Tear it out at Someone Else's Expense

There has been a problem with a concrete pour at the Sewer Treatment Plant project. Apparently the concrete did not meet the specification of the project in the specification book or as interpreted in the prints, however the concrete did exceed the strength tests. According to the Engineer the Concrete needed a fiber reinforcement additive in order for it to work properly for its intended use. The total amount of the concrete that needed to be coated , if kept, or jack hammered out and replaced was approx. 4 yards. The concrete may have worked, however it would need to be inspected annually and possibly coated with a concrete coating referred to as Xypex. This may have cost added maintenance, and problems due to freeze and thaw of sewage. This area would have been submersed in sewerage at all times during normal plant operation. I have copied below a list of questions in which I asked of the contractor when I was asked to accept this. I did not accept this and it was the opinion of the Engineer, Floyd Browne, that it be removed and replaced with the correct concrete per specification. This problem was not done deliberately from what I understand. I have also attached a second email in which I received a response from Floyd Browne, that the Village will not be held liable or have to pay any additional costs associated with the replacement of this concrete.

-----> BELOW IS A LIST OF QUESTIONS WHICH I SUBMITTED TO THE CONTRACTOR BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION MEETING LAST FRIDAY REGARDING THE CONCRETE MISHAP
I spoke with two members of Council. Due to the fact this may have adverse affects in the future I am going to have to default this decision to Council. I can attempt to have the Chairman call an emergency Public Works meeting, and see what they would recommend. The Council Meeting approval could not happen until Thursday the 15th of the month.
I would recommend that a proposal is submitted in writing on behalf of Sunesis outlining the product, which i did review the specification. It needs to be something that is official, legal, and binding. Our legal counsel would have to approve it. I do know that the Council will take Floyd Browne and Burgess and Niple's recommendations into consideration. This is an important decision, and it will ultimatley affect the entire community.
Some questions I have and have been asked of me, from Two Council Members:
Who is going to inspect yearly for reapplication?
Who is going to reapply material?
Who is paying for this added maintenance?
Who is going to purchase the Xypex for future applications?
Who will stand behind the warranty of the product?
What if the product does not work and the warranty is void due to application issues?
Will the plant have to be taken offline for this maintenance in the future?
How long will the plant have to be shut down?
Can the system handle a shutdown?
Will it be easy to clean areas for reapplication if needed?
How clean does the area have to be during reapplication?
Who will be responsible for draining and cleaning for reapplication?
How long will the maintenance take if reapplication is needed?
What if cracks occur in the future and Xypex does not work?
How long is he warranty? (given the fact that the plant will be good for the next 20-30yrs)
What if a company who stands behind the warranty goes out of business? Is there a backup?



EMAIL BELOW REGARDING THE LIABILITY AND COST OF REPLACING THE CONCRETE. JIM DID REPLY WITH APPROVAL AND SAID THE EMAIL IS CORRECT AND THE VILLAGE WILL NOT HAVE TO PAY ANYTHING FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE WRONG CONCRETE WITH THE CORRECT CONCRETE PER SPECIFICATION ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEER, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTRACTOR.
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 9:02 AM
To: James J. Klamet
Cc: Fred Beery
Subject: Construction Meeting Follow Up from 5-8-09



Jim,
I thought about the Construction meeting over the weekend. I just wanted to be clear
what I understood and took away from the meeting on Friday. Today, weather permitting, Sunesis would be removing the concrete that was poured wrong per the specifications and replacing with the correct grade concrete. I believe from the meeting that everyone agreed that the concrete would not work, was not correct, and it either had to be removed or sealed. It was the recommendation of Floyd Browne that it needed to be removed and replaced with the correct concrete per the specifications and the plans. From my standpoint and on the Village of Lynchburgs behalf, I do not believe the Village government or community should be responsible in any way to pay for the unfortunate event of removing and repouring the concrete, that has to be done because it did not meet the specifications of the project portrayed within the plans and or spec book. I believe that the cost, if any should arise out of this re pour should be borne by the Contractor, Sunesis, and or Floyde Browne, the Engineer. In conclusion, from the Friday meeting it was clear to me the Village will not be burden with additional responsibility, costs, or liability for this issue, and that we have done everything within our power to maintain a project has been done in the best interest of the community and with quality workmanship.
Jeremy Shaffer
Village of Lynchburg
937-364-2241

Wastewater Treatment Phase Progress Slowed Again

There have been a few hang ups throughout this small and short Phase One Project to build new head works at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Each time something happens it move the schedule further off track. Currently the Project is thirty days off schedule. Since the Village is under Findings and Orders from the EPA, this is a cause for concern. The EPA has been notified, and does realize it is not due to fault of the Village of Lynchburg.
REcently, the on site resident representative was at the end of his contract. The resident rep. acts as the eyes and ears for the Engineer and the Village. He keeps record of progress, potential problems, and changes during the project. He is like an inspector. Since the time of the project was extended, the Public Works committee and myself believe it was necessary to have someone on sight to oversee daily activities. So he was extended through Floyd Browne for another few weeks at a reduced schedule. The resident rep. will be on site when work is happening.
Now, there seems to be a problem with the wrong specification of concrete poured in the project. A grade was used that did not contain a fiber reinforcement.The spec. book apparently called for reinforcement. This may slow the project since there is some disagreement with what to do to repair the issue. There are two options. First is two jackhammer the concrete and re pour it. Second would be to coat the current concrete with a formula that may prevent cracking. There has not been a decision made. I just want everyone to know the progress and assure them, that I will hold everyone to the schedule, keep the cost down, and only approve quality workmanship on this project. I have attached a couple emails below that may help everyone better understand the situation.

