August 18, 1995 - MTA Construction Non-Conformance...

Los Angeles County

Hetropoiitan

Transportation

Authoril~

8,8 West Seventh Street

Suite 3oo

Los Angeles, CA 9oo~7

2~3.623.1~94

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

August 18, 1995

MTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

STANLEY G. PHERNAMBUCQ~.

MTA CONSTRUCTION NONCONFORMANCE REPORTS

Attached is the first transmittal of Nonconformance Reports (NCRs)requested by the MTA Board of Directors. These reports will be given to theBoard Secretary’s office each Friday for transmittal to the Board on thefollowing Monday. The attached NCRs cover the period of July 18 - August17, 1995.

Following are a few guidelines regarding NCRs that may help clarify someissues.

¯ Instructions for filling out the NCRs are attached to this letter.

¯ Anyone employed on MTA projects may write an NCR.

¯ Most NCRs are written by the Lead Quality Control Inspectors.

¯ The nonconforming condition will be validated by a Lead Inspector even ifsomeone else writes the NCR.

The Board may receive the same NCR more than once because severalstages are required for completion of an NCR.

¯ In Stage One the nonconforming condition is identified and sent tothe person listed in Block 11.

¯ In Stage Two the person or agency in Block 11 lists the root causeof the problem and the corrective action necessary to preventrecurrence -- Blocks 13 and 14.

¯ In Stage Three the Resident Engineer accepts or rejects the itemsin Blocks 13 and 14 and determines if the situation requiresEngineering Management Consultant (EMC) approval. "Repair" "Use-as-is" dispositions require EMC approval. Other conditionscan be dispositioned by the Resident Engineer.

¯ Stage Four is the verification that the nonconforming condition hasbeen corrected and the NCR is then signed off in Block 22 andclosed.

¯ NCRs are a "closed loop" system in that the NCR is closed by thesame person, or designee, who validates it initially.

MTA Board of DirectorsAugust 11, 1995

On some occasions more than one stage of the NCR will have been completed prior totransmittal to the MTA Board. On others, the NCR may be updated one stage at atime.

It is often not possible to respond to NCRs by the due date. When this happens, theNCR is placed on a delinquent list and tracked until closure.

If the Board would prefer not to receive NCRs until the cause of the problem and thecorrective action have been listed (Stage Two), or if there are questions regarding theNCR process, please contact Garry Warren, the MTA Acting Director of QualityManagement, at 213-244-6216.

SGP:GW:gg ...............

Attachments

Rod DawsonJohn AdamsGwen WilliamsCharles StarkDave SieversElaine StewartGarry WarrenKim Kimball

Nonconformance Report Instructions

Blocks 1 through 12 are completed by the originating organization.

1. Enter the contract number.2. Location of incident, material, hardware, etc.3. Date the NCR is prepared.4. NCR number obtained from the NCR log which consists of the contract

number, year, and sequence number (e.g., B231-93-01)5. State contractor or suppliers complete name.6. Applicable specification or drawing number.7. Originato~s signature and work phone number.8. Describe the nonconformance in detail. Note requirements, i.e., section,

paragraph, drawing, etc.9. Responsible RE signature, vedfy complete, legible and accurate

description.QA manager approval required for NCRs initiated by QA.

10. Enter the person’s name and title responsible for investigating, providingroot cause and corrective action(s).

11. Enter the date the reply is due back to the originator.12. Resident Engineer enters the appropriate disposition.

Blocks 13 through 16 are completed by the organization responsible forcorrecting the problem.

13. Person/organization identified in Block 10 is responsible for investigatingand describing the root cause of the nonconformance and providingcorrective action disposition.

14. Describe the actions and responsibilities for correcting thenonconformance and preventing recurrance.

15. ,Signature of the individual preparing the disposition and date.16. Date the corrective action will be completed/effective.

17. RE signature and date indicating approval of the corrective action anddate.

18. Design engineering approval required for disposition.

Blocks 19 and 20 are completed by field inspection.

19.

20.

When the NCIR is closed/completed:

¯ The original remains in the RE files.¯ A copy is sent to the CM’s Manager, Quality Assurance.

RE Field Inspection vedfies the work is complete and acceptable.Describe inspections, location, sedal number, etc., as appropriate.RE Field Inspector enters the date of verification and acceptance.

NONCONFORMANCE REPORT

TEA~ETRI]

Page / of /

1. Contract No: Year: NCR No.:

4. Location:

7. Spoc~ficadort/Orawing No.:

5. NCR Type:

Originator:

10. Inspector: Date: I 1. Reply requested from:

13. Root c~se of ~ problem (co~leted by con~ctorl:

12. Ra~y due date:

14, Corrective action(sl to prevtnl recurrence (completed by contractorl:

i 5 .,.~-¢~p ated by: Date:

18. Disposition: ~Rejec~

16. Implementation Date:

[~] Rework [~ Repair

17. R.~_E Approval; ^ l Date:

rl Use-As-ls

1 9. Engineer Approval:(Repair and Use/A$-Isl

Name: Signature: Date: 2.0. Inspector: Date:

21 . Verification that nonconforming conCltt~on has been corrected:

Form Q-014 (6/9z.) FORVVARD COPY OF THE COMPLETED NCR TO THE MANAGER, QUALITY ASSURANCE

MTCManagers of Trans~ C.,on~ruc~on

NONCONFORMANCE REPORT(Continuation Page)

Page 2 of 2

C6~I0 LA River Bridge 8-I-95 21

Disposition:

The proposed corrective action is rejected. See our comments to Submittal No. 587.01

~ esiden~ E~gineer

Form No O-O~-- .’

¯ IM iTVlanagers of-Transit Construct/ona joi~t venture of CRSS, STV Group

and T~ansmetrics, Inc.

~444South Flower Skeet, 4th FloorLos Angeles, C..alifomla 90071

Tel. (213) 688-2988Fay. (213) 688-2987

July 24, 1995

Jeff EllisProject SuperintendentKiewit Pacific Co.309 Arroyo Seco Park WayLos Angeles, CA 90042

R05-C6430-CM122. I (14, 15)R05-C6430-SQ020 (427)

Contract: C6430 Arroyo SecoBridge Reconstruction

ec: Resolution for NCR 14 and 15

Dear Jeff:

Your responses to NCR 14 and 15 have been.forwarded.to EMC for their review. Work associated withthese NCR’s may not proceed without approval.

Sincerely,

Rich Hebert, P.E.Resident Engineer

Co: Ed Vargas, MTADan Estmda, MTABill Gardner, MTCBarry. Hertslet, MTC

Pasadena Blue Line

TEA(~)ETRrlPatlners~p for Excellence in IR’ail Constr~c~ion

NONCONFORMANCE REPORT ,,,

14. ~-ti~e zc~on(s) to pr~veflt recurrence (mn%oleted I~ co~tnctor):

18. Oist~smor~

~ R~,ect ~ Re~ork [~ Repair ~ Use-.A.14s

19. ~n~neer At:ll:ln~il: Print N~mE ~/~tur~ Dice~

21. Verr~citJon tf’~t noncon{on’mnl cond/Uon his ~ corrected:

2~ In~ p~-e~< ~or~

NONCONFORMANCE REPORT

RODQ

18. Dispos~on:

Managers of Transit Construction

0

0

O

0

0

0

0-

0-0

0

0-

0-

0

O

¯ [~J Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Nonconformance Report

Line: L;ontract No.: Year:. NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:MTA B-241 1995

4. LocationInside the station at the invert slab.

From north bulkhead to 5’ so. Col. # 19.

142 VermonttBevedy Station

5. NCR Type: 6. Co~=~actor:.Concrete Placement. Tutor-Saliba/Perini

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.:B-241 Spec. No. 03300.1.3.6, 01300.3.2.D.3,

8. Originator: Phone No.:

3. Date:7-18-95

Hold Tag No.Ralph J~t.lif, f. J ,# (213)644-1986 N.A.o31oo.3~.E.1, u, ,o. ~1o/o~.

