The Boston Globe’s Editorial on March 26, 2006 was an objective review of the Attorney General’s pursuit of the Big Dig contractors up until that date without the benefit of hindsight. Those who understood the law and the facts in this case recognized at that time the difficulty of a mega recovery from the Big Dig Contractors . Now, as new facts are uncovered and the threat of a criminal investigation are leveraged by Reilly he now has an opportunity to bring the case to another level. Those who are quick to criticize his motives should really read this informative summary and conclusions reached by the Globe.
Bos Globe .. 3/23/06………
WHEN Attorney General Thomas Reilly came up with a figure of $108 million for supposedly faulty design, engineering, and management of the Big Dig, there were the usual cries that this figure was too low, that surely more mistakes were made on a $14.6 billion project. But Reilly wanted to include only matters on which he had a reasonable chance to succeed in court. He and attorneys for the companies involved in the work need to agree on a settlement so that the state can focus on the more important task — making sure the completed Big Dig tunnels are properly maintained. Stephanie Lovell, Reilly’s top deputy, has spent more than a year working on the complaint. With the help of outside legal and engineering consultants, her team at the attorney general’s office has compiled a comprehensive list of complaints against project managers Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff and engineers who designed the many complex sections of the project.
But those who think the state should demand much more have forgotten that Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff told the Weld administration in late 1994 that the project would cost nearly $14 billion. The administration kept that estimate secret, and it wasn’t revealed until the state inspector general included it in a report in 2001. The final cost is in line with that earlier figure. How many costly mistakes could there have been?
The worst management error Bechtel/Parsons made is not included in the Reilly letter. Bechtel/Parsons has acknowledged that it failed to adequately monitor work on the I-93 tunnel that resulted in a massive leak in September 2004. It is paying to seal it off and to repair thousands of other small leaks. The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which maintains the highway, is overseeing the work. Chairman Matthew Amorello, in a telephone interview, said yesterday that total leakage is now at 25 percent of the federal limit. Pumps are easily handling this load.
Bechtel/Parsons and the other companies cited by Reilly ought to look honestly at their past performance. If failings in their work might contribute to future maintenance problems, they need to contribute to a fund for ongoing repairs as part of the settlement.
When Reilly took on cost recovery last year, as he prepared to run for governor, this page criticized him for taking campaign contributions worth $35,000 from people having business connections with the project. ”Since we took over cost recovery, we have not taken contributions from Bechtel, any subcontractors or section design consultant and that includes anyone in the demand letter,” said Corey Welford, Reilly’s campaign spokesman.
The conclusion is that the attorney general is doing this thankless task competently and above politics………”
Is Bechtel, for the first time in construction litigation history, going to settle because as you say
<
p> “[Reilly] and attorneys for the companies involved in the work need to agree on a settlement so that the state can focus on the more important task..?” And Bechtel’s motivation is what? The threat of a non law suit? By an incompetent AG? Who will be gone one way or the other in a few months? For a case we can drag on for years? When weâre not working here anymore?
<
p>
Bechtel won’t settle now, unless they have an offer they can’t refuse. They will drag and delay. Their lawyers know no other way, and their client doesn’t want to deal with it. It doesn’t seem to be affecting their ability to get new business. And they don’t have to report a loss because of a settlement. They just underestimate projections and help the quarterly numbers. And that is what it is all about. Quarterly numbers.
criminal investigation underway,. Will they settle in the future. Yes, most definately but it will be for a lot more money and because of the obvious negligence Bechtels insurance companies will probably be liable.
You have no idea what you are talking about. So don’t try. zit is embarressing.
is that Reilly is still taking contributions from contractors involved in the Big Dig contrary to what his spokesperson said. But that said I am not saying Reilly is doing a bad job or that he is corrupt. I am just pointing out a significant conflict of interest. I will reserve judgment on the investigation he is conducting until that investigation is underway in earnest.
How has this ceiling collapse at a specific part of the entire project caused by a specific and identified problem effects the litigation involved do to other specific problems at other specific parts of the entire project?
<
p>
What if Bechtel’s defense is that MA government was so corrupt that they were intentionally deceived by conspiring subcontractors and MA state officials? It probably will be. That’s why Reilly want to “settle”.
<
p>
Thell me RightMiddle, why is Reilly so afraid to take this to trial. The only thing can use to threaten. Unless of course Tom tells them he will charge them all with murder unless they pony up some $$$ for the entire project.
I doubt he scares them.
<
p>
Bechtel didn’t become Bechtel by doing shoddy work. They’re no angels, but there were so many cockroaches running around in the dark on this project looking for and stealing crumbs that they all couldn’t be killed so work around them as best we can.
<
p>
Result is someone put a few extra bucks in his pocket by using not enough or sub par of something. Or both.