L.A.’s Geology Is Safe for Tunneling, Expert Panel Says : Metro Rail: Report renews confidence of subway backers, but Antonovich calls it a ‘whitewash.’ Study also blames some construction problems on management.

In a major boost to subway proponents scrambling to keep the multibillion-dollar project alive, a panel of engineering experts concluded Thursday that Los Angeles’ geology is “safe and economical” for tunneling and, in fact, offers fewer problems than in many other cities.

Despite some criticisms, the $125,000 study provided little in the way of new ammunition to critics who have vowed to “pull the plug” on the $5.8-billion subway and want to move future rail lines above ground in the 21st Century.

The subway system’s advocates did little to hide their enthusiasm.

“Pop the champagne; this is a great report and it brings our credibility back,” said Stanley Phernambucq, construction chief at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. “This reaffirms where we’re going. . . . It reaffirms the fact that we can tunnel safely and with all due caution, of course. The conditions here are no worse than anywhere else in the world.”

Nonetheless, the long-awaited study blamed several of the operation’s high-profile problems on management shortcomings. It also recommended that planners consider more sophisticated equipment to lessen public disruptions that have become common along the subway’s construction route.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who has fought vigorously to derail the subway construction, lambasted the report as “a whitewash.” And state Sen. Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica), another frequent critic, questioned the independence of the report’s authors, saying the MTA officials who chose them “weren’t looking for bad news.”

The study, Hayden asserted, “is really [Mayor] Richard Riordan’s rubber stamp for the gravy train.”

“I don’t think this will give much comfort to the business owners on Hollywood Boulevard who saw the boulevard sink after being promised that it wouldn’t,” Hayden said.

The report, prepared over the last three months by a team of three international experts, was requested by Riordan after a huge sinkhole engulfed part of Hollywood Boulevard in June because of faulty design work.

Under the threat of state and federal funding cutbacks for the project, transit officials said the report would help them determine how--or even whether--they should proceed with plans to extend the subway to the Eastside, the Westside and across the San Fernando Valley.

Currently, 3.2 miles of subway are in operation in the Downtown area between Union Station and MacArthur Park, and tunneling is under way to extend the subway through Hollywood to the Valley by early in the next century.

Riordan said in an interview that the study “gives us confidence in going ahead on the tunneling, at least from a construction point of view.” But beyond the geotechnical issues addressed in the report, the mayor said officials still need to confront the broader question of whether subway construction best serves the region’s transportation needs.

The report said several of the construction problems on the project stand out, including the erection of thin tunnel liners along the Downtown leg of the subway, the sinkhole and additional ground sinkages in Hollywood and North Hollywood.

These problems might have been avoided, the report said, had the MTA held its contractors more stringently to its approved plans.

Nonetheless, the panel concluded, the transit agency “can be satisfied with much of its tunnel construction” because the rate of problems on the job is as good as or slightly better than with other tunneling projects studied around the world.

In its statistical analysis, the panel found that half the work on the Los Angeles subway was done “without problems.” More than 12% of the work was carried out with minor problems, the report found, and 37.5% suffered “significant problems.”

The panel consisted of Dan Eisenstein, professor of geotechnical engineering at the University of Alberta; Geoffrey Martin, a seismologist and dean of the USC School of Civil Engineering, and Harvey Parker, senior vice president of the Seattle-based engineering firm Shannon & Wilson Inc. None of the panelists returned calls for comment Thursday, but all are scheduled to present their findings at a workshop today at MTA headquarters.

MTA board Chairman Larry Zarian scoffed at the idea that the experts were biased in the agency’s favor. “All I can say is that these people are experts I believe are truly well-recognized worldwide. It would be presumptuous to feel they haven’t done their job,” he said.

Despite a generally glowing report, the panel found significant room for improvement, noting that both the frequency of earthquakes in the region and the presence of methane and other underground gases are unique problems that demand extra caution in subway construction.

Still, Antonovich maintained that the experts, in declaring the construction “economical,” ignored the huge costs of lessening methane and earthquake hazards and of paying off claims to residents whose property is damaged by construction. “The report is a cover-up for the excessive costs of the subway system. . . . It’s a whitewash,” the supervisor said.

Although the area’s soil conditions make it a relatively cheap place to tunnel compared to the sites of other North American projects, this may have exacerbated some of the problems on the Metro Rail program, the report concluded.

Because contractors are competing to offer the lowest bid on a job, they may not be able to afford to use the most sophisticated equipment to ensure stable ground and avoid settling of the soil--a repeated problem on the project.

If it avoids cheaper, disruptive practices such as street-level grouting, the agency may actually save money by cutting down on cost overruns and property claims against the project, the report said.

Phernambucq said he will weigh the study’s recommendations on adopting more sophisticated methods.

“We’re going to look at that, absolutely,” he said. “We’re changing the way we operated, and we’re changing for the better.”

Transit officials reviewed soil conditions before beginning tunneling in 1986. But the MTA in August decided at Riordan’s request to hire the panel after the sinkhole developed.

The report comes as Riordan and other MTA board members, trying to end the agency’s political and public relations embarrassments, are seeking to fire MTA Chief Executive Officer Franklin E. White.

After a contentious 2 1/2-hour meeting Wednesday, MTA directors agreed to have an existing committee of five members make a recommendation on White’s fate.

But with that compromise plan just hours old, board member James Cragin, a supporter of White, said Thursday that he will ask MTA Chairman Zarian to revamp the process out of concern that it may be stacked against the chief executive.

By his count, Cragin said, the members of the CEO Evaluation Committee now stand at 3 to 2 against White. Riordan, who used to chair the panel, is one of its members and helped devise the process for evaluating the chief executive.

“I don’t think it’s fair to White,” Cragin said. “Right off the bat there are more members on that committee that have already indicated they don’t want him, so how are you going to get a fair evaluation of the guy?” Cragin said he wants the board to bring in an “outside and impartial” consultant to assess White’s performance.

But that idea met with immediate resistance. Raul Perez, one of the two MTA board members who last week proposed firing White from his $178,000-a-year job, said that “I don’t want to see us waste any more money for another study.” And Zarian said: “I want to give this committee a chance to do its work.”

It became apparent this week that the subway construction problems have cost the agency financially. President Clinton on Wednesday signed a bill allocating $85 million this year for Los Angeles subway construction. The project had been receiving more money than any other transit project in the nation--25% of all construction funds. This year, it fell to third on the list and will receive only 12% of the money.

Still, Los Angeles officials were encouraged by a statement in the House-Senate conference committee report that the MTA has made “significant progress” in improving safety and quality assurance.