NIK: irregularities in the airport in Modlin – Virtual Poland

The number of irregularities in the activities of the company Mazowiecki Warsaw-Modlin Mazovia Airport and construction supervision indicated in the report of the SCC. Time pressure meant that investment, the airport in Modlin, was ill prepared – give the inspectors.
 

The airport in Modlin was launched in July 2012, but after a few months, at the end of December was closed due to problems with the surface of the runway. Aircraft returned to the airport is only in September 2013. Year. SCC believes that the company Mazowiecki Warsaw-Modlin Mazovia Airport did not have formal procedures for conducting investment process, taking into account the risks that may occur at each of its stages. Also did not have sufficient staff resources, allowing for self-management and monitoring investments.

According to NIK, to supervise the construction of the airport company emerged substitute investor. “NIK found that during the implementation of the investment project supervisor, improperly supervised the construction work: the inspectors were not always present on site, lacked reaction to reported defects, malfunctions were carried out construction documentation” – says Chamber.
 

stressed that supervision over the investment process did not prevent the emergence of irregularities involving, among others, to: faulty execution of the runway, award of public contracts in violation of the law or on niegospodarnym spending the money.

“As a result of the appearance of chipped concrete pavement of the runway threshold, due to the presence of marl in the composition of the concrete, the airport was excluded from commercial exploitation for nearly six months. Both in their preparation, as well as during the actual construction of the participants of this process did not take sufficient actions that might reduce the risk of this vulnerability “- set the SCC.
 

emphasizes that developed for runway construction documentation did not state clearly the type of aggregate, which had to be completed concrete mix used in the construction of the belt. “I also indicated unequivocally norms according to which should be selected to perform a mix of aggregate and cement concrete” – stated.
 

“As a result, the contractor did not have documentation that warrants exclude the presence of particles with high water absorption, which may be damaged by frost and rozmarzaniu”. NIK stresses that the exclusion of airports from the use resulted in financial losses determined by the company in the amount of 34.38 mln zł.
 

During the execution of works, the company gave contractors the three basic agreements ponadplanowo 62 orders for additional works worth a total of 16.19 million zł net. “Contractor of the works were selected after conducting proceedings under single-source procurement, despite the absence of evidence to the use of this mode, ie. In violation of the law”, – considers the SCC.
 

“Regardless preparation of tender documentation tasks including construction of airport, involving, among others, the preparation vague and inconsistent provisions of the agreement and the terms of reference, resulted in the need to conclude an agreement with the previous contractor a further two contracts for additional work on which the company has issued more than 5 million, which in the opinion of the NIK was niegospodarnym expense “- underlines SCC.
 

NIK informs that in connection with the loss of confidence in the company include project management company with other entities of the contract covering the tasks belonging to it: all works related to supervision, which is already the supervision of a substitute investor. For this type of agreement, the company has issued more than 500 thousand. “In the opinion of NIK were wasteful activities. NIK also critical of concluding another agreement with the investor substitute against which the company lost trust. By virtue of the agreement, the Company paid the project supervisor over 300 thousand, in addition, in part for his work in the earlier Agreement” – reads the SCC.
 

NIK draws attention to the passivity of construction supervision. “In spite of special circumstances, which were: the type of facility, the nature of defects identified at the airport (runway chipping) and associated with the use airports danger to passengers, construction supervision was limited to a conditional use permit runway Modlin airport without checking for several months whether and how the airport manager implements the conditions laid down in the decision, “- noted.