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:" Ti~e contEactor’l~ required to locate constn~ction joints asindicated on the approved working(lift) drawings, unless otherwise approved by the commission or its designee. Thecontractor has constructed a horizontal construction joint in the invert placement for r~ #10 and part of lift #9. Thisconstruction joint is not shown on the approved lift drawings for these lifts. Prior to ¢omplelion of this portion of theinvert, please submit the construction joint for approval.

10. . Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested ~=-om: 12. Reply due date:~’ead

Ralph ~-18-958~an Lee/Holly Cindell 7-21-95

13. Ro~t ~use of the i~t~o~lem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):

14. Corrective action(s) (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval:Date:

18. Disposition status:I~ Reject

19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name:

Rework I~ Repair [~l Use-As-IsSignature: Date:

(Repair and Use-As-Is):

21. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

20. Lead Inspector:. Date:

22. Inspection:06£ u.u o._.4

Print Name SignatureForm 82 (7/95)

~ M. etropolitan Transportation Authority


May AEe~t~ROD -.

Yes No NA

Initials Date

,. une: ~ontract No.: Year:.MRL B-241 1995

4. LocationVermont/Beverly sta(ion, Invert

placements # 9 & 10.

NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:143 Vermont/Beverly Station

5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor:.Testing Tutor-Saliba/Pedni

3. Date:7-18-95

7. B-241 Specification No. 8. Odgin~to~.~ Phone No.: Hold Tag No.01460.1.9.B.

Ra~f~;£ (213) 644-1986N~.

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance descdptiof~: T~e co~[=act dcu~’ments require that anapproved/independent testing laboratory perform material qualification and job control testing. The concrete testsperformed for invert lifts #9 and #10(slump, unit weight, cylinders, temp.) were done by an employee of Tutor-Saliba/Pedni that was ACI certified. This is not in accordance with the contract specifications.

10. Lead Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:

Ral~ ~~5Bryan Lee/Holly Cindell 7-21-95

13. I~oot/cause of-the p~b’~em and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date: 17. REAppmval:Date:

18. Disposition status:

19. Engineer approvalReject [~ Rework ~ Repair [~ Use-/~.lsPdnt Name: Signature: Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


20. Lead Inspecto~ Date:

22. Inspection:

Print Name

Form 83 (-7/95)Signature Date-

Metropolitan Transportation Authority


Line:MRL.

contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:B-241 1995 146 Vermont/Beverly Station

MayAffect

Yes No NA

Ini’dals Date

3. Date:7-19-95

4. Location 5. NCR Type: . 6. Co~ttactor/Supplier: ’Vermont/Beverly Station, Invert Concrete Cudng. Tutor-Saliba/Pedni, Accurate

placements #9 & #10.7. B-241 Specification No.: 8. Odginptor: .#’ Phone No.: Hold Tag No.03300.3.8.B, 03300.3.8.C.

R~~.~,~,~ (213)644-1986NA.

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance desc~iptid’n: ~he contract sl~=ctfications allow Membrane Forming Cudngcompound when permitted by the commission. The contractor has submitted a curing compound for approval, but itwas still under review at the time of placements #9 & #10.

10. I’ead Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:Ralp¢~~, ~ Tutor Saliba/Pedni, Accurete 7-21-95

13. Rd’otr~(use of the’ p~0ble"n~-and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implemer~ation Date: 17. RE Approval:Date:

18. Disposition status:[:3 Reject

19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name:

Rework I--I Repair [~ Use-As-IsSignature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:



22. Inspection:

Print Name "Signature Date ’Form 83 (7/95)


1. Une: Contract No.: Year:.MRL B-241 1995


NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:147 Vermont~evedy Station

May Affect I~OD ....~0 ]~Yes No NA

Initials Date

3. Date:7-19-95

4. Location

I 5. NCR Type:

6. Contractor:Inside the station. "D" level Struts #34 Excavation Support Tutor-SalibaJPerinr

through #40.7. B-241 Specification Section/Drawing No " I 8. Originator. Phone No.: Hold Tag No.02160.3.6.B & Dwg. No. SS-004A. Ral h atli 213)644-1986

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description: "l~e intemai braci~ =mmediately above the invert slab(thelowest level) shall remain in place until the invert concrete has aged for a minimum of ten days and acquired theminimum compressive strength of 2500psi. The contractor has proceeded with the initial removal process(cutting thestrut welds) of the "D" level struts(the lowest level)prior to meeting these minimum requirements.

10. Lead Ir~pector: Date:

I 11. Reply requested from: i 12. Reply due date:Ralph W~ i -1 -95 Bryan Lee/Holly Cindell 7-21-95

13. Roo~ ~se of the prol2~’~n and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By:


19. Engineer approval

Date:

I


I 17.

RE Approval:

Reject [~ Rework [~ Repair [~ Use-As-IsPdnt Name: Signature: Date:

I 20. Lead Inspector.

Date:



Date:

22. Inspection:

Print Name Signature DateForm 83 (7/95)

L~ Metropolitan. Transportation Authority ~~.~


Line: Contract No.: Year: NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:Red B-241 ’95 144 Wilshire/Beverly station

4. LocationInvert concrete south of col. 18

5. NCR Type:Electrical

6. Contractor/Supplier:TSP/Comstoc~ Electric

~ No

/ InitielG " Date

3. Date:7118/95

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Originator: Phone No.:

SS-16050 3.2 A. 1. Drawings E-004, E-030, Ken/~orrov/,n 913-7311E-045 and E-049 7~, /

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description: Su~ ~’t conduit TC-011

Hold TagNo.

Requirement: Specification Section 16050 3.2 A. 1. States "Install Conduit as indicated".Nonconformance: Drawing E-D30 indicates the routing of conduit TC-011 to be embedded in the invert concJ’ete.This conduit was missed in the invert concrete placement and the contractor is rerouting it. This rerouting is notin accordance with the contract drawin0s.

10. l~e ~ Inspector: ,/~ Date: 11. Reply requested,from: 12. Reply due date:

13. I~oo~t cause ~f the~l ~blem and ~ction(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor}:

14. Corrective action(s} (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval: Date:

status:18"Disp°siti°n [ J Reject [~] Rework D Repair ~--] Use-As-Is19. Engineer approval Print Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector: Date: "

(Repair and Use-As-Is):21. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22.Inspection:

Print Name Signature Date


Nonconformance Report --

Red B-241 ’95 145 I ........... ~l~’;hire/Beverly station

~ "’7~t;;95-*. Locauon 5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor/Supplier:Invert concrete south of col. 18 Electrical TSP/Comstock Electric

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Or~ator: Phone No.: Hold TagNo.SS-16050 3.2 A. 1. Drawings E-O04, E-030, & Kery~Vlorro~v A ~7311

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description: Sut~ct conduit TC-012

Requirement: Specification Section 16050 3.2 A. 1. States "Install Conduit ..........as indicated". Note 23 on E-004 requires PVC conduits to transition to rigid when exiting concrete. Detail 1 on E-045 shows this detail.

Nonconformance: Conduit TC-012 exits the concrete in PVC.

10. Lea_,~nspector: /7 Date: 11. Reply reque~e~_from: 12. Reply due date:

13. Roo,cause of the/~roblem and action(s) to prevent recuffence (completed by the contractor):

14. Corrective action(s) (completed by the cor~~~actor):


18. DispositionL-~ Reject [ J Rework ] ] Use-As-Is

status: U Repair"19. Engineer approval Print Name: Signature: Date:

I 20. Lead Inspector: Date: "(Repair and Use-As-Is):21. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22.Inspection:

Print Name Signature DateForm 83



May,,mect RODn 0 E) Yes No NA

~. une: ~onTract NO.: YeaE NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:3. Date:MRL B-241 1995 149 VermonVBevedy Station 7-24-94

4. Location ~t~t’~3 ~_-/..~’÷ I~ G 5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor/Supplier: ~Inside the sta. at the HDPE protection Protection mat elevation Tutor-Saliba/Pednimat, sta. 365+21 to sta. 367+57

7. B-241 Specification 8. Originator:. Phone No.: Hold Tag No.03300.1.2.D.2.b

_R.~/~.~. (213) 644-1986N/A

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description.~ ~-he con{tact ~ecification require concrete substratesurfaces be constructed to indicated elevations within plus or minus 1/4 inch. PD survey data indicates the protectionmat placed over the HDPE in the above noted location was placed higher th~ the Indicated elevations from 1/2" highto 4 7/8" high. Please vedfy these existing conditions and provide the commission with a resolution for their approval.

