Major lawsuit over the Obama presidential center

[Yankee Chronicler]

Obama Library: Behind schedule, over budget and mired in lawsuits

A federal lawsuit was filed earlier in January, accusing a New York-based construction company of discriminatory actions.

www.newsweek.com

Concrete subcontractor is suing the structural engineer, Thornton Tomasetti, alleging racial discrimination and unreasonable interference in performing their work.

Thornton Tomasetti is one of the best structural engineering firms in the world. They do major projects internationally. Anything is possible, but I find it difficult to imagine that they would act on the basis of racial bias on a project as visible as the Obama Presidential center. This could be a case to watch.

Most of Concrete Collective's "compensable costs" come from loss in labor productivity, which the lawsuit says comes from the "unexpected" project specifications, prevention of "logical flow of work" as well as the "lack of mechanical, electrical and plumbing design coordination."

I fail to see how they can blame lack of M/E/P coordination on the structural engineer. That's a real stretch. As for the "unexpected" project specifications -- I wonder if they were created after the concrete sub had signed a contract, or if the concrete sub assumed some lesser standard specifications and was then caught by surprise when they actually read the specifications they had agreed to follow.

 

[Wstubbs]

Yeah, sounds like they didn't build it to plan

 

[redeyedfly]

I fail to see how they can blame lack of M/E/P coordination on the structural engineer.

This happens all the time. If structural had the info for coordination and missed it, then it is on them.

This project is very large and has multiple staged bid packages. It's very messy, and I wouldn't presume anything.

 

[ICE]

Obama Library: Behind schedule, over budget and mired in lawsuits

A federal lawsuit was filed earlier in January, accusing a New York-based construction company of discriminatory actions.

www.newsweek.com

Concrete subcontractor is suing the structural engineer, Thornton Tomasetti, alleging racial discrimination and unreasonable interference in performing their work.

Thornton Tomasetti is one of the best structural engineering firms in the world. They do major projects internationally. Anything is possible, but I find it difficult to imagine that they would act on the basis of racial bias on a project as visible as the Obama Presidential center. This could be a case to watch.



I fail to see how they can blame lack of M/E/P coordination on the structural engineer. That's a real stretch. As for the "unexpected" project specifications -- I wonder if they were created after the concrete sub had signed a contract, or if the concrete sub assumed some lesser standard specifications and was then caught by surprise when they actually read the specifications they had agreed to follow.

If the project is a federal government affair the specifications for the concrete include minutia regarding the placement that fills paragraphs...pages even. I worked a federal job at Beale Air Force Base as an inspector for a series of water tanks. I don't recall the size but 'parking lot' fits. When I read the specs I came to the conclusion that we should call the whole thing off.

 

[mtlogcabin]

The lawsuit alleges that Thornton Tomasetti made an "improper and unanticipated decision to impose rebar spacing and tolerance requirements that differed from the American Concrete Institute standards," which, in addition to "Thornton Tomasetti's excessively rigorous and unnecessary inspection and Request for Information process," resulted in "millions of dollars in losses to II in One and Concrete Collective."

I guess the concrete company never worked for Wal-Mart

 

[Yikes]

ICE, I don't think Presidential libraries are "government projects" (GSA) per se. But they are high-profile enough that the concrete specs will not only have structural requirements but also aesthetic / finish requirements.

"The lawsuit alleges that Scott Schnieder, senior principal and structural engineering practice co-leader at Thornton Tomasetti, sent the Obama Foundation a memorandum suggesting 'the construction issues were all unequivocally driven by the underperformance and inexperience of the concrete sub-contractor.'"
Depends on what they mean by "suggesting". Outside of court testimony itself, my attorney would advise me to revise it to:
"In my opinion, the construction issues were all unequivocally driven by the underperformance and inexperience of the concrete sub-contractor."

The lawsuit alleges that Thornton Tomasetti made an "improper and unanticipated decision to impose rebar spacing and tolerance requirements that differed from the American Concrete Institute standards," which, in addition to "Thornton Tomasetti's excessively rigorous and unnecessary inspection and Request for Information process," resulted in "millions of dollars in losses to II in One and Concrete Collective."

On a project of that size and prestige, the specs won't merely be assumed. They will be clearly established in the spec book, as will the RFI process. And if the engineer's preferred spec exceeds ACI standards, that is irrelevant; the contractor has to follow the contract documents. If they didn't anticipate the stricter specs, it's either because (A) they never read the spec book and/or took it seriously, (B) the spec wasn't yet issued at time of bid, in which case the contractor had an opportunity to ask for a change order to cover work associated with the more stringent specs; or (C) the general contractor failed to provide the specs to the sub prior to bid, in which case the GC would need to eat the sub's change order.

Likewise, inspection would only delay the project if (1) inspectors were unavailable upon reasonable request (legit change order), or (2) the contractor failed to call for inspection in a timely manner (not a change order), or (3) the workmanship repeatedly failed to make spec.

The only way a contractor can blame the RFI "process" is if they didn't take seriously the part in the specs where it says how many days the engineering firm has to respond to RFIs. Most engineers will be responsive to field requests, but when they sense the contractor is abusing the process, or using RFIs in lieu reading the plans closely for themselves, an engineer may not be inclined to fast-rack responses quicker than the contractual requirement.

 

[bill1952]

improper and unanticipated decision to impose rebar spacing and tolerance requirements that differed from the American Concrete Institute standards

Do we know the "impositions" were in the contract documents when the contract was agreed to? Just seems oddly worded.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Do we know the "impositions" were in the contract documents when the contract was agreed to? Just seems oddly worded.

