i i i Tr rt Briefing for Chief Executive Wb | Transport For information tomers: | Services Sydney Metro Northwest Viaduct Construction Issues From: A/Chief Operating Officer Topic: Roads and Maritime Services’ response to Sydney Metro's request to continue constructing an elevated viaduct over White Hart Drive, Rouse Hill. Analysis: Roads and Maritime to consider approval for construction of the viaduct over publicly accessible areas of the site and have required Sydney Metro to address concerns about the work. These concerns include public safety and the viaduct's structural integrity, as well as a lack of independent certification, and non-compliance with conditions of the Works Authorisation Deed (WAD). It is recommended that Roads and Maritime considers the commitments made by the TANSW Sydney Metro management in the assurance letter they have recently issued before making a decision regarding construction approval. This will provide the opportunity for RMS to identify and consider instances of WAD non-compliance and the public safety risk, and if necessary invite the project team to provide further technical assurance so that Roads and Maritime can issue approval. Sydney Metro has indicated that they will escalate the matter if approval is not forthcoming given key project delivery risks they face. Key issues Roads and Maritime and the independent certifier have concerns about public safety and quality assurance Sydney Metro wishes to continue constructing an elevated viaduct across White Hart Drive and has applied for consent from Roads and Maritime through the WAD mechanism, On a prior road crossing of Memorial Avenue, Transport for NSW was able to provide adequate assurance that it had matters in hand and that the safety of road users and assets was protected. However, a subsequent incident of spalling has raised fresh concerns. In addition, there has been no progress certification from an independent certifier for any of the ‘works completed within the past two years and many records exist that identify issues with WAD quality compliance. Roads and Maritime has previously approved continuation of construction over areas of the site that are not publicly accessible. When Transport for NSW last requested approval to proceed, Roads and Maritime asked that Sydney Metro endorse its contractor's plans to construct over live roads, and provide assurance that Roads and Maritime's concerns have been addressed before submitting any further applications to start works over live roads. Roads and Maritime assessed the current application and accompanying documents (Attachment A), and advised that it cannot provide approval for Sydney Metro to start construction due to concerns about compliance with WAD conditions. Roads and Maritime’s jafy concems relate to construction, including quality assurance, which in turn raise issues of structural reliability and public safety. Roads and Maritime’s project representative considers Sydney Metro has not yet provided adequate assurance that the project meets WAD requirements, The independent certifier has raised similar concerns (Attachment B). Roads and Maritime also considers that that the Prescribed Quality Management Plan, required under the WAD, needs to be updated to incorporate the augmented safeguards and controls (outlined in the letter at Attachment C) and the independent certifier should ideally RWC.002172 - Page 59 of 92provide comments on the plan. Roads and Maritime may then need to further consider these ‘comments with Transport for NSW. ‘Once Sydney Metro provides adequate technical assurance, Roads and Maritime can approve construction to proceed ‘Sydney Metro has now provided an assurance statement letter nominating that issues relating to construction, including quality assurance, have been considered, addressed and mitigated within this letter they have also committed to presenting verification that the appropriate quality information will be forthcoming however cannot commit to providing this prior to the White Hart Drive works commencing, Roads and Maritime are now in a position to consider approving the commencement of works, Although Transport for NSW has provided Roads and Maritime with broad indemnities in relation to the works, including the viaduct, Roads and Maritime retains responsibility for ensuring public safety as the roads