10. Lead Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12_ Reply due date:Ralph W. I~tJiff / _~" ,,/ 7-24-95 Bryan Lee/Holly Cindell 7-25-95

13. Root c~_~e of the pro~l-~m and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):




19. Engineer approvalReject [~ Rework [~ Repair [~ Use-As-IsPdnt Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


22. Inspection: .,

Print Name SiclnatureForm 83 (7/95)

SURVEY NOTES, 1/10" GRID ’i~ -z,-f1- "1 -z:tl-~=~, Z

--~:~U~-.:-- ...... ~::A._: 7LI:::.:::.:.:2:. :12.:_._~’2 - ~~"::::::::::::::::::::::::::::_::

...... : ....... i / ~ .e~ + I ....... . :.--_

_:..-.-- ~.2mL~]_~--:~~ - -: .... . ...... ..:::<:: .... . .....

.......... ~.~ ............................. ~ -.2..i__22-. " .............

....... . 21 7-2~ 2~_ ...... ~7~¢/ ..................


May Affect ROD[] El []Yes No NA

of1. Line: Contract No.: Yea~. NCR No.: 2. Contract Name: 3. Date:MRL B-241 1995 151 Vermont/Beverly Station 7-26-954. Location

I 5. NCR Type:I 6. Contractor

Insude the station at invert level. Sta. Cast in Place Concrete. Tutor-Satiba/Pedni"363+97.6 to Sta. 366+81.3, Lt.&Rt. Construction Tolerances.

7. B-241 Specification No.: I 8. Odgjoato~. ,y Phone ~o.: No.03200.3.3.A, 03300.1.2.Do20I -~..~~’~f £~ (213)E4,, 1986 H°ld Tag

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description: the co~iract documents require that the contractorconstruct the station to the indicated dimensions and elevations. Allowable tolerances are indicated in the abovereferenced specifications. Also, these specifications require that the reinforcing steel be placed as indicated on theapproved placement drawings and within tolerances specified. Attached are copies of su~,eyors notes compiled byParsons-Dillingham. These notes indicate that the inside face of the soldier pile encroached into the station structure inseveral locations. The contractor must su~tmit a corrective procedure for approval prior to placing concrete, as thesenotes indicate that the extedor walls may be thinner than required. The attached notes are for information only andrequire the contractors verification.

! 10.~~.o~ Date: I 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:. ~7-~(’- ,~5 Bryan Lee/Holly Cindell 7-31-05

13. l~oo~"cause of the I~Oblem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date:



16. Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval: Date:

Reject [~] Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-IsPdnt Name: Signature: Date:

I 20. Lead Inspector. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


22 Inspection

Pdnt Name Signature Date

PARSONS-DILLINGHAM

Survey Request

Oe~-fion o(-Work Reque~efl. ~ attach Ngh~ght~l ,zb~’t of =pp~ ~ dr=t~g:

JULY 25, 1995

ATrA~ PLPASE FIND PARSONS-DII.HNGHAMS AS-BUILT OF FACE OF PN.~, @BOTTOM OF STATION EXCAVATION

SOME OF THE Plq.E FACES ARE COVERED BY HI)PE etc.

(-) = FACE OF prr.~. IS INSIDE CONCRETE(+) = FACE OF PII.~ OUTSI23E CONCRETE WALL LINE

-1.21’ = 1’-2 5/8" @ 364+17.5 EAST FACE-0.90’ = I0 3/4" @ 366+14.9 WEST FACE

WORSE CASES:

DOES RF_.SI~TS MEET SPECIFICATIONS:

COPY AL HODGE

RE ~ C _ B~41

DISTRIBUTIOI~

DOC CONTROl

FC.’Tn 25~ (G/$1JSR241B.DOC

¯ ¯ +SURVEY NOTES, 1/10- -GRID .+ -~-.z,-t,+ - --~=.i=~...~,e_~ ~

Blocks I through 9 are completed b the " "on ,nat, ...: . y..%...... ~’~..~1. Enter MRL for Metro Red Line, contract number, last two digits of the year, and NCR sequence number.2. Enter contract name, example: Wilshire/Westem Station.3. Enter the~date the NCR is prepared.4. Enter location of incident, material, hardware, etc.; use sial;on or column line.5. Enter what the problem relates to: mechanical, concrete, supports, systems, test, etc.6. State the contractor or supplieds complete name.7. Enter the applicable sp ".ecifica~;on, paragraph, or drawing number.8. Enter the originator’s signature and work phone number.9. Describe the nonconformance in detail and specify requirement; i.e., specification section paragraph, ..

drawing, etc.

Blocks 10 and 12 are completed by the lead inspector.

10.Lead inspector’s signature validates the nonconformance and verifies complete, legible, and accuratedescription.

11. Enter the name and title of the person responsible for investigating and providing root cause andcorrective action(s).

12.Enter the date the reply is due back to the originator. Response can be a plan of action.

Blocks 13 through 16 are completed by the organization responsible for correcting the problem.

13. Person identified in Block 11 is responsible for investigalJng and describing the root cause of thenonconformance and providing correc~e action.

14. Describe the actions and responsibil’dJes for corre~ng the nonconformance and preverdJng recurrence:15. Signature of the individual responsible for prepariag the disposition and corrective ac~on. 16. Enter the date the corrective action will be implemented.

Blocks 17 and 18 are completed by the resident engineer.

17. RE signature and date indicates approval of the identification of the problem cause, corrective actionsand implementation date.

18. Enter the appropriate disposition: reject, rework, repair or use-as-is.

Block 19 is completed by the Engineer (EMC).

19. Engineering approval required for repair or use-as-is dispositions; print name, sigl~ature, and date.

B/ock 20 is completed by. the ~earl inspector:.

20. Review the NCR for completeness.

Blocks 21 and 22 are completed by the inspecton

21. Vedfy that the work is complete and acceptable. Describe inspections and results, location, sedalnumber, etc., as appropriate.

22. Pdnt name, signature a0d date indicating acceptance.

When the NCR is close.d/completed:

¯ The odcjinal remains in the RE files.¯ A copy is sent to the contractor.¯ A cop~/is sent to the Manager, Qualit~ Assurance.

[M-]’l~letropolitan Transportation Authority

1. Une:MRL

4. LocationBevedy and Vermont

May Affect RODI::] El ElYes No " NA

InitiaLs Date

Nonconformance ReportPage

Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:B0241 95 l,.~ Z. BevedyNermont Station

5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor/Supplier:Safety Tutor-Saliba-Pedni

of 23. Date:

08-03.-95

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Originator: Phone No.:Contract Document, Part F, CSSM Rev. 6, Sec. __ ./Bdan Brock (213) 953-27926.3.3 h, CFR 1926.404b[1], and ESO 2405.4b.9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:Contract requires:Ground-Fault Circuit Interrupters [GFCi] or an approved Assured Grounding Program [AGP].

continued on page 2

Hold Tag No.5"-~ 5- ~/

10. Lead Ij~spector. _// ,Date:

13. Root cause of the probl’e’m and action(s)

11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:Mr.’Bwan Lee Start of,shift on 8/7/95

prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: I~] RejectRework [~] Repair I~ Use-As-Is

19. Engineer approval Print Name:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Signature: Date:



22. Inspection:



1. Contract No:B0241

¯ Nonconformance Report(Continuation Page)

2. Location: 3. Date:Bevedy and Vermont 08-03-95

Page 2 of 24. NCR No:

A Miller generator [1] being used to supply 120 volt power, by way of extension cord, to operate electricalpowered hand tool down in the station excavation area. The generators (3 on site) are not provided with GFCIprotection and/or the contractor does not have an AGP implemented on site.

