MaltaToday previous editions

MT 7 June 2015

Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/523863

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 3 of 59

maltatoday, SUNDAY, 7 JUNE 2015 4 News CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 Smith wrote the memo after receiving a copy of a concrete test accompa- nied by a number of observations, showing that questions over the veracity of the tests and quality of concrete used were being raised. This is further evidenced by a comment by Smith who asks whether there would be a failure if the entire sample were to be "dis- carded". The original contract clause re- quired two test samples at 28 days, with the pass or fail criteria being the average of the results. The clause, Smith explained, al- lowed for a test result to be dis- carded if a "test manifests evidence of improper sampling, molding or testing". If both show such evi- dence the entire test would have been discarded. "Skanska are testing three cubes at 28 days, which is good. If we have two results close and a third a lot lower, then that one would be discarded and the average of the two higher would give a pass result. "Ortesa [subcontractor] are sniff- ing around this issue thinking they can make some capital out of this, and are very keen on core tests. My feeling is that concrete will pass a core test, particularly with the ex- tra time it has to cure." Smith concluded that: "there are grounds for Skanska to argue successfully that the concrete test results comply with the letter of specification. I still maintain that the individual test results, due to their ranges, are poor (r*****h). We should instruct Skanska to take one core of one of the deliveries in question. This should satisfy honours all round, if it passes the Client will have to pay and there will be no need for further tests. If it fails then we have a big problem on our hands." Fraudulent concrete tests The first inquiry led by Sci- berras has already unearthed a letter dated 11 July, 1996 is- sued by Ortesa and addressed to PMO following a site in- spection, raising numerous concerns that the "quality of works [is] totally insufficient and not acceptable in many areas". The letter was accompanied with various photos evidenc- ing, according to Ortesa, poor quality of reinforced con- crete work and compaction, bad levels of cast concrete in walls and bad positioning and alignment of predalles (slabs). Area D1.3 featured on more than one occasion in the photos evidencing bad workmanship. The Project Management Office was set up in 1993, when architect Vince Cas- sar, together with univer- sity rector Fr Peter Serra- cino Inglott, had agreed to set up the PMO under the auspices of the Works Di- vision and Malta Univer- sity Services Ltd. In 1992, Monte Tabor Foundation – contracted with the de- sign of the hospital – ap- pointed Ortesa Spa as its subcontractor to prepare all the relevant designs. PMO had engaged At- tard Montalto as the project manager. Other architects involved were Frank Cortis and Albert Cauchi. Appearing before the inquiry, At- tard Montalto was asked whether, on the basis of present day techni- cal reports, the PMO failed in its obligations and duties especially with regard to the client's interest. According to the inquiry, Attard Montalto said: "If it results so, I am very shocked and I would nev- er have expected this based on what I believe we did correctly to ensure that things were done proper- ly. [But if it results so] something has gone wrong. You cannot deny it." The evidence given by Frank Cortis "did not elucidate much on the main scope and investigation of the board", the inquiry said. On his part, Cauchi, whose role was to review the structure and carry out onsite inspec- tions, told the in- quiry that there were various occasions when he had to stop the contractor from proceeding with cer- tain works due to bad workmanship or work practices, and had or- dered that some works be demolished. Complaints of lim- ited manpower over- seeing the works on site were also raised. The Sciberras inquiry found that most of the tests on the quality of concrete were carried out by the contractor himself with a small sample being tested by the Kordin facility of the Works Division. It transpired that only one out of every five tests was carried out by the Works Division. "The board has enough evi- dence to determine that the tests provided by the contractor are fraudulent. […] Considering the extent of the defective concrete found on site, it is evident that such defect could not be a result of genuine mistakes or failure of oversight, but must have been the result of a concerted effort from which the contractor, sup- pliers and possibly third parties benefitted." It transpired that a number of tests were rubberstamped by Blokrete Ltd but the inquiry could not be certain that Blokrete Ltd itself and its officials were direct- ly involved or the perpetrators. The inquiry traced and reviewed extensive concrete tests spanning the months from January to Sep- tember 1996. A senior technical officer at the Works Division said that the samples were not taken by Works Division officials but were deliv- ered directly by employees of the contractor to the laboratory. This was corroborated by a lab technician who confirmed that samples were brought directly to the lab by Skanska JV employees. Asked if this was the norm, Al- fred Kitcher said: "No. No. The norm is that we usually collected it ourselves." If tests fail 'then we have a big problem on our hands' The memorandum sent by Smith to Attard Montalto

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of MaltaToday previous editions - MT 7 June 2015