While the administrative commission of inquiry into the collapse of part of the pier of embarkation of the terminal 2 E, May 23 at Roissy, prepares to make public its report its President, Jean Berthier, present February 15 , the controversy has rebounded yesterday following an article of the "Parisien" referring to the conclusions to which it would have come. According to the daily, it would confirm a track already mentioned in the report stage of July 6, a perforation of the vault in concrete by the "button", these metal pieces placed on the roof to support the outer canopy. Since then, experts have highlighted a lack of reinforcement in concrete: "not strong enough, the vault would not have had the necessary resistance to withstand the pressure exerted by each buton." "Clear: an arc in concrete with a metal frame with large meshes and thus too loose could not withstand the pressure of the outer shell glass", wrote "Le Parisien".
Transmitted to the justice
The Ministry of equipment and transport responded yesterday by saying in a statement that "all recent declarations relating to the causes of the accident (...)". may not translate at this point the conclusions of the administrative commission. "The mission and the report are not completed and, therefore, what some might lend him are totally premature." Responding to the newspaper, which "is expected already on the side of Aéroports de Paris (ADP) to a cascade of review warnings" what a close source of ADP yesterday confirmed to AFP , the Department recalled that "the purpose of the commission is to identify the causes and to make any general recommendations for this type of works." "However, the administrative commission does is not designed to search for the responsibilities, these issues in actions brought by the justice." The report presented by Jean Berthier will be obviously sent to justice to help educate the Criminal Branch of the case.
If the information on the origin of the drama were confirmed then arises the question of responsibility for the choice of the volume of necessary reinforcement in the concrete vault. Former EPA architect, Paul Andreu took the lead yesterday, stating in a press release: "Since the first day, Visual observations showed that the loss is caused failure of the steel concrete reinforcement" implied, and not a too much boldness in the drawing of this vault of only 30 centimeters thick. Moreover, the person concerned "recalls that all the building professionals will confirm: determination of reinforcement is not a problem of the competence of architects design, but is a task the responsibility of the companies of BTP", in this case, GTM Construction, a subsidiary of the Vinci Group. House mother whose title has not suffered in the stock market, closing at 114,20 euros, stable with its course of Friday refused yesterday to any comment, waiting for the publication of the report. Last July, the report questioned "the origin of the phenomenon and the reasons why the accident occurred two years and four months after the construction". In the case of a flagrant lack of reinforcement, the structure should have indeed let go immediately. The rapporteurs therefore evoked a possible decrease in strength of the material. Moreover, it should be noted the great complexity of the site in which 400 companies were involved in lots separated, under the conduct of ADP, which was both owner and master of work.