Mr. Chuck Scarrot believes that they [TSP] are in compliance because they comply with exception in CFR1926~404b(1)[ii], note the Miller generators do meet the requirements of the exception; however, they shallcomply with either the GFCI or an AGP! M~’. Scarrot refuses to provide GFCI’s and/or implement an AGP.

Two CS-50’s were written in reference to this subject. The CS-50 number were:7409 issued 28 June 1995 and 7412 issued 27 July 1995.

C~rrect.ive Action:

1. Provide GFCI protection on the generators, or2. Implement an approved [approved by MTA Safety] AGP, in accordance with CFR 1926.404b[1](ii[).

Metropolitan Transportatioh Authority


MayR

Yes No

!. Line: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name: I 3. Date: --MRL B-241 1995 153I VermonUBevedy Station

t7-19-95

4. Location I 5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor:.At the contractor’s waste water storageIWaste Water Discharge Tutor-Saliba/Perini"

tank located at the west end of his yd.7. B-241 Specification: I 8. Originator. Phone No.: Hold Tag No.01566. Appendix"A",l.e. 02140.I.2.F, I Robe~ K,apchy~/, ..~. (,~ 3)644--198602140.1.2.H, 02140.1.2.M, 02140.1.3.E.

I ,’~’,~’~,: "~ -~’~’~’~/~9. Contract requirement: The co(~[=-act documents require that trie ~ontrac~or ma~tain the pH of discharge water withinthe range of 6.0 to 9.0, and provide installation, operating, process monitoring and maintenance data daily to thecommissionNonconformance Description: Waste water that was discharged on 7-28-95 exceeded the limitations for pH as stated inthe above noted specifications. Attached is a copy of the Parsons-Dillingham Environmental Controls Department’sinspection report made from observances made on that day.

10. Lea~l Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:RalphW.Ratliff J~ ,,6-1-95 Bryan Lee/Holly Cindell

13.1R’~ cause ~f th~oblem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):

14. Corrective a~on(s) (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By:. Date:16. Implementation Date: I 17. REApprovai:

Date:

18. Disposition status: [~] RejectRework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is

19.Engineer approval(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Pdnt Name: Signature:Date: I 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:


22. Inspection:

Form 83 (7/95)


PARSONS-DILLINGt/AM .Nonconformance Report

Pa e 1 of 1

4. Location: 5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor/Supplier: -At the south-east comer of the Water Service Tutor-Saliba/Pedniintersection of Vermont Ave. &

Oakwood Ave.7. Specification/Drawing No. " 8. Originator.

/ -" Phone No "13-241 SpecificationNo. 01500.1.1.C.1 &01500.1.1.0.2

RalphRatliff~~. ~ (213)644-’~’9869. Nonconformance description and contract requirements: At the above ~efe(enced location, tfi~ contractor was usinga water source that was being metered to the buildings at 346-350 Nodh Vermont Ave. No permit had been obtainedby the contractor for using water from this meter. Also the contractor has been issued a portable meter supplied by theD.W.P.WoS. for metedng water used by the contractor for construction purposes. The contract documents require thatthe contractor obtain permits and approvals from regulating authorities.

10. Lead .Inspector: Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12_ Reply due date:

Ra.~~, ~_~2~95BryanLee/BobDeMotte

~ -C’/,,¢,/~..~ /7’6_13. Ro0t/cause of ~e p/o’l~lem: (,.~ntractor has failed Io use ==uthoF,~ed ~et meter for ob~aiRing water for construction.-

14. Corrective action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by lhe c~o~ni,ractqr):

15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implem, n/tation Date: 17. RE Approval: Date:

18. Disposition:[~] Reject ~ Rework [] Repair Q Use-As-Is

19. Engineer approval Print Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector-. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

17~/. ~7~y ~"- ~- ~,.~"21. Vedficatiom that nonconforming condition has been corrected: ~f//~’,~/zr~ /~- ~’<~,’i~dpx,,,Dl~.~,<.. L,<

22, Inspection

Date

~ !fi 6PARSONS-DILLINGHAM


~vi. t~atcn - Area ZA. Hodge - Area 2C. Dixon - B251A. Yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren - MTAR. Trepp - PD/QA

~ntract No.: Year: NCR No.:T. Welch - RE B252

I/4. ~_0cati0n

II- ~/Z,,o, ,,3 ~.17. SpecTfication/Dr~,,..,!

5. NCR Type:

I 6. Contractor/Supplier:n/ ...... n~ Nc-..:- .

t 8. Originator: 0~~Phone No.:

0. Nonconformance description and contract requirement: _~.~Z~.

10. Leadlnspector:

/ 11" Reply requested frOm:

Date:"" 12. Reply due dat’ef’.

lbL Root ~use o{the prqDzem (completed by the contractor):

14. Corrective action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):

18. Disposition:[] Reject ~L~Rework

[] Repair19. Engineer approval Print Name: Signature: Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


7. ~" z-r-~ --":--~:-~.’ ~ -..4~) -~ o3 ’4 ~z_- 1,3 - % oo~ ’=t’. o1,, ,f~ ~. oZ.

g",,=-,,-~ .~-’u-,d,,.~ ,--/--f~/---"~,D, :£,-//D---/,..~-..p,/,,G,~.~_, .~ ,~-~-----.~-,~ ~’/, o o22. Inspection:

~:~’~ ,,~’,d~ ~~~~~l~_ ~_,/~

.........Print Name/ ~.. "-’~Sig~ure ’d:::::/-

"Date

iPARSONS-DILLINGHAM

Nonconformance Report(Continuation Page)

1. contract No: 2. Location: 3. Date:Page .,~ of,,~,

4. NCR No: =

Form 83B (4/94)

PARSONS-DILLINGHAMNonconformanS~R~p6~t

be: M. Latch - Area 2A. Hodge - Area 2C. Dixon - B251A. Yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren - MTAR. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252~ Pa0e / of.2."~-’. Line: Contract No.: Year: NCR No.: I 2. Contract Narne: V.~_ ~;~2_,,/~0,~7~,4.~,_/7..{

4. Location - .~5.NCR Type:

V~ o~ ~~~~ ~~~ 6. Contra~or/Supplier:

7. Specification/Drawing No.:

~8. Originator~

~~ ~ ,~, ~ ~ Phone No.:9. Nonconformance description and contract requirement:

10. Lead_lnspector:~ Date:

I 11. Reply requested from:

~

I

12. Reply due date:

13. Root ~au~e/of the probler~ompieted by the contractor): - ,

~OIqE, ~ t~::~E ~E:OA~D WA,~, ~PDED ONLY ~0 p~VENT

14. Co~ective action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contra~o0:.

15. Prepared By: Date: 16.

t~,i4-gq18. Disposition:

