Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
i INSPECTION AND OTHER STRATEGIES FOR ASSURING QUALITY IN GOVERNMENT CONSTRUCTION COMMITTEE ON INSPECTION FOR QUALITY CONTROL ON FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BUILDING RESEARCH BOARD COMMISSION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SYSTEMS NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL William B. Ledbetter Andrew C. Lemer Editors NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1991
ii NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sci- ences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distin- guished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of sci- ence and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the fed- eral government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Frank Press is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sci- ences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy mat- ters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal govern- ment, and upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Samuel O. Thier is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was established by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of further- ing knowledge and of advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general poli- cies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is adminis- tered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Frank Press and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This report was prepared as part of the technical program of the Federal Construction Council (FCC). The FCC is a continuing activity of the Building Research Board, which is a unit of the Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems of the National Research Council. The purpose of the FCC is to promote cooperation among federal construction agencies and between such agen- cies and other elements of the building community in addressing technical issues of mutual concern. The FCC program is supported by 14 federal agencies: the Department of the Air Force, the Depart- ment of the Army, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Energy, the Department of the Navy, the Department of State, the General Services Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Postal Service, the U.S. Public Health Service, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Funding for the FCC program was provided through the following agreements between the indicated federal agency and the National Academy of Sciences: Department of State Contract No. 1030-621218; National Science Foundation Grant No. MSM-8902669, under master agreement 8618641; and U.S. Postal Service grant, unnumbered. Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 91-62333 International Standard Book Number 0-309-04547-9 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418 S 409 Printed in the United States of America
iii COMMITTEE ON INSPECTION FOR QUALITY CONTROL ON FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS Chairman WILLIAM B. LEDBETTER, PE, Consultant, Pendleton, S.C. Members MERRILL R. COTTEN, Chief, Construction Management, De Leuw, Cather & Company, Chicago, Illinois F. H. (BUD) GRIFFIS, Professor of Civil Engineering, Columbia University, New York, New York C. RAYMOND HAYS, Director Safety/Quality, RUST International, Birmingham, Alabama ARTHUR T. KORNBLUT, Kornblut & Sokolove, Cheve Chase, Maryland JOHN W. MORRIS, USA Retired, Engineer Advisor, Zorc, Rissetto, Weaver & Rosen, Washington, D.C. DONALD W. PFEIFER, Vice President, Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Northbrook, Illinois ROBERT ULREY, Manager of Technical Services, Houston Lighting and Power Company, Houston, Texas DAVID J. WICKERSHEIMER, President, Wickersheimer Engineers, Inc., Champaign, Illinois PAUL ZIA, Distinguished University Professor, Civil Engineering Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh
iv Federal Construction Counsil Liaison Representatives KNOX BURCHETT, Office of Foreign Building Operations, Department of State WILLIAM DUNCAN, P.E., Division of Health Facilities Planning, Public Health Service JAMES D. DURHAM, Office of Environmental Health and Engineering, Indian Health Service ROBERT EIDSON, Office of Facilities, Department of Veterans Affairs IRVIN HAMBURGER, P.E./C.P.E., Office of the Air Force Civil Engineer JAMES R. JONES, Directorate of Military Programs, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers WILLIAM J. KEHEW, P.E., Chicago Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy ALEX LINCOLN, Public Buildings Service, General Services Administration MIGUEL LOPEZ, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Department of the Navy WILLIAM POUNDS, Office of Foreign Buildings Operations, Department of State Public Facilities Council Liaison Representatives ROBERT KELLER, Division of Design and Construction, Office of Administration, State of Missouri FRANCIS W. KUCHTA, Department of General Services, State of Maryland Project Staff ANDREW C. LEMER, Director PETER H. SMEALLIE, Senior Program Officer PATRICIA M. WHOLEY, Staff Associate SUZETTE CODY, Project Assistant JOANN V. CURRY, Senior Secretary
v BUILDING RESEARCH BOARD (1990â1991) Chairman RICHARD T. BAUM, (Retired) Partner, Jaros, Baum and Bolles, New York, New York Members LYNN S. BEEDLE, University Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering and Director, Institute for the Study of High-Rise Habitat, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania GERALD L. CARLISLE, Secretary-Treasurer, International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftsmen, Washington, D.C. NANCY RUTLEDGE CONNERY, Consultant, Woolwich, Maine C. CHRISTOPHER DEGENHARDT, President, EDAW, Inc., San Francisco, California ELISHA C. FREEDMAN, Regional Manager, The Par-GroupâPaul A. Reaume, Ltd., and Executive-in-Residence, University of Hartford, Connecticut DONALD G. ISELIN, USN, Retired, Consultant, Santa Barbara, California FREDERICK KRIMGOLD, Associate Dean for Research and Extension, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Alexandria, Virginia J. W. MORRIS, USA Retired, Engineer Advisor, Zorc, Rissetto, Weaver & Rosen, Washington, D.C.