authority with powers to issue the WAD and authorise works, There is also a whole of Government responsibility to manage ail safety requirements, WHS issues, and roads authority responsibilities. Discussions with Sydney Metro are ongoing to achieve a satisfactory solution. Supporting analysis Provisions of the WAD Roads and Maritime has an existing WAD with Sydney Metro for viaduct construction over public roads, Roads and Maritime owned land, and associated road works. The WAD requires Transport for NSW to retain a proof engineer for the viaducts over roads and an independent certifier for the works generally, including aspects of the viaducts. Where Roads and Maritime has concems about the quality and safety systems it can undertake an audit, and can direct that works cease if there are concerns for public safety. Financial impact NIA. Consultation Roads and Maritime staff have been in ongoing contact with Transport for NSW and Sydney Metro project staff, and will continue to work with them to establish the minimum commitments required in order for Roads and Maritime to approve access to the road network, Angus Mitchell, A/Chief Operating Officer Chief Executive's comments Noted Briefing for Minister or Secretary RWC.002172 - Page 60 of 82General Correspondence Reference No: Project Tit: NWWRLSVC-RMS-NWR-GEN-000138 Nath West ail Link SVC Project Miers [northwest Date: To: ce: From: Subject 27 May 2016 ‘Steve Watson, Noth West Rai Link I Arcads Impregio Sain Joint Verte Ipregilo alin Jit Venture |. mpreglo Sli Joint Venture ‘Owen Cheek, North West Ril Link ‘tian Populn, Nath West Ril Link ‘Michael Burden, Noth West Ral Link Water Casu, North West Rall Link SS Cartractor Exteral Mailbox, Impreglo-Salin Joint Ventre TUN. rpregto Sain oink Vertue i, Impreglo-Saln det Vertue Gopeng Dave, Roads and Mariime Sonics say Pate, North West Ral Link Ed Matthows,Nexth West Fal Link Dennis Povey, North West Rail Lin Mark Ross, Noth West Rail Lin ‘Scot Bennett, Nth West Ril Link Anthony MeMshon, Roads ard Maritime Sanices RE: SOG-4036>> WAD Package 22, ago 2 Notice that the requirements of clause 13.3 ofthe WAD been satisfied. Stew, RMS cannot appre commencement of constuction ofthese works until INSW can demonstrat thatthe curent Vaduct structural integity issues and the recent safety incidents will nok expose any FMS asset cr asset user to isk, Regarts “Try MeMaen Discipline: Design Lots: Criginator’s Reference No, Original Message — AMIE | ransport ey | for NSW Principal General Correspondence Location: Mites |northwest Reference No: NWRLSVCNWRRMS-P_GEN00233, Project Title: North West Ral Link SVG Project, Date: 2 May 2016 Response required by: 31 May 2016 Anthony McMahon, Roads and Maritime Senices, Gopeng Dave, Roads and Mattie Senices ‘Seve Watson, Noth West Ril Link ‘Owen Cheek, Noth West Ral iBh Application TRA-000295 - Page 190Mies [northwest General Correspondence Roference No: NWRLSVORMS-NWR-GEN-000%41 Project Tite: North West Rall Link SVC Project Date: 07 June 2016 To: ‘Steve Watson, Noth West Rall Link cc: Hyder IC Exteral Melibox, Arcacis pgs Arca ‘Walter Casu, Noch West Fail Link Ed Matthews, Noch Wet Ral Lrk Michael! Burdon, Nerth West Rall Link CGopang Dave, Roads and Maitime Senices by Pate, Nerth West Rail Link Ban Popuir, North West Fil Lik Dennis Povey, Nath West Fal Link ‘Scott Benret, Neth West Rall Link David Kernerd, Noth West Rai Link ‘Scat Fllowld, Noth West Rail Link From: Arithory MeMhon, Roads ard Maritime Sendoes Subject: RE: $OG-3804>> WAD Packages 19 Stage 2 and 22 Stage 2 al RMS cannot apprce commencement of constuction fr ether package 19 stage 2 or 2 stage 2fe the falloning reasons Regarding SVC WAD Packago 22 + Sofer RMS has only received sparsely detalled caresporcerce and verbal brieings on the recent sping incidents and isnot yet ina postion {obe able to estat the situation s serous encogh that RMS should issue a dectcn regarding futher constuction in te interest public safely. ‘+ RUS has not ceived enough detiled tecnica infomation to estatiish the relevance ofthe remeacaton proposal (Stitch Pot) tothe design and construction methodology ofthe suc. ‘+ RMS has not yet received enough information to eluate f the preposal to utlise an NCR process with defred inormatin is appropiate to ff the Qualty Assurance requremeris in these circumstances. + RUS has not received the