[~ Reject

19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name: Signature:(Repair and Use-As-Is): /v"//l~


~~~~ ~ ~z-/,~-~,oo ~ ~-~/,oo22. Inspection:

~~ ~~~Print Nam~

mpl_eme,~ation Date:(" I 17. I~tE-hoproval- "x _ /7 D ¯

.Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is

Date: I 20. Lead Inspect.(~-: Date:.,~

Form 83 (4/94) Forward copy of the completed NCR to the Manager, Quality Assurance

PARSONS-DILLINGHAM

Nonconformance Report(Continuation Page)1.00nt ra ctNo: 2. Location: I 3.Dat e~,~,7~ " 4. NCR No:

Form 83B (4/94)

| . L ! 1 i! A. Yahontov- EMUMetropolitar T~ansportation Authori6/L ~ 7 !tJ Ill. D..Cg.mpton-MTA

--" J °nc°nf°rmance-I~~[ R. Trepp PD/QA

£Lin~: Co~tract~o.: Year: ~CRNo.: IZCo.t~Name:..’. ’_’ - .~_-- _--.

4. Location~---~dAV/~-//~,cb ,4-7" I 5. NCR Type:

7. Specit=cation Section/_.=,.ving, ,c,.: I 8. Qr~ginator. Phone No.:

9Contractre-uirOem~entlaG. 0 . L~z"LcV-_~J~¯ q na nonconTormance description~

of/

Hold Tag No.

10. Lea_~d Inspector. Date:

I 11. Reply requested from:I 12. Reply due date:

13.LP~"ot c~e 6f the pro~;:~em and action(s) to prevent recurrence (comple(’ed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By:

18. Disposition status: r-I


Date:

Reject

16. I mplementatio~proval_:~ D~te: _

~Rework ~L Repair [~] Use-As-IsPdnt Name: Signature: Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is): ---~-- ~G~/.~..~/7-/~Z_ "=(:)z/6o-/.3


22. Inspection

/ Print Name

Form ~3 (i ,,c~,

Metropolitan Transport_atio__,n AuthorityA. Hodge - Area 2C. Dixou - B7.51A. Yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren o MTAIL Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252

...... ~Nonconforma-nce Report

1. Line: Contract No.: Year:

May ~,ffect ROD[] [] E3Yes No NA

Ini~[s Date

4. LocationI 5. NCR Type: up~pl

~-~f r~b ~ t~ ~ ~6. Contm~or/S

7. Specifi~lion Seaion/Brcv~~ 8. Odginatoa

Phone No.:

~ Hold Ta9 No.. requlremem an~ non~mo~an~ ees~ptio~ ~ _ ~ _~ ~

~ 0. Lead Inspe~or: Dale: ~ ~ ~. Reply reque~ from:

~ ~2. Reply due date:~ 3.~o m an~ ~ion(s) 1o prevent ~nce (~mplete~ by

I3. D,ate: --





16. Implementation Date: 17.

Reject [] Rework

Pdnt Name: Signature: Date:

RE Approval: Date:

[] Repair [] Use-As-Is



20. Lead Inspector: Date:

22 Inspeclion:

Print Name Signature DateForm 83 (7./g5I’

Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityA. Hodge - Area 2C. Dixon - B251A. Yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Wtrrea- MTAR. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252


May/~ffect ROD -

Yes No NA

Initials Date

1. Line: Contract No.: Year: NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:/- ~ J 3 Date- ~

. J 1 Vc..~z:~ ,~J "77 ~-,~,,o’~-,~ ~ -~.-~’ -

. ~Iecm~lon ~eclion/Dr~wini lb.: J I. Oigin~lo~ Plone 16.: -- Hold ~ Io.

g. Contract requirement and nonconfolance desiptio~ ~ :

and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed y the contractor):


15. Prepared By:



Date:

I


I 17.

RE Approval:

Reject ~] Rework [~Pdnt Name: Signature: Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


Date:

Repair [~ Use-As-Is


22 Inspection

Print Name Signature DateForm

! l t:; I~JMetropolitan Transportation Authority

A- Hodge- Area 2 ~C. Dixon - B2~!A. Yahontov- EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren - ltfrAI~ Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252


M~ty Effect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date





t16. Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval: Date:

Reject [] Rework ~ Repair [~ Use-As-IsPrint Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


22 Inspecbon

Print Name Signature DateForm 83 (7195)

Metropolitan Transportation


1. Contract No:

May .Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials

2. Location: 3. Date:.,~of

4. NCR No:

Form 83B (7/~c5) ,,



M~ay Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date



18. Disposition status: d Reject


Rework [~ Repair E] Use-As-Is19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name: Signature:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


Dale: 20. Lead Inspector. Date:

22. Inspection

Print Name Signature~rm 83 (7/95) Date


~ ofContrac~ No: 2. Location: 3. Date: 4. NCR No:

Form

Metropolitan Transportation Authority C. Dixon - B251A. Yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warrr~ - MTAR. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252


May Affect RODn E] ElYes No NA

Initials Date

1. Line: Contract No.: Year.

4. Location.~.c3~.7.../._(. "/~ ~ .~ ’~O~.’

I 5- NCRType: ~ 6. ~nt~or~E7,~ ............. ,,- - t8. o~-~ .................. /Drawing No.: ator: Phone No.: Hold Tag No.

9. ~ontra~ requirement and nonconfo~ance description: ~

-"’~-~ ~10" Lead Inspector:y3"~Date: I 11. (..~’-’z~(=:=~,,~ ~r,,~J ~/-=’z~"~Reply requested from:

Jl 12. Reply~,~//l/~/’’--due date:13. Root~’use em and’action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):/


15. Prepared By:

18. Disposition status:[]


Date: 16. Implementation Date:

Reject [] Rework [] Use-As-Is

17. RE Approval:

[] RepairPdnt Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector. Date:

Date:



SignaturePrint NameDate

Form 8.!. (7/-95}

Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityA. Hodge - AreaC. Dixon - B251A. Yahoatov - EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren- MTAR. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252


May A’ffect ROD -

Yes No NA

Initials O~te

1. Line:, Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:

4. Loc~tion 5. NOR Type: 6. OontractodSupplier:

9. Contra~ requirement and nonconfo~ance des~pfion:

~ 10. L~lnspe~ D~’ ~: Ill. Reply r~u~ from: I 1~. Re’~ly due d~;:

! ! 3~oot ~se of the ~lem and ~ion(s) to prevent m~n~ (~mplet~ by ~e ~o0(






Reject [~ Rework ~] Repair ~ Use-As-IsDate: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:Print Name: Signature:



22. Inspection

Print Name Signature DateForm 63 (7t95)

Metropolitan transportation Authority cD~o. -Bz~I. ~.......... -.---~-" A. Yahoutov - EMC¯

. ’"~".. D. Compton - MTA

~:ii R. Trepp-PD/QN !

May Affect ROD

Yes No . NA

._ _ ...... JNb,nconformance Report

Line: ContdadNo.: Year:. NOR No.:

Location [5. NCR Type: I 6. Contmctor/Supplien

Contract requirement and nonconformanceA:lescription.~ (~/

I0. Lead.lnspector. Date: [ 11. Reply requested from: [ 12. Reply dugdate:

13~R15"ot ~C~se of the I~blem and’action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


18. Disposition status: [~ Reject [] Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is


Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector. Date:


22. Inspection:

Rdnt Name Signature Date

Form 83 (7/95)

4-10 rOT_

t-o*’l. -oi

.MetroPolitan Transportation AuthorityA. Hodge- Area 2C. Dixon - B251A. Yahontov- EMCD. Compton - MTAG. Warren- MTAR. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch o RE B252


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

. Une: Contract No.: Year:.

¯ Location

, Spe~fi~tion SeGionlDrawing No.:

NCR No.:

5. NCR Type: I 6. Contractor/Supplier:

8. Origin~or. Phone No.:

2. Contract Name: : I 3. Date: 1

Hold Tag No.

¯ Contract requirement and nonconformance description:

0. Lead In~o~ D~e; I 11. Reply ~ue~ ~m: I 1~ Reply due date:



I 16. Implementation Date: [ 17. RE Approval:

Date:

18. Disposition status: [:~ Reject[] Rework 0 Repair [~ Use-As-Is


Signature: Date:

I 20. Lead Inspector. Date:

~_1. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22. Inspection:


Form 83 (7195)

Metropolitan TransP, oL’tat~ion Authority c D~o. -s2~’:.-’". ~ ~--~ ~ [i~,,; -,-~ ~.--’~-. ~ A. Yahoutov-EMC

¯ "~’~ ’ -": "’ ~ ~"\ D. Compton-MTA

i~ ~ !ii 1: G. Warren-MTA ’

i !il ’ ~ - 9 !:i i~ R. Trcpp-PD/QA. ~ ~ ;" ’ T. Welch - RE B252~i !:, _ ’~ - Nonconformance Report

May Affect ROD[] ~ ~!Yes No NA

