecuador towards this situation, which it knew about since 2016 and which it had the obligation to solve. unilaterally by terminating the contract in 2018.