Sunday, September 7, 2014

Deficiencies in Project Management in Construction of the Silver Spring Transit Center

This is taken from a presentation that Ed Blansitt, Montgomery County Inspector General, gave on 
September 3, 2014 to the annual conference of the Federal Audit Executive Committee (FAEC), Council 
of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in Alexandria VA.



"The County will be looking to you as the SER (Structural Engineer of Record) to provide us guidance in this issue. We are all sensitive to keeping with schedule, but that should not keep us from doing what is right for the long term of the facility." 
Donald Scheuerman, Jr., Chief, Project Management Section, DGS 
October 28, 2010

Almost four years later Montgomery County is making repairs to the "severely compromised" Silver Spring Transit Center "to meet Building Code and WMATA requirements".




Mr. Scheuerman, what happened? Clearly, those responsible did not follow through on your charge to "do what is right for the long term of the Silver Spring Transit Center". Who's responsible for this failure?

Stop the madness! Do not open the Silver Spring Transit Center (now scheduled for "some time in 2015") until an independent criminal investigation has been completed and made public.


the "smoking gun"...
(although many would argue that KCE's March 15, 2013 report is the REAL smoking gun...)

this is taken from a presentation made by Ed Blansitt, Montgomery County Inspector General, to the Federal Audit Executive Committee (FAEC) annual conference, Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, on 9/3/14:

Deficiencies in Project Management in Construction of the Silver Spring Transit Center
Ed Blansitt, IG, Montgomery County, MD OIG
Mike Morgan, AIG, Montgomery County, MD OIG

2014 FAEC Annual Conference
September 3rd & 4th. 2014 
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO)
600 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314

Link:  http://www.ignet.gov/faec-september-agenda-2014.html
  • Click on the “Slides” hotlink for Blansitt's presentation (10:30-11:20).
  • A Microsoft PowerPoint (.ppsx) file will be downloaded.
  • Double click on the .ppsx file to view the presentation slides.

"April 2010. Montgomery County Department of Permitting Services inspector raises concern that post tensioning of the slabs and girders with the built in wall would create a zone of cracking in the slabs along certain points."

"March 2013. KCE Structural Engineers issues report on the SSTC stating the facility is 'severely compromised' and requires extensive remedial strengthening and repair to meet Building Code and WMATA requirements."

"Advisory group commissioned by the County Executive projects completion around April 2015 at a cost of $131 million."

"IG (concludes):
  - weak or ineffective project controls
    - could and should have directly controlled the construction activities
    - weak concrete in structure could have been avoided
      - strength of in-situ concrete significantly lower than construction specimens even after 1+ yr.
  - weaker concrete acted to exacerbate other deficiencies
    - slab thickness (or lack thereof)
    - pour strip reinforcing and tensions (stresses)
    - (deficient) design
    - stress cracking due to tendon tensioning
  - (deficient) cold weather curing 
  - data documenting deficiencies existed--was not analyzed
  - independent peer review (should have been performed)
  - independent construction manager (should have been hired)"

On the last two points, why are an independent peer review and an independent construction manager necessary? Why can't Montgomery County staff perform these functions? Is it because of conflict of interest resulting from Montgomery County noncompetitively choosing the builder/contractor, the design engineer and the concrete tester/inspector and special quality inspector (public-private partnership), instead of them being selected competitively, as is the case with most large public works' projects? Were political contribution$ involved in the $$TC's public-private partnership $election proce$$?

Finally, why isn’t Mr. Blansitt giving his presentation at public meetings so that those who are paying for the SSTC, you and me (53% federal funding, 11% MD, 36% County), can ask our questions and provide our comments on the public record?





Can there be any doubt: 
  • that the Silver Spring Transit Center is a lemon? 
  • that it will be expensive to operate and to maintain because of its inherent flaws, not the least of which is its complete lack of expansion/contraction joints?
  • that the SSTC poses legitimate public safety concerns?
  • that the SSTC is a waste of federal, state and county funds?
  • that Montgomery County, the Maryland Transit Administration and the Federal Transit Administration have failed to protect the public with the $130+ million lemon SSTC?
  • that the news media have failed us by not reporting this story "in depth" and by not asking "probing questions"?
  • that those who pay for public works, you and me, get ripped off by public-private partnerships?
  • that nobody cares?


We tend not to think about the effects that normal temperature changes can have on manmade structures that aren't designed and built to accommodate them. But, who can forget January 28, 1986 and the space shuttle Challenger disaster?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disaster 


"The Rogers Commission found NASA's organizational culture and decision-making processes had been key contributing factors to the accident. NASA managers had known contractor Morton Thiokol's design of the SRBs contained a potentially catastrophic flaw in the O-rings since 1977, but failed to address it properly. They also disregarded warnings (an example of "go fever") from engineers about the dangers of launching posed by the low temperatures of that morning and failed to adequately report these technical concerns to their superiors.
What Rogers did not highlight was that the vehicle was never certified to operate in temperatures that low. The O-rings, as well as many other critical components, had no test data to support any expectation of a successful launch in such conditions. Bob Ebeling from Thiokol delivered a biting analysis: "[W]e're only qualified to 40 degrees ...'what business does anyone even have thinking about 18 degrees, we're in no man's land.'"

Silver Spring Transit Center



No comments:

Post a Comment