Initials Date

Une: Contract No.: Year: NCR No.: 2. Contract Name: -- ---~

I 3. Date~_~,,C~

Hold Tag No.

~. Oontra~ requirement and non~nfo~an~ de~fipti~

t0. Lead Inspe~o~ Date: I 11. Reply ~ue~ from: I 12. Reply due date:

~3~o~se of the ~blem~nd a~i n( ) to p~vent ~n~ (~m~et~ by ~e ~n~o0:



[ 16. Implementation Date: 117. REApprovah

Date:

18. Disposition status: [] Reject [] Rework l-’l Repair [] Use-As-Is

19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Signature: Date:

t 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:


22. Inspection:


Form 83 (7/95)

~ ,Metro.politan Transportati~)n Authority-.- : !i %’

’ AUG-9

A. Hodge- Area 2C. Dixon - B251A. yahontov- EMCD.. Cam. pton - MTA

R. Trepp - PD/QAT. Welch - RE B252


May Affe .ct ROD

Yes No NA

Une: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.:II 2. Contractt,/,~ °~w-Name:

Location I 5. NCR Type: I 6.0ontractor/Supplier:

ISpecification Section/Drawing No.:

I 8. Originator.PJ’(one No.: Hold Tag No.

. Conlr~a~2~rreq’q’~u~re~ent and nonconformanc..,e descri~~.~

0. Lead.lnspecto~ ’ Date:, I 1 I. Reply reque_~ed from: I 12. Reply due date:

:3. ]~-6~t ~,~e of the p~m and a~on(s) to prevent re~rrenee (completed


5. Prepared By: Date: Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval:

8. Oispositionstatus: [] Reject [] Rework [~ Repair [] Use-As-Is

Date:


Signature: Date:


~_1. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22. Inspection:


Form 83 (7/95)

C. Dixon - B251A, yahontov - EMCD. Compton - MTAC. Warr~-M~A i17,. Trepp - PD/QA iT. Welch - RE B252


Location

May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

Phone No.:Specification Section/Drawing No.:

~~_z.,.,f,-~~t°r: ~’/")

Hold Tag No.

. Contra~ requirement and non~nfo~an~ descdption~ ~.~.~.~

O. Le~spectoc. ~ Oa~ | 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:

3. ~-0-~t ca~’e of the pm~gn and gction(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):

Corrective action(s) (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By: Date:16. Implementation Date: I 17. RE Approval: Date:

18. Disposition status: [] Reject [] Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is

lg. Engineer approval Print Name:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:


22. Inspection:


Form 83

L’~,Metropolitan Transportation Authority


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

1. Line: Contract No.: Year NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:MRL B261 1995

4. LocationStrut Levels A & B

059 Vermont/Sunset Station

5. NCR Type: 6. ContractodSupplie~.Strut to Wale Connection Tutor-Saliba-Pedni

3. Date:7/26195

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Originator.Contract Drawing No, SS-006 Emanuel DouglasTutor-Saliba-Pedni, Drawing D-19. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:

Phone No.: Hold Tag No.953-2792 N/A

Nonconformance: Strut to wale connection shown on TSP Dwg. No. D-1 did not consider the review comment in thefabrication or the installation of the struts and wales. Considera0on of the review comments is a condition of theApproved as Noted status of the submittal.. The rejected portion of the submittal requires an immediate response so itwill not further impact the job progress.

10. Lead Inspector:. ~ Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:

!Z~~., anuel Dougl,,~.~/~.~,..s. ~ /~ "---¢ ~ 7/~/95Project Manager, Peter Clark August 1, 1995

13. Root cause o.~ pn~m and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: [] Reject[] Rework [] Repair [--I Use-As-Is



21. Verification that nonconformCng condition has been corrected:

20. Lead Inspecton Date:

22. Inspection


~ Metropolitan Transportation Authority


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

1. Une: Contract No.: Yeac NCR No.: J 2. Contract Name: J 3. Date:MRL B261 1995 062I Vermont/Sunset Station

J 8/3/954. Location

Level "A" Struts

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.:TSP Drawing No. D-1 Sections 1-4

9. Contract requirement: "

5. NCR Type:Excavation Support

6. ContractodSupplie~-.Tutor-Saliba / Pedni

8. Originator. Phone No.: Hold Tag No.Emanuel Douglas 953-2792 N/A

Support angles on struts number 37 through 39 indicate the required size of the angle iron should be 5"x3"x1/2" onthe TSP drawing D-1 - Approved as Noted:Nonconformance description

Angle iron sizes vaded from 4"x3" to 3.5"x3" on the east ends of struts number S-37, S-38 and S-39. Supportingdocumentation will be required.

10. Lead. Inspector:. ~Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:i ~~~,~../~ Project Manager, Peter Clark August 11, 1995

13. Root cause of the~rob~ and. action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date:

18. Disposition status: [] Reject[] Rewo~

17. RE Approval: Date:

[] Repair [] Use-As-ls


Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:


22. Inspection:


Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityNon-Conformance Report

Page 13. Date:

7/18/95

1. Line: Contract No.: Year NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:MRL C0311 95 005I Tunnel Line Section, Sta 630+00 to Universal City

4. Location I 5. NCR Type: I 6. Cont~ctodSupplier:Crossover excavation

I Excavation Support /Traylor Bros~Frontier Kemper17. ~pe,~~cation Section~Dra,,,.g No.: I 8. //1 P,one No.:

Pile Installation CWP9. Contract requirement and non-conformance description:On Fdday, July 14. 1995, when soldier beam E-24 was picked up for placement, ff was bent/kinked at the mid-pointbetween C and D level soil anchor pockets. The pile was installed with the knowledge of the inspector and ResidentEngineer. The pile may require repair pdor to installation of tiebacks. No tie-backs are to be installed on the pile untilthe disposition is approved by the Authority’s engineer.

of

Hold Tag No.

10. Lead Inspector Date: I 11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:

1G. Mitteer, TBI/FKCI ] 7/28/9513. RoOt cause of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: [] Reject

16. Implementation Date: I 17. RE Approval:

[] Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is19. Engineer approval Print Name:

(Repair and Use-As-Is):Signature: Date:

21. Verification that non conforming condition has been corrected:

Date:


22. Inspection:

Pdnt Name Signature DateForm 83 (1/95)

~ M~tro, politanTransportation Authority


¯ Une: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:MRL C311 1995 006 I

. Location

May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Tunnel Une Section,Sta 630+00 to Universal City

Initials Dat~

3. Date:08-03-95

Temporary decking system at crossover

Specification Section/Drawing No.:

5. NCR Type:Temporary decking system

1522 Temporary Decking System

6. Contractor/Supplier:Traylor Bros./Frontier Kemper

8. Odginato~ Phone No.:A. Pall 818-763-3015

¯ Contract requirement and nonconformance description:

Batch plant inspection for the 8 ft x 8 ft x 8 in concrete pad placed on 08-03-95 was not done. This is in noncompliance to the specification section 03301- 1.2E. Set-up time for the concrete mix was 11:00 a.m.Batch plant inspection was set for 11:00 a.m. Concrete was mixed and transported to site at 10:00 a.m.

Hold Tag No.

homas M. 08-03-95 G.Mitter, TBI/FKCI 08-21-953. Root cause of the ~roblem and a~on(s) to prevent rect=rrence (completed by the contractor):


5. Prepared By:



Date: 16. Implementation Date:

Reject [~ Rework

Pdnt Name: Signature:

17. RE Approval: Date:

Repair [~ Use-As-Is

Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

!1. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22. Inspection:


MetFo.~olitan Transportation Authority May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date"

nconformance Report

ine: Contract No.: Year:.RL C311 1995

.ocationemporary decking system at cross