information as required under Cl 13.3 (and Cl 13.3) er the alters constuction proposal + RMS has not received any assurance or confation fo the proponent (TINSWY) thet the works shaud eoceed. Regarding SVC WAD Package 19 ‘+ RS has not yet boon mad anere thet the Vect sogmets tobe utlised fer these spans are for intended pupose, + RMS has not received any assurance or conimation fam the propanent(TINSWY) thatthe works shoud proceed. RMS js also concemed thatthe curent Quality Management Plan and management procedures do not sufcirly demonstrate that Techical Requirements, Dueilly digaions and other Standarcs stipulated in the SVC WAD axe being met Regards “Tony MeMahon Discipline: Design Lots: Location: Originators Reference No. Original Message ——- Miters | northwest GIPA Application TRA-000295 - Page 187CAMPBELL Clarinda EEE eee From: McMahon, Anthony Sent: Wednesday, 15 June 2016 11:25 AM To: HEAD Steven; MOGA Dora A; THURSTON Claire F; LITHGOW Christine Ce: BOCK Sally E Subject: RE: copy of assurance letter please Attachments: Sydney Metro Viaduct Construction Approval CEO Brief Version 2.docx Steven, Please consider the attached revised CEO Brief on Sydney Metro Viaduct Issue. Regards ‘Anthony McMahon Integration Manager Roads and Maritime Services Sydney Metro Project Transport for NSW 1M 0400 619329 Pod - D, Level 1, 99 Philip Street, Parramatta, NSW 2150 From: HEAD Steven [mailto:Steven.HEAD@rms.nsw.gov.au] Sent: Wednesday, 15 June 2016 10:30 AM To: McMzhon, Anthony; MOGA Dora A; THURSTON Claire F; LITHGOW Christine ‘Subject: RE: copy of assurance letter please Dora Following ourt meeting this meeting with Tom Gellibrand | asked Anthony to work with you to update the Brief along the lines of how we discussed last night and also reflecting the discussion with Sydney metro this morning Our understanding at this point is that they will be bringing a separate report to us before again asking to ‘commence construction over Sanctuary Drive. ‘There did appear to be some disconnect between what we were told this morning and whether or not Rod Staples still seeks to discuss the matter with Peter or Ken Regards Steven From: McMahon, Anthony [mailto:Anthony.McMahon@transport.nsw.gov.au) Sent: Tuesday, 14 June 2016 9:46 PM To: MOGA Dora A Ce: HEAD Steven ‘Subject: RE: copy of assurance letter please Dora, Steven, 1 RWC-002172 -Page 71 of 92Attached is the assurance statement we received from TINSW in Jan 2016 following the previous concrete spalling incident adjacent to Memorial Avenue. Although this version is marked as Draft the final version is word for word identical (I just don’t have a copy on this machine). ‘As regards which commitments of this letter that have not been met since the most recent concrete spalling incident adjacent to Sanctuary Drive there are two areas of concern for RMS:- ‘The segments proposed to be used over Sanctuary Drive were actually manufactured prior to the enacting of the mitigations referred to in the Executive Summary report which accompanied the attached assurance statement; so although RMS have recently been made aware by TINSW that some of these segments are now known to exhibit manufacturing non-conformances similar to those that have recently failed we do not know if TINSW or their contractor retrospectively checked these segments after the initial spalling incident or did they consider the implications of proposing to use these segments prior to the most recent spalling incident occurring. With the most recent incident TINSW initially attempted to obtain RMS approval to commence construction without providing any assurance that their contractors mitigation proposals were adequate or any confirmation that any live roadway risks had been considered despite lessons learned from the previous incident, their assurance statement and the entire matter being discussed at length in a PCG meeting 1 week prior to their application. | will provide a more simplistic version of the brief that summarises the previous issues in the context of the current situation and nominates the RMS risks in the morning after our 7.30 meeting. Regards ‘Anthony McMahon Integration Manager Roads and Maritime Services Sydney Metro Project Transport for NSW M0400 619329 Pod - D, Level 1, 99 Philip Street, Parramatta, NSW 2150 From: MOGA Dora A [mallto:Dora, MOGA@rms.nsw.qov.aul] Sent Te