May 4th (1st Correspondence)

Mayor/Aaron. Attached is the reply from our structural engineer with respect to the lack of fiber reinforcement in the fillet walls at the screen structure. The bottom line is that there is no product that will totally eliminate the occurrence of shrinkage cracks in the concrete once it has been placed. The Xypex product submitted does meet wastewater plant applications and will provide an integral water proofing condition at the surface of the concrete which will certainly seal any cracks that have developed in the curing process to date. But the Xypex product will require a continued maintenance program, since shrinkage cracks can continue to form.

If Sunesis and the Village can agree upon an extended warranty of this condition past the one year warranty, the Xypex treatment if installed per the manufacturer’s strict specifications, could be considered as an alternative to the total removal and replacement of the fillet walls.

James J. Klamet
Director

Floyd Browne Group

MAy 4th (2nd Correspondence)

Mayor/Aaron,

The specification for the fillet concrete is clearly spelled out in section 03300. It may have required clarification in the form of an RFI prior to placement of the fillet concrete, but this was not initiated by Sunesis. Although the concrete placed is sufficient in strength and the proper air entrained admixture for freeze-thaw protection is present, the ability for shrinkage cracks will continue to persist. The surface treatments proposed will certainly protect against any adverse effects of current shrinkage cracks. There is still a high probability that future shrinkage cracks can develop. Hence, the need for an extended warranty and future re-application of this proposed product may be required.

It is our structural engineer’s opinion that the Xypex system is a product better suited for this application, but only used in conjunction with an extended warranty from Sunesis. We support our structural consultant’s recommendation only. Short of that recommendation, the existing fillet concrete must be removed and replaced to meet the plan specification.

James J. Klamet
Director

Floyd Browne Group

The WasteWater Treatment Plant Inspection UnNecessary

I have copied an email i Received yesterday below. It seems that the Ohio Dept. Of Commerce, Industrial Compliance Division does not need to inspect. It is exempt from the Ohio Building Code according to the email. So I assume that the Violation will disappear and that the project will continue on without any third party inspections.Look below for the emailed information.

Jeremy

RE: Notice of Violation

Tuesday, April 28, 2009 6:51 PM

From:

"James J. Klamet"

View contact details

To:

"J Shaffer" , "James E. Gabriel, P.E." , "Don Seaton" , "Jay W. Shutt, P.E."

Cc:

"Mac McCauley, P.E."

Mayor,

I just want to assure you that I did speak to Geoff Eaton (Bureau Chief & Assistant Chief Building Official) at the Bureau of Building Code Compliance today. He verified that this project does not need to be inspected by the State since the structures involved are exempt from the OBBC inspection requirements. He apologized for the oversight by his staff in requiring a plan submittal last Fall. He will also refund the building permit fees that the Village paid for (@$1,600). I need to provide the Village Tax ID number to complete this request for reimbursement. Please have Kim e-mail this number to me as soon as possible.

James J. Klamet

Official Notice of Violation

I have uploaded the Notice of Violation. I received this today from the State Building Inspector assigned to this project. I hope this explains the snag I mentioned a few days ago. I have other letters, one that I sent to the Engineer regarding the importance of this project and growing concerns. I have received a copy of a letter that was submitted to the Department of Commerce, by Floyd Browne CEO, Jay Shutt, in response to the Violation.
It is important that we understand the repercussions of this, the Village is under an EPA mandate, this project is funded with public Money, the community needs the increased capacity etc... It is important that the project is done correctly the first time. I have been doing my best to make sure that the project is being done in the best interest of the community.

WWTP Phase One Has a Snag

The improvements to the Waste water treatment plant have been going smooth until this week. The expected substantial completion was going to be around the first of May. AT the last construction update, on Friday April 10, there were a few new updates that the Engineer, Floyd Browne, had not taken into account on the electrical portion of the job. The Engineer presented me with work directive three. This was a change order to the electric portion calling for larger wire and service to handle the larger wet well and potable water pumps throughout the project. The contractor noted that they would need extra time due to delays on the electrical and due to some weather days during the course of the winter. This will probably set the substantial completion off by 30 days or more. All parties seemed to believe that the project would be completed in time for the final inspection and final completion dates.
On April 23rd, the State inspectors for building and electrical were present at the job site. The electrical inspector told the Electricians to proceed, however the Engineer needed to submit changes to the State of Ohio for the electrical updates. The building or structural inspector reported that there was a violation, due to the fact he had not been notified of the projects progress and this was the first time he had been on site. He did report a violation and informed the engineer, Floyd Browne, that they were to submit a letter and supporting documentation of the progress and take responsibility for the work that had been done and not inspected. Throughout this project, I had asked about inspections several times, which seemed to fall on deaf ears. This may, and will probably slow the project completion. It will depend on how quickly the Engineering firm works to repair the situation. The site representative, for the engineer, has taken pictures and notes throughout the project.
The contractor, Sunesis, has seemed to have done good work and has been particular throughout the project thus far. I do not want to make this sound good or bad, at this point I do not know. It is very disturbing that the State inspectors have not been kept informed as they should have. I have sent letters and emails expressing my concerns to the engineer, Floyd Browne.
The next scheduled Construction Meeting will be held on Friday May 8th at 10am at the Municipal Building