- Consultants have consistently reported that the Muskrat Falls project is well-managed and well-led.
- Despite that independent analysis, MFP has been dogged by significant cost over-runs, significant problems with performance on meeting project timelines, and chronic problems with communications/public disclosure.
- Review of Muskrat Falls project by a company called Independent Project Analysis.
- Consists of 34 slides
- Majority of slides (20) contain background information on project and contractor or bland statements of fact.
- No details on research specific to this assessment beyond reference to interviews.
- Remainder of slides (14) provide no evidence to support positive statements or indicate areas of concern...
- Example:
- “LCP has the following characteristics that are comparable to those of successful megaprojects moving forward…”
- Implicit unanswered questions remain.
- Question: What was the before/after assessment that led to the “September re-baseline”?
- In other words, did MFP have the characteristics of successful megaprojects before what IPA calls the “September re-baseline” or are those the result of a significant project re-jig?
- Slides seem to only discuss situation since September“moving forward” with no indication of substantive knowledge of situation before September 2015.
- This is important because other consultants told us repeatedly this was a solidly managed project before the “September re-baseline”.
- MFP supporters have record of presenting information that is inaccurate/incomplete.
- Examples:
- Lowest-cost alternative
- Water management
- Power output
- Project cost estimates
- Elimination of thermal generation.
- Solidly managed projects primed for success don’t usually have to reset the baseline halfway through.
- Question: Does it have any characteristics of unsuccessful megaprojects?
- Unexplained hints of internal project management problems (comms often misidentified/mistakenly blamed for management problems):
- “LCP organization comprises more levels than typically observed for similar projects, suggesting additional communication efforts required…
- “Organization staffing analysis indicates that MFG would benefit from additional construction management…
- “LCP lower level management comments suggest an increased management field presence will be beneficial…”
- Red Flag (Slide 32 – Recommendations, first bullet):
- “All megaprojects have to be vigilant and exercise due diligence in reacting to capital productivity challenges.”
- On one hand a penetrating insight into the obvious.
- On other hand may refer to specific problems with this project with “capital productivity challenges”.
- Sudden appearance of jargon unrelated to rest of presentation = Big Red Flag
- Unexplained Jargon = Enormous Red Flag
- Could be referring to significant cost over-runs on project to date coupled with significant problems that led to “September re-baseline.”
- Could be something else.
- ??? What does it mean
- Conclusion:
- Consultants have consistently reported that the Muskrat Falls project is well-managed and well-led.
- Despite that independent analysis, MFP has been dogged by significant cost over-runs, significant problems with performance on meeting project timelines, and chronic problems with communications/public disclosure.
- Growing gap between claims in favour of project and observable experience coupled with proponents’ record of incomplete/inaccurate statements undermines public confidence in project and its proponents (Nalcor and government).
-srbp-