uesday, 14 June 2016 6:05 PM McMahon, Anthony Ce: HEAD Steven ‘Subject: copy of assurance letter please Hi, can you pls send us a copy of this letter you mentioned earlier. Thank you Dora Moga ‘AlManager Government information Services Officer - JMD Government Information Services | Customer, Engagement and Planning Division T 02 9462 6412 www.ms.nsw.gov.ak Every journey matters Roads and Maritime Services Level 1 ~ Ennis Rd [Kirribilli [Sydney NSW Locked Bag 928 North Sydney 2059 RWC-002172 - Page 72 of 92CAMPBELL Clarinda ee From: McMahon, Anthony Sent: Monday, 19 September 2016 5:07 PM To: HEAD Steven; ‘DINAN John P* Subject: ‘Sydney Metro Viaduct Serious Structural Failure Gents, Current update for the viaduct issue. Substantial Structural Failure of Viaduct RMS was informed this morning that on Sunday 18/9/16 a new viaduct span to the South of (But not over) Windsor Road had experienced substantial structural failure during one of the post-stressing stages which are conducted after all the viaduct segments have been installed. The event is of such an extent as to place the entire span at risk of failure, Immediate RMS Concerns Although the section of viaduct that has failed is not over or adjacent to any RMS managed assets there are other viaduct installation works that are only partially complete ongoing over White Hart Drive, These works are at the stage where all the viaduct segments have been installed but the post-stressing operation is only partially complete. RMS has sought urgent assurance from TINSW that these works pose no risk to the public or any RMS managed asset. RMS has so far obtained verbal assurance that the works over White Hart Drive have a different construction methodology to those that have recently falled and in fact the gantry over White Hart Drive is of a type that sits in an ‘underslung’ position beneath the viaduct segments supporting them until their stressing is complete. This gantry is currently in this position and should not be moved until TINSW are satisfied itis safe and appropriate to do so. RMS has requested that TfNSW confirm if it is necessary that White Hart Drive be closed to public access and are awaiting this confirmation. The TFNSW site management team have now met with their main contractors designers (SMEC) of the viaduct structure and have verbally informed RMS that they are not aware of any immediate risk to the public posed by the current works over White Hart Drive, TINSW have instructed SMEC to double check that all quality information for those works is correct and report back to TINSW. TINSW have also discontinued plans to proceed with further viaduct works in the short term, Regards ‘Anthony MeMahon Integration Manager Roads and Maritime Services Sydney Metro Project Transport for NSW. M0400 619329 Pod - D, Level 1, 99 Philip Street, Parramatta, NSW 2150 1 RWC-002172 - Page 82 of 92CAMPBELL Clarinda From: MeMahon, Anthony Sent: Friday, 27 November 2015 3:03 PM To: steven head@rmsnsw.gov.au Subject: Sydney Metro Current Issue This message has been archived. View the original item Steve, Regarding our recent conversation, one issue that will be raised by the Sydney Metro Program Manager Rodd Staples tomorrow concerns the following. 1SJV ~ the main contractor for the construction and installation of the viaduct, suspended all further pre-cast segment installation works until further notice. This decision was made following substantial pressure from TINSW who have great concerns regarding cracking and de-lamination of concrete from segments that have already been installed and partly as a consequence of RMS writing to TFNSW almost 3 months ago seeking re-assurance that these issues would not place any RMS assets or asset users at risk. The works were suspended yesterday as ISJV were about to commence installation of viaduct units over the T-Way adjacent to Memorial Avenue and soon the installation of single span bridge units over Windsor Road. If TFNSW and ISJV don’t reach a resolution for these issues very soon the critical path for the entire project is at risk. Please call if you need to know any more. Other main issues:~ P.S. Resolution of potential congestion issues from day of opening directly attributable to the project is still the main issue for RMS on this project. Plus the sanctity of RMS WADs is critical! 1 RW-002172 - Page 83 of 92