Wrong Impressions

I am compelled to comment on your recent article about Bechtel/PB's settlement regarding Boston's Central Artery/Tunnel project, as well as the editorial. In several instances your article contains factual errors and in others it leaves the reader with significant false impressions.

 Although Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) does not seek to engage in a point-counterpoint exchange, we do feel it is important to put the events that led to the CA/T settlement in proper context.

PB first began work on CA/T in 1985. As an entirely employee-owned company, we have always approached our work with an overriding commitment to quality and technical excellence. We take responsibility for our work and seek to make the appropriate corrections when errors  occur. It is with this ethos that we approached the negotiations to resolve issues related to CA/T.

The settlement on the project closed a chapter on the most complicated and controversial infrastructure project in American history. Throughout the settlement negotiations and indeed the project, PB sought to portray its role on the project accurately and take responsibility for its actions.

Despite the implications in your article, criminal charges were never lodged against PB, nor were we ever advised that manslaughter charges would be filed against us. We cooperated in every re­spect with the numerous investigations by the Massachusetts attorney general, the U.S. attorney and others into the various aspects of the project, including the ceiling collapse that led to the tragic  death of Melina Del Valle.

Your article  states that it was not until Powers Fasteners Inc. was indicted in Au­gust 2007 that PB "came forward seeking a resolution." In fact, PB had been working with the commonwealth to find the cause of the accident within hours of its occurrence and maintained close contact throughout the investigation. Although we were prepared to begin discussions in January 2007 when Attorney General Coakley first took office, those discussions were understandably delayed until she could complete her own investigation. When that investigation advanced to the point where discussions were possible, we began those discussions and reached significant agreement by July 2007, well before the Powers Fasteners indictment.

Your article unfairly suggests that a review of our "business ethics and quality-assurance programs" was forced upon PB. In fact, PB itself first proposed the ultimately agreed-upon program to the offices of the U.S. attorney and the attorney general in April 2007. So committed were we to ensuring that we implemented an industry-leading quality and ethics training program that we volunteered to make such a program part of a contractual commitment to  the citizens of Massachusetts. Thus, it was our constructive suggestion that was incorporated into the final agreement.

Also suggested by your article is that PB entirely failed to oversee contractors on the project. Such an implication is false. As acknowledged in the agreed Statement of Facts, "on certain occasions" among thousands, staff failed to detect inaccurate labor classifications wrongly coded by contractors on the project. The implication that we entirely  failed to provide quality assurance on concrete is similarly  inaccurate.

Finally, the implication that PB is now at significant risk of debarment  from federal work also is inaccurate. As U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan noted at the Jan. 23 press conference announcing the resolution, his office recommended against federal debarment. Earlier, PB had requested that the Federal Highway Administration  (FHWA) review our performance on the project.  However, none of the parties to the agreement wished to delay announcement of the settlement  pending completion of FHWA's review.

Since its founding over 120 years ago, PB has been committed to bettering the infrastructure of the communities in which we live. Throughout our work on the CA/T project, we sought to provide the best technical solutions to unique and complex problems. We have not been perfect nor will we ever be. We will, however, always keep our commitments to the communities we serve and in which we live. We feel we have done so with this  settlement and on this project which, in your editorial,  you rightly characterize as "a credit to the industry."

George J. Pierson
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Chief Operating Officer
PB Americas Inc.
New York, N.Y.

Clarifications

The headline "Bechtel/Parsons Pay Millions for CA/T Errors" in the recent article on Boston's Central Artery/Tunnel settlement refers to New York City-based Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. and not Pasadena, Calif.-based Parsons Corp. Parsons Corp. is an independent company and is in no way affiliated with PB.

ENR's description of increased bearing pressures in Clyde N. Baker's  Newsmaker story, "Soil Specialist Puts Supertall Buildings on Solid Ground," should have distinguished between soil- and rock-bearing foundations. The allowable bearing pressure for hardpan caissons in Chicago has increased over 300%, from 6 tons per sq ft to 25 tsf, while rock caisson bearing pressure rose 50%, from 200 tsf to 300 tsf.