Local METRO watchdog Tom Bazan’s latest public information requests of the transit agency have yielded some interesting information regarding the ongoing stray-current problem.
Recall that back in November, KTRH-740 and KHOU-11 reported that nearly $1 million had been spent trying to solve the problem. A Chronicle story in December also covered the issue. All three stories gave the impression that METRO fully expects the contractor (Siemens) to reimburse it for these costs.
A letter from Siemens to METRO dated 21 November 2006 suggests that the contractor isn’t nearly as amenable to reimbursing the agency for stray current costs as METRO may have suggested to local media. Here is an excerpt from the document forwarded by Bazan:
In response to METRO letter MSG-10708 dated 8/17/06, STS provides the following:
It is Siemens position that the costs delineated by METRO that may be related to stray current investigations, i.e., testing, repairs, management and any other costs that may have been incurred by METRO during the stray current investigations are considered consequential in nature. Consequential damages are expressely excluded from the Siemens/Metro Contract as stated in Article 87 …. “The contractor shall, to the extent permissible by law, be exempt from incurring consequential damages from METRO when such consequential damages relate to the performance of this contract.“
In conclusion, STS is not liable for Metro’s claim related to the costs incurred by METRO which may be related to stray current efforts.”
It doesn’t really sound as though Siemens is very receptive to METRO’s suggestions that it pay back the transit organization for the growing costs of a stray-current problem that neither the contractor nor METRO seems able to fix.
