National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: ADDITIONAL ACTIONS BEING CONSIDERED
Suggested Citation:"SUMMATION." National Research Council. 1987. Quality Control on Federal Construction Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/19185.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"SUMMATION." National Research Council. 1987. Quality Control on Federal Construction Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/19185.
×
Page 30

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.

7 SUMMATION The committee received information from federal agencies on five subjects related to quality control of construction. With regard to definitions of terms, the information supplied by the agencies verified the committee's belief that agencies use a variety of quality control terms and that the terms are defined differently by different agencies. However, it is not clear that such differences cause any confusion or problems. In fact, some of the differences are probably more apparent than real. For example, even though agencies use different words to define the terms "quality control" and "quality assurance," most agencies agree that quality control is what the contractor does and quality assurance is what the agency (the owner) does. Agencies had widely differing views on the best basic approach to use to control quality on construction projects. The Army and the Navy both rely on the contractor quality control approach; i.e., they require the contractor to assume responsibility for quality control. The Veterans Administration relies primarily on government personnel for quality control. The Public Health Service generally favors using the design architect-engineer firm for quality control on large projects and in-house staff for quality control on small projects. However, two PHS programs (the Food and Drug Administration and the Indian Health Service) favor the use of in-house staff for all projects. The General Services Administration is opposed to the contractor quality control approach. When in-house staff is not available, GSA hires an independent third party inspection firm. 29

The agencies that responded to the committee's questionnaire were generally reticent about expressing views on trends in construction quality. The agencies gave various reasons for their reticence: lack of statistics, the difficulty of the task of quantifying quality, and the fact that quality actually is estab- lished by the contract documents with which contractors must comply, and if quality levels change it is due to changes in those documents. In discussing actions taken to improve construction quality control, most agencies put more emphasis on steps taken to improve the quality of their designs than on actions taken to improve quality control per se. Although the information on steps taken to ensure better designs was, strictly speaking, not responsive to the committee's questionnaire, it was consistent with the view expressed by most agencies that quality is actually defined by the contract documents and that contractors can only be required to provide the level of quality stipulated in the plans and specifications. Thus, when seeking better quality, the place to start is with the preparation of plans and specifications and related documents. Various agencies did, however, discuss steps being taken specifically to improve quality control on their construction projects, including: more training for inspectors and resident engineers, the distribution of inspection guides to inspectors, and hiring private firms to provide quality control services when government personnel are unavailable. In response to the committee's question about additional actions being considered to improve the quality of construction work being received, agencies mentioned a variety of steps; some of the ideas mentioned were extensions of actions already being taken; e.g., providing more training for inspectors and using private firms for inspection. Other ideas were somewhat novel; e.g., improving career opportunities for quality assur- ance personnel (in order to attract and keep better qual- ified personnel in such work), and institution of an award program to give recognition to quality construction work. 30

Next: REFERENCES »
Quality Control on Federal Construction Projects Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF
  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!