over

NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:007I Tunnel Line Section,Sta 630+00 to Universal City

5. NCR Type: I 6. ContractodSupplier:Temporary decking systemI Traylor Bros./Frontier Kemper

8. Originator: Phone No2A. Pall 818-763-3015

3pecification Section/Drawing No.:~22 Temporary Decking System

3. Date:08-03-95

Hold Tag No.

Contract requirement and nonconformance description:

The top flange plates welded joints tested for beams DB-3, #1 & #2 failed the test. This does not conform todrawing ES-24 detail for" FLANGE & COVER PLATE VVELD DETAILS"

Lead Inspector:. Date: 11. Reply requested from: I 12_ Reply due date:

I~omas M. Wilson~ 08-03-95 G.Mitter, TBI/FKCI 08-11-95

Root cause of~h~" ~ro~lem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the co.b-ac~or):

Corrective action(s) (completed by the contractor):


8. Disposition status: [~ Reject

16. Implementation Date: 1.7. RE Approval: Date:

Rework 1-11 Repair [~ Use-As-Is

,9. Engineer approval Pdnt Name:(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector. Date:

_~1. Verification that nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22. Inspection


PARSONS-DILLINGHAM

MRL CO.331 95

4, LocationAL Tunnel Ring #29- 30- 31,

7. Sp~cif;catfordOrawing No.:02330 3.1 A.6

Noncon;~orrnance Report

NCR ~.~ I 2.. Contra~’Name: ’ --35I NORTH HOLLYWOOD TUNNELS

5. NCR Ty~e:Grouting

Nonconformance description and contract requirement:

6. ContractodSupp~ier:OBAYASHI

8. Origl~ator. Phone No.:

I F~’ed Sin"" ~d"

818-752-987~

Rings #29-30-&31 Cont, a.~ grouting has not b~en pedormed w~thin 16 houfs of ini~Jal installalion..

10. Lez~d inspec~o~.,,,- _ f Date: from:7-5-05

" I Carl Linden1 ;~. Ro~cause of the prol~em (completed by th~ contracter):

12. Reply due date:7-t2-95

14. Corrective action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By:. Date: Implementation Date:

18. Disposition: (~ Reject [~ Rework

19. Engineer approval Pdnt Name:(Repair and Use-A~-Is): -

Signature!

17. RE Approvat; Date:

~ Repair [~ Use-As-is

Date: I 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:I

21, Vedfica~Jon ~t nonconforming condition has been corrected:

22 Inspection:

Fo~m ~3 (4/94)

Name Sig(~at ur.e~ _ Date

Metropolitan Transportation Authority ¯Nonconformance Report

, Une: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:MRL CO331 95 40

INORTH HOLLYVVOOD TUNNELS

.. Loc~tion 5. NCR Type: I 6. Contractor/Supplier:AR TUNNEL SAFETY

I OBAYASHi¯ Spedlication Section/Drawing No.: I 8. Originator:. ,# Phone No.:I1518-3.1-B 2

I D/~VE Mli~::~

// 213 991 9235

L Contract requirement and nonconformance description:qON CONFORMANCE7EMPORARY VENTILATION SYSTEM NOT RUNNING~,EQUIREMENTFHE SYSTEM SHAU_ BE OPERATED 24 HOURS PER DAY. 7 DAYS A WEEK

Pave3. Date:

07/25/95

Hold Tag No.

of

t0. Lead Inspector:~~" Date:

I 11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:ROBFRT W VEATCH 07/25/95 CARL LINDEN 07/31/95

13.. Root cause of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By:. Date:

18. Disposition status: ~] Reject



Signature:


17. RE.Approval: Date:

[~ Repair [~ Use-As-Is

Date: I 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:

I

22. Inspection

Print Name Signature Da(e

M~etropolitan Transportation AuthorityNonconformance Report

1. Une: Contract No.: Year:.MRL CO331 95

4. LocationAR TUNNEL

7. Specification SectionfDrawing No.:01518-3.1-B 2

NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name:40I NORTH HOLLYWOOD TUNNELS

8. Originator. /) Phone No.:D/~VE MIt~Et.~ // 213 991 9235

Page3. Date:

07/25195

Hold Tag No.

of

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:NON CONFORMANCETEMPORARY VENTILATION SYSTEM NOT RUNNINGREQUIREMENTTHE SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATED 24 HOURS PER DAY. 7 DAYS A WEEK

10. Lead Inspector:/~-~’-~’~’ ~" - Date:

111. Reply requested from:!

12. Reply due date:R O B.~.T~W~ _~k ~TC/H 07/25/95 CARL LINDEN 07/3’i/95

13.. Root cause of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date: ’17. RE.Approval: Date:

18. Disposition status: [] Rejec~[] .Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-Is


Signature: Date:



22. Inspection

Print Name Signature

:orm 83 (1/95)

Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityNonconformance Report

1. Line: Gontract No.: Year:. NCR No.:MRL CO331 95 40

2. Contract Name:NORTH HOLLY~NOOD TUNNELS

4. Location ’ 5. NCR Type:AR TUNNEL SAFETY

6. Co~t(actodSupplier:.OBAYASHI

3. Date:07/25/95

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Originator:01518-3.1-B 2

.~VE.~M ~,.~._9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:NON CONFORMANCETEMPORARY VENTILATION SYSTEM NOT RUNNINGREQUIREMENTTHE SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATED 24 HOURS PER DAY, 7 DAYS A WEEK

Phone No.:213 991 9235

Hold Ta~ Nol

10. Lead Inspector. Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:

ROB~~.~.,._H_ ~’-~-~~07/25/95 CARL LINDEN 07/31/9513: Root cause of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: [] Reject[] .Rework [-~ Repair [] Use-As-Is




20. Lead Inspecto~ Date:

22. Inspection


Mbtropolitan Transportation Authority


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

1. Line: Contract No.: Yea~. NCR No.:MRL CO-331 95 41

2. Contract Name:NORTH.HOLLYWOOD TUNNELS

3. Date:07-25-95

4. LocationAL TUNNEL RING’S #51-52-53

5. NCR Type:SUPPORT

6. ContractodSupplier.OBAYASHI

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: I 8. Originator.02330 3.1 A.6

I Fred Smith,~_~5-

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:Rings #51-52-53 have not been contact grouted within 16 hours. [2nd NCR of this nature]

Phone No.:818-752-9876

Hold Tag No.

10. L~ad Inspector. Date:

~11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:Fred Smith ~,~/~vE ~ 07/25195 Cad Linden 07/28/95

13. Root caus~ of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By: Date: 16. Implementation Date:



17.

[] Reject [] ’Rework []Print Name: Signature: Date:

RE Approval: Date:

Repair [] Use-As-Is




22 Inspection


"[’~ Metropolitan Transportation Authority


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

=. -i~. ~.,on~rac[ INO.: Year:MRL CO-331 95

4. LocationAL TUNNEL RING’S #51-52-53

NCR No.: 2. Cor~t~act Name:~/’,2~ NORTH HOLLYWOOD TUNNELS

5. NCR Type: 6. Contractor/Supplier.SUPPORT OBAYASHI

3. Date:07-25-95

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: ] 8. Originato~02345-3.8 F. Fred Smith

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:Expansion gaps must be filled within 16 hours [2nd NCR of this nature]

Phone No.:818-752-9876

Hold Tag No~

10. Lead Inspector. Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:Fred Smitz~.~,, ~ 07/25195 Cad Linden 07/28195

13. RooL_X:z4__use of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):





[] Reject []"Rework [] Repair [] Use-As-IsPdnt Name: Signature: Date: 20. Lead Inspector. Date:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


22 Inspection .,

SignatureForm 83

t]’Metr~)politan Transportation Authority


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Initials Date

Une: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.:12. Contract Name: I 3. Date:/IRL-3 CO-331 1995 43

I North Hollywood Tunnels ~ 08-O1-95Location I 5. NCR Type: 6. ContractodSupplier.

]nkershim Blvd -Settlement markersI Settlement I Ob.ayashi

Specification Section/Drawing No.: I 8. Odginatoc. fl ~_ Phone No.: Hold Tag No.

Contract requirement and nonconformance description:he following settlement markers:#401-402-403-405-406-407, have all exceeded the allowable settlement criteda of 1".he specification reads: For structures not being protected by underpinning, take corrective measures and modifyonstruction procedures as approved by the Authority or its designee to prevent damage to structures, facilities, andtilities, if geotechnical instrumentation measurements of deformations or ground water levels exceed the followingccep~ble limits: settlement measurements 5’ above the tunnel crown show ground settlement of I