vi HAROLD J. PARMELEE, President, Turner Construction Company, New York, New York LESLIE E. ROBERTSON, Director, Design and Construction, Leslie E. Robertson Associates, New York, New York JAMES E. WOODS, William E. Jamerson Professor of Building Construction, College of Architecture and Urban Studies, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia APRIL L. YOUNG, CRA Coordinator, First American Metro Corporation, McLean, Virginia Staff ANDREW C. LEMER, Director HENRY A. BORGER, Executive Secretary, Federal Construction Council PETER H. SMEALLIE, Senior Program Officer (to June 1990) PATRICIA M. WHOLEY, Staff Associate SUZETTE CODY, Project Assistant JOANN V. CURRY, Senior Secretary LENA B. GRAYSON, Program Assistant
PREFACE vii PREFACE Quality is not an act. It is a habit. Aristotle Much has been said and written in recent years about the nation's declining commitment to the principles of quality that marked our rise as the world's leading industrial power and about our need as a nation to renew that commitment. President Bush has stated that ". . . our work to build quality products will be a crucial link to the long-term success of the United States in the global marketplace." The U. S. construction industry has not been immune to the problem. Our share of world construction markets has shrunk. Foreign competitors are gaining increasing strength in our domestic markets. Many people in the industry point to qualityâin our materials and equipment, our design and workmanship, in the private and public sectorsâas significant causes.
PREFACE viii When the agencies of the Federal Construction Council requested the Building Research Board to advise them on construction inspection practices that would help to improve the quality of their constructed facilities, they referred only to the tip of this massive iceberg of a problem confronting the entire industry. We and the committee invited to provide this advice found it difficult to restrict our attention to this one small aspect of the major challenge of moving the industry back to building quality facilities. However, we recognize that habits are persistent and, once formed badly, can be changed only through constant attention and perseverance. Inspection is an important and long-accepted means to achieving quality and one that is well suited to the task of changing bad habits. We hope that our work and this report will contribute to a change in habits and thereby to the broader goals of quality to which we all must aspire. William B. Ledbetter, Chairman Committee on Inspection for Quality Control on Federal Construction Projects Andrew C. Lemer, Director Building Research Board
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Quality facilities enhance the safety, productivity, and environment of the people and economic activities they serve, and are achieved through a process of planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance that must work effectively at all stages. In construction, quality is obtained through conformance to adequately developed requirements, requirements clearly stated to set forth the characteristics which the constructed facility must have to serve its users well. An essential precondition for assuring construction quality is getting the requirements right and stating them clearly and accurately in the drawings and specifications to be followed by the constructor. Construction costs that exceed design estimates are an important indicator of failure to achieve quality. If the requirements are right and the estimating effective, then cost growth is attributed to construction problems, but in practice the growth is largely attributable to design inadequacies. However, achieving quality in construction remains a substantial
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY x challenge after planning and design have produced an appropriate and clear statement of requirements. The constructor has a responsibility to control quality and conform to requirements by managing labor, equipment, and materials to produce a facility that meets these requirements. The purchasers of constructionâthe owner and users of the facilityâseek to assure that quality by participating in the monitoring of the constructor's quality control activities. Inspectionâthe specific examination, testing, and overall appraisal of a process, product or service to ascertain if it conforms to established requirementsâis an essential tool for construction quality control and assurance. Federal agencies follow a variety of practices in using inspection to assure quality. Some agencies assign