As General Manager for the joint venture of The BSC Group and Cullinan Engineering (BSC/C), I was more intimately involved with “Big Dig” SUE activities than the writer and need to correct a couple of issues he raised. BSC/C’s responsibly included, among others, management of all surveying and mapping activities during design and QA/QC during construction.
Contrary to the statement regarding the non-use of SUE in the design phase, several hundred potholes (Level A) and tens of thousands of linear feet (Level B) surveys were completed under a Pilot Program directed by the FHWA. This began in the fall of 1993 for Design Contracts D011A and D014C and continued with D019A based on our findings.
Project leaders like me actively promoted the use of SUE throughout yet, despite that effort and usual for the complex environment, it was not possible to avoid all conflicts which ultimately created delays. To that extent, the writer is correct.
However, the Project was exonerated from unjustified cost overruns and delays by the official Cost Recovery Committee in all fifteen cases brought against it. This was documented in a series of articles published in the Boston Globe that also cited acceptance by the vested parties of the 1994 estimate of $14 billion in 1994 dollars.
The writer of the article, likely due to their unfamiliarity with many aspects of this incredibly complex project, was unaware of these and other details. My advice in the future would be for them to cite one of many published studies by the FHWA found here: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/case.cfm that consistently demonstrate the cost and time savings provided when SUE is used in both the design and construction phases of a project rather than misleading readers by their being unaware of the actual work.
Wayne L. Mory, PS