Letter of transmittal
- To: the Nevada Gamblers team owners and Dome management team
- From: the McDuff management team
- Subject: regarding the problems noticed with the Nevada Gold Dome
Attached you will find the report regarding the ‘artificial turf, ramp cracks, roof leak and equipment damage of the Nevada Gold Dome’ object constructed by our company and delivered to your management team more than two years ago. This report compares and contrasts the evaluations our management and your dome management, made about the problems observed.
The problems observed and evaluated were:
- Artificial turf: several spots around the edge of the field.
- Ramp cracks: Several one-inch cracks have developed in concrete ramps that lead from the locker room to the field.
- Roof leak: Leaks developed in the dome roof, caused by the pounding of rainwater on a sunken roof section near one of the spectator decks.
- Equipment damage: Water entered one of the dome’s controls rooms, damaging three TV monitors and causing carpeting to mildew.
From the evaluations made we found that there are some different instances that our teams have. There are serious differences especially in the evaluation of the last two observed problems, the roof leak, and the equipment damage. These differences are not exclusive. More detailed analysis and review of our stances could lead to a joining of positions.
We thus recommend that it would be more appropriate to conduct deeper analysis to come to a more shared evaluation and a final solution that would benefit both companies.
Please find below our evaluation report with its explanations. If you have any additional concerns concerning the evaluation and the subsequent operations proposed to follow, please do not hesitate to contact us immediately.
Introduction
To have clearer ideas we find it is necessary to define some basic concepts. These key terms’ definitions will lay the ground for a sound explanation of the findings from our evaluation. These key terms all relate to the four problems observed in the Nevada Gold Dome and the responsibilities our company has as a constructor of the Dome. These definitions of terms will also help us in assessing the liabilities regarding this issue. After the key terms are defined, we will begin by describing the observations of the problems made by our team and the Dome team along with the differences in opinion. First, let us begin by defining the terms of the problems observed.
- Dome stadiums are sport structures (stadia) enclosed by a roof in the form of a dome.
- Artificial turfs are surfaces made from synthetic fibers made to resemble natural grass.
- Reinforcing bars are bars that are used to reinforce a structure.
- Ramp cracks are cracks in the concrete bars and pillars supporting a building.
- A roof leak is when the water finds other ‘alternative’ ways other than the predisposed draining canals in the roof.
A warranty is a “guarantee that certain facets of an article or service sold are as factually stated or legally implied by the seller, and that often provides for a specific remedy such as repair or replacement in the event the article or service fails to meet the warranty” (Bush, 1915).
Liability is a “comprehensive legal term that describes the condition of being actually or potentially subject to a legal obligation” (Bush, 1915).
Total quality management is a “set of management practices throughout the organization, geared to ensure the organization consistently meets or exceeds customer requirements. Total quality management places a strong focus on process measurement and controls as means of continuous improvement” (Markel, 2006).
Issues in the discussion
Four major problems attracted the attention of the teams and that both agreed that should be addressed as soon as possible.
- Artificial turf: The turf has pulled up at several spots around the edge of the field. Although Dome maintenance staff tried a quick fix, the turf has pulled back up– again and again.
- Ramp cracks: Several one-inch cracks have developed in concrete ramps that lead from the locker room to the field. Just last week two football players tripped on the cracks as they entered the field in front of the TV cameras covering the game. The embarrassment, as well as the possible danger to high-priced players, has the dome management fuming.
- Roof leak: Leaks developed in the dome roof, caused by the pounding of rainwater on a sunken roof section near one of the spectator decks.
- Equipment damage: Water entered one of the dome’s controls rooms, damaging three TV monitors and causing carpeting to mildew.
For the issue of artificial turf, the dome managers believe that artificial turf was installed improperly, without adequate drying time allowed for the adhesive.
Our evaluation team believes that the problem was caused wholly or on a part by the dome’s home team, the Nevada Gamblers. Two years ago, the team began practicing on the surface before the end of the two-week curing period recommended by the installers.
For the issue of ramp cracks, Dome managers remember McDuff, Inc.’s comments on a construction progress report, indicating that several trucks arrived late when concrete was being poured for the ramps. Thus there were longer than usual delays between truck pours for the ramp.
Our team believes that our company satisfied the minimum professional standards for timeliness during the concrete pour. Unrelated to the timing problem, McDuff had recommended additional reinforcing bars for the ramp concrete during construction. However, Dome management had only approved the minimum amount required by applicable standards.
For the roof leak, Dome managers believe that a structural flaw in the roof support system caused water to pool on one small section of the roof, instead of rolling off into the drainage canals.
After observing the roof area, our team rose suspects that a major hailstorm two months ago damaged the roof panels, which caused the pounding of rainwater and led to the subsequent leak.
Regarding the issue of equipment damage, Dome management suggested that the route of the water shows that it may have come through wall spacing from the area of the roof leak.
We recommend not underestimating the possibility that the damage resulted from a custodial worker failing to turn off a faucet located above the control room in a maintenance area. When the open faucet was discovered, the maintenance room was cleaned up without anyone observing seepage into other rooms or wall space, but such seepage seems just as likely as seepage from the region of the roof leak.
Recommendation/conclusion
Our firm strongly believes that customer satisfaction is the most important thing for a business company. We are ready to collaborate with the Dome management to resolve the issues at once. Nevertheless, we cannot be retained liable for events that do not relate to our construction work. Hailstorms or any other natural event are such events that are not covered by any warranty in the world. Thus the roof leak is a problem caused by extra-warranty phenomena. We cannot be considered liable for that and the equipment damaging also. Since it came from the roof leak we have no liability toward that. Furthermore, our team showed that it could also have been the fault of an employee of the dome.
Regarding the ramp cracks, the delay in concrete pouring because several trucks arrived late still is not a valid justification since our company fulfilled the minimum requirements as agreed. Nevertheless, we are ready here to offer our help and reinforce the ramps to show our goodwill.
References
Bush, C. (1915). Uniform business law: with business forms and illustrative cases. The H.M. Rowe Company.
Markel, M. (2006). Technical communication, 9th edition. Bedford: St. Martin’s Publishing.