inspection responsibilities to their own staff. Others depend on the design architect or engineer or an independent firm to conduct inspection. Some agencies rely almost entirely on the constructor's quality control system and conduct few inspections of their own. All of these various practices have produced comparable and generally adequate construction quality, but the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers' contractor evaluation procedures are exemplary. In general, quality could be improved by reducing this unnecessary variety in practices, by making inspection more efficient, and by avoiding specific practices that foster conflict among owners, designers, and constructors. The U. S. construction industry and its customers have much to gain from the growing interest in teamwork and long term commitment to quality reflected in the philosophy and practices presented under such titles as Total Quality Management. Owners and users working to enhance their assurance of quality in construction should act within the context of this philosophy and practice. Federal agencies in particular can enhance the quality of their construction by taking action on the following recommendations: 1. Work to improve the agency's ability to develop quality definitions, facility programs, plans, budgets, guide criteria,
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xi design drawings, and specifications that convey correct requirements in a clear manner to the constructor. 2. Avoid adversarial design and construction management practices and adopt defined programs to foster teamwork among users, design and construction managers, designers, and constructors. 3. Assure that drawings and specifications are complete, clear, and consistent. 4. Avoid overly frequent or detailed inspections that do not contribute directly to assuring final quality. 5. Join with other agencies in specific programs to share information and centralize selected inspection activities, for example by participating in the Army's Construction Contractor Appraisal Support System. 6. Work with designers and users to develop integrated inspection plans for all construction projects, and then with constructors to assure that the plans are effectively executed. 7. Fund research and demonstration activities required to develop new inspection and other quality assurance technologies. 8. Adopt systems to measure explicitly the agency's quality management efforts and to relate those efforts to the costs of replacement and repair of faulty construction or of productivity lost through acceptance of faulty construction. 9. Assert, at senior administrative levels, each agency's commitment to quality in its constructed facilities and establish definite programs for making the commitment effective and lasting.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xii
CONTENTS xiii CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 Scope of the Committee's Deliberations 3 Organization of the Report 5 2. Quality and Practices for Its Assurance 7 Defining Construction Quality, Assurance, and Control 8 Inspection for Quality Control and Assurance 10 The Federal Acquisition Regulations 11 Agency Quality Management Practices 13 Factors That Influence Agency Practices 16 Perspectives from Private Sector Quality Management Practices 19 Legal Distinctions Between Federal and Private Practices 23 Committee Assessment of Agency Practices 25
CONTENTS xiv 3. Extensions and Alternatives to Inspection 27 Total Quality Management in Construction 27 Teamwork and Quality 29 Contractor Performance Evaluation 30 Bidder Pre-Qualification 31 Incentive Contracting 32 Integrated Inspection Plans 32 Cost and Schedule Protection Plans 33 New Technology for Inspection 35 Quality Measurement Systems 36 4. Conclusions and Recommendations 39 Getting Quality in Federal Facilities Construction 39 The Designer's Role 40 The Role of Inspection 41 Coordinated Agency Quality Management Programs 41 Effective Inspection 42 Quality Measurement Systems 42 Effective Quality Management 43 Assuring Quality in Construction 43 APPENDIXES A Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff 45 B Glossary of Terms Related to Construction Quality 51 C Federal Acquisition Regulation and Construction 55 D Total Quality Management 57 E Quality Performance Measurement 61
INSPECTION AND OTHER STRATEGIES FOR ASSURING QUALITY IN xv GOVERNMENT CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND OTHER STRATEGIES FOR ASSURING QUALITY IN GOVERNMENT CONSTRUCTION
INSPECTION AND OTHER STRATEGIES FOR ASSURING QUALITY IN xvi GOVERNMENT CONSTRUCTION