0. Lead Inspector. .l Date: I 11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:

I Cad Unden i o~0~-95red S mith~~_,j~ 08-01-95

3. Root q~’se ¢~f’the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: [~ Reject

16. Implementation Date: 17. RE Approval:

19. Engineer approval(Repair and Use-As-Is):

Pdnt Name:

Rework [~ Repair [~ Use-As-Is

Signature: Date:

I 20. Lead Inspector:.

Date:


Date:

22. Inspection:


Form 83 (7/95)

DATE:

SHIFT:,

BY:

C331-AL.~ETTLEMENT.SUMMARY "NOTE: 1. Points surveyed are along Center line of AL Alignment

2. ( ) represents approx, location of GPIEXT w.r.t, face station during survey

3. Segment #, time set, & face station are w.r.t, segment installation

GP I EXT #

)- ()r- (

( )-( )-( )-I’

)1 ).)- ( )-

)-),- ( )’-

( )-( )-(

)- ( )-)-, ( )-

((

((((((((

{ ( )-

( ( (

( ( )-( )- ( (

.. (

)- (

)- ()-,- {

(

t," (

)- (

)- (

{ )"

(

(). (

)-)-)- (

)- (

I) (

AUSEGMENT #

AUTIME SET

AL-FACE STATION

AR-SEGMENT #

AR-TIME SET

AR-FACE STATION

....PARSONS- DI LLINGHAMMETRO RAIL CONSTRUCTION MANAGER °"

R82-C0331-REC-1709SQ020.1CM 122.1 -N~.,,?. 4~/ F,’/~

August 9, 1995

Mr. Carl LindenProject ManagerObayashi Corp.11206 Weddington St., 2nd FI.North Hollywood, CA 91601

Subject: Contract C0331 " i#~L/~ I 0AL Tunnel Support, NOR-44Response to CRE-2201

Dear Mr. Linden:

We are in receipt of your response to NCR 4~, and have determined that the responseis unacceptable. It is irrelevant that the contractors’ personnel showed the productspecifications to PD inspectors and that the products exceed contract requirements. Bynow, you are aware that PD inspectors are not a part of the approval process forproduct data acceptance.

The approved submittal on file does not include the materials used for this repair. Youhave attached productdata for Burke Stone, Damp Pack Grout and Burke Plug to theNCR, stating that you had intended to submit this data. This product data is to beformally submitted separately so that it may be reviewed by the EMC. If these productsdo not meet the contract requirements, applications of same must be reworked.

Consequently, we are retuming NCR 44 for a more appropriate response and anticipatethe technical submittal of this product data. Please call in response to this topic, if youhave additional concerns. "

A. Wattson, MTAD. Miner, PD

Sincerely,

Daniel A. Louis, P.E.Resident Engineer, C0331_

-- tx~-’Docume~t ControlFL E Ries w/art

P!.-Lz’LC~h -C0331/Pg.-1 of 1/REC1709.OOC



May Affect ROD

Ye~ No NA

Jne: Contract No.: Year..L CO-331 1995

_ocation ; 5. NCR Type: 1 6. ContractodSupplierTunnel ,

/ Support I Obayashi~rJon Sea:ion/Drawing No.: - --~riginatac. ~} zi]’" ~

.345-3,8J E red Smith/~,~ I’D

818-752-9876

~U~ n--"~-’~ocrna~’~ description~." ~ .

NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name: . 3. Date:No.rth Hollywood Tunnels 08/02/95

Hold Tag No.

;-=e contractor has an approved wet shotcrete-rnix for the filling of the segment strut gap. Due to the minor spoiling of3ncrete from segment #76 at the strut gap; and stoping the tunnel alter installing segments #77,#78 & #79, theontractor {for safety reasons} immediately filled the gaps at seg. #77 & # 78 with a 5000 psi quick set concrete. Theontractor has an approved submittal which does not include the material which was used in this case. We have asked:~e con’tractor for a submittal which includes the new matedal but OC. has not provided this.

13. Root ca~p.)~’e of’~e problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contza<:tor):

14. Corrective a~on(s) (completed by the contractor):

15. Prepared By: Date: I 16. Implementation Date:

I-.. [~ Rework

18. Disposi’don s~tus: I~ Reject

17. RE Approvah Date:

Repair C] Use-As-Is


Signature:


Date:


22. Inspection:

Print Nsme Signature .Date

Metropolitan Transportation AuthoritY


May Affect ROD

Yes No NA

Date

¯ Une: Contract No.: Year:. NCR No.: I 2. Contract Name: I 3. Date:MRL CO331 95 45I North Hollywood Tunnels

I 08107195¯ Location I 5. NCR Type: I 6. ContractodSupplie~.,L TUNNEL Rings# 8~-83&84

I SITE WORK J Obayashi

¯ Specification Section/Drawing No.:

11 8. Odginator:.~_~_,2"

Phone No.:2311-3.5 A.2. & 02311-3.5 A.3. Fred Smith 818-752-9876

L Contract requirement and nonconformance description:-he AL Mining crew is continually emptying the muck apron and excavating the face out past the breasting table. This~llows the muck to continue to fall out ahead of the table and not build up on the tables providing an acceptable method~f positively controlling the tunnel face as per the contract. Realizing that the crown of the tunnel has been chemically]muted to modify the ground and help insure that ground loss doesnt occur, proper mining techniques must be usedo insure that all reasonable measures are taken to control the tunnel face and prevent any voids from occurring.

Hold Tag No.N/A

10. Lead I.nsPector.,// ~,,~% Date:

I 11. Reply requested from: I 12. Reply due date:~red Smith~,~ ~, 08107/95 Cad Unden " 08/08/95

13. Root ~=a~use of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor.):


15. Prepared By:. Date:

18. Disposition status: [] Reject


[] Rewo~ Repair [~ Use-As-Is

19. Engineer approval Print Name: Signature:(Repair and Use-As-Is):


Date: 20. Lead Inspector:. Date:

22. Inspection:

Print Name Signature

Form 83 (7/95)

oaie

~ Metropolitan Transportation Authority

1. Line: Contract No.: Year.MRL CO331 95


May Affect ROD

Yes No

In#Jars ~Date

NCR No.: 2.~ct Name:46 I North Hollywood Tunnels

4. Location5.~_-_E~R Type: 6. Contra’-~~or/Supplier.Lankershim BIvd-Sta. 1041.00

l SettlementObayashi

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.:-~ 8. Originator. g/ Phone No.: Hold Ta~01057-3.4 C-3

~_ Fred Smi~fKLP818-752-9876 n/a

~-~t-~eql~irement and nonconformance descrip~ g/The bottom anchor on Extensometer IOA has dropped more than 1". This exceeds the allowable settlement criteria.

08/08195

10. Lead Inspector. Date:

1 11. Reply requested from:~y due date:

Fred_~ 0.8/08/95Cad Linden

108110195~. Root~-ed’u~ p-"~’~Eem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):


15. Prepared By:



Date: 16. Imp’--’~lementation Date:

Reject I~ ReworkPdnt Name:- Signature:



-~Approval:Date:

{~ Repair E]Date: 1 20. Lead Inspector. Use-As-Is

Date:

22. Inspection:

Print NameSignature DateForm 83 (7/g5)

Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityNonconformance Report

~1’. Line: Contract No.: Year~ ’ NCR No.: 2. Contract Name:MRL CO331 95 50 NORTH HOLLY~NOOD TUNNELS

Page 1 of ~3. Date:

08/14195

4. LocationAR & AL TUNNELS

5. NCR Type:SAFETY

6. Contractor/Supplier:OBAYASHI

7. Specification Section/Drawing No.: 8. Originator: Phone No.: Hold Tag

9. Contract requirement and nonconformance description:NON CONFORMANCEMuck cars are not equipped with automatic coupling devices as required by CaltOSHA TSO 8474(a).REQUIREMENTEmployers must comply with all Cal/OSHA Safety Orders that apply to their type of business. Employers are notexempt from full compliance unless CaI/OSHA has issued a wdtten order authorizing a variation.

10. Lead Inspector: Date: 11. Reply requested from: 12. Reply due date:ROBERT W. VEATCH 08L14/95 CARL LINDEN 08/15/95

13. Root cause of the problem and action(s) to prevent recurrence (completed by the contractor):



18. Disposition status: [] Reject[] Rework [] Repair [~l Use-As-Is

19. Engineer approval(Repair and Use-As-Is):




22. Inspection:

Form 83 (1/95)


August 18, 1995 - MTA Construction Non-Conformance...

Documents

Transcript of August 18, 1995 - MTA Construction Non-Conformance...