Owner's Engineer function in FIDIC-regulated donor projects: scope, obligations, and common gaps
Donor-financed infrastructure in Somalia increasingly uses FIDIC-based contracts with an Owner's Engineer supervising an EPC contractor. The OE role is frequently under-scoped, and the gaps surface as claims, defects, and handover disputes. This guide sets out the mandate as it should be written, and the omissions we encounter most often.
What the Owner's Engineer is actually for
Under a FIDIC Silver Book EPC arrangement, the contractor carries design responsibility and most delivery risk. It is tempting for employers to conclude that supervision can therefore be light. The opposite is true: because the contractor controls design, the employer's only systematic protection is a technically capable representative reviewing what is designed, witnessing what is tested, and certifying what is claimed. That is the Owner's Engineer.
The OE mandate spans design review against the employer's requirements, factory and site inspection, witnessing of Factory Acceptance Tests, construction supervision and QA/QC, review of interim payment applications, management of variations and claims, commissioning oversight, and administration of the defects notification period through to final handover.
The five gaps we encounter most
First, design review scoped as a courtesy rather than a control: the OE receives drawings for information, with no hold points and no obligation on the contractor to resolve comments before procurement. Second, FAT witnessing budgeted for one visit when the equipment schedule requires several factories on several continents; the unwitnessed tests are always the ones that matter later. Third, no presence at critical concealed works, earthing systems, cable trenches, and foundations, which cannot be inspected after closure. Fourth, payment certification treated as arithmetic rather than verification, so milestones are paid against paperwork rather than inspected progress. Fifth, the OE demobilised at taking-over, leaving no technical representative during the defects notification period, precisely when disputes over performance guarantees arise.
Writing the mandate properly
The corrective is procedural and inexpensive relative to the risk. Define hold points and witness points in the employer's requirements, not just the OE's terms of reference, so they bind the contractor. Budget FAT witnessing against the actual equipment origin schedule. Require the OE to maintain a site presence matched to the construction programme's critical path, not a fixed monthly visit count. Tie payment certification to physically verified progress. And retain a reduced OE function through the defects period with a defined role in performance testing and final acceptance.
- 01Under EPC contracts, the OE is the employer's only systematic technical protection.
- 02Bind hold and witness points into the employer's requirements themselves.
- 03Budget FAT witnessing against the real equipment origin schedule.
- 04Keep an OE presence through the defects notification period.