No, we don't. Since stumbling across this initial article, I have searched out and read several more. They all say pretty much the same thing, and it's all based on statements by the concrete subcontractor. The engineers are letting their attorneys do the talking, in court -- which is the best way to handle it. However, the foundation that's actually building the complex has stated that they do not believe there was any racial bias on the part of the engineers.

I would like to see more photos of defective work, to get a sense of how extensive and how prevalent it is.

 

[Yikes]

Regarding additional photos: It’s also possible that once the initial defective work became apparent, that necessitated closer and more frequent inspection, to prevent more defective work from occurring.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Hmmm ...

Chicago removed most of Chapter 1 of the IBC, leaving provisions regarding enforcement of the code to be addressed by a muncipal code that I don't have access to. But they retained Chapter 17, Special Inspections.

1704.4 Contractor Responsibility​

Each contractor responsible for the construction of a seismic force-resisting system, designated seismic system or a seismic force-resisting component listed in the statement of special inspections shall submit a written statement of responsibility to the owner prior to the commencement of work on the system or component. The contractor's statement of responsibility shall contain acknowledgement of awareness of the special requirements contained in the statement of special inspections.

So, in theory, the concrete subcontractor was aware that its work was subject to special inspections.

1705.3 Concrete Construction​

Special inspections and tests of concrete construction shall be performed in accordance with this section and Table 1705.3.

I won't try to reproduce Table 1705.3. It doesn't appear to have been changed from the ICC version. It includes all the standard special inspection tasks for concrete so if, for example, rebar wasn't placed properly, the contractor would have been required to correct the misplacement before making the pour -- or else possibly tear it out after the pour and start over. It appears to me, on the basis of almost zero real information, that the contractor did sloppy work and didn't expect to be required to correct it.

 

[Yikes]

Further in the article, it says the concrete contractor made a “Request for Equitable Adjustment” (REA). I don’t typically encounter that, but as near as I can tell, it’s a term of art in government contracts, so maybe ICE was right about it being a government project. Apparently REA is a change order request wrapped up in less confrontational terminology.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Presidential libraries are not government contracts. It may be a "term of art" in that part of the country, or perhaps a term that was used in the contract documents. I understood it basically to mean a change order.

 

[LR419]

The REA might be a formal way of restating the language in AIA A201 General Conditions. For example, in 12.1.2: "If a portion of the Work has been covered ... the Architect may request to see such Work and it shall be uncovered by the Contractor. If such work is in accordance with the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall be entitled to an equitable adjustment to the Contract Sum and Contract Time as may be appropriate...." Similar language is used in reference to concealed/unknown conditions, and for nonconforming work that the Owner accepts rather than requiring removal and correction.

 

[ICE]

necessitated closer and more frequent inspection, to prevent more defective work from occurring.

That's not how the game is played.

 

[redeyedfly]

That's not how the game is played.

That's exactly how it works.

 

[ICE]

That's exactly how it works.

It has not been my experience that an inspection prevents defective work from occurring. If that was the case, the threat of an inspection would have an effect. Sometimes I suspect that the work was done so wrong just for me.

 

[redeyedfly]

It has not been my experience that an inspection prevents defective work from occurring. If that was the case, the threat of an inspection would have an effect. Sometimes I suspect that the work was done so wrong just for me.

Building departments don't typically do rebar inspections on commercial work, special inspectors do that. When special inspectors or engineers find errors during their observations, the typical response is to increase the frequency of inspections and observations.

 

[ICE]

Building departments don't typically do rebar inspections on commercial work,

I always performed rebar inspection on commercial work. Special inspectors can’t approve the work and engineers are terrible inspectors.

 

[steveray]

Building departments don't typically do rebar inspections on commercial work, special inspectors do that. When special inspectors or engineers find errors during their observations, the typical response is to increase the frequency of inspections and observations.

They rarely find errors and I always do....To the extent that two companies will never do business in my municipality again....

 

[redeyedfly]

They rarely find errors and I always do....To the extent that two companies will never do business in my municipality again...

They ALWAYS find errors. They're fixed before you ever show up on site.

 

[redeyedfly]

I always performed rebar inspection on commercial work. Special inspectors can’t approve the work and engineers are terrible inspectors.

That's very odd for most of the US. Special inspectors DO approve work and engineers NEVER do inspections, they perform observations which is very different.

 

[BN4537]

Building departments don't typically do rebar inspections on commercial work, special inspectors do that. When special inspectors or engineers find errors during their observations, the typical response is to increase the frequency of inspections and observations.

This is typical here. We will do the inspections if the RDP didn't call for the special inspections, but we rarely have problems on commercial jobs.

When engineers get involved we end up seeing way more rebar than we would see on an IRC house. I have no idea if that reflects poorly on our IRC houses or if the engineers just build in that much cushion. It is presumed to be drastic overkill by the contractors.

 

[steveray]

They ALWAYS find errors. They're fixed before you ever show up on site.

So this was a new build for Dollar General and this was after the rebar debacle...:

Nick,
I just want to be very clear about this....The designer/structural engineer of record is accepting responsibility for the structural adequacy of hangers not being installed in accordance with manufacturers installation instructions, trusses missing their metal connecting plates, trusses being damaged, trusses installed with bracing not matching the truss sheets? Because that is what I am seeing in the field and in the attached pictures and what we need a specific approval of.

 

[ICE]

They ALWAYS find errors. They're fixed before you ever show up on site.

Those errors are documented in a report.

That's very odd for most of the US. Special inspectors DO approve work and engineers NEVER do inspections, they perform observations which is very different.

Well California is used to being called odd. I was not aware that Special Inspectors had the authority to sign job cards to approve work outside of Ca. Inspectors here approve the work.

And by the way, an engineer's observation is mostly meaningless. Perhaps they have value with bridges and dams, high rises and power plants but we require them for mundane projects like houses and shopping centers, which is a waste of money.