A review of the project by John Smyrk in 2005 stated:1 •  “threats to the project were not identified”;  •  programs of pre-emptive and contingency actions were not assembled;  •  “things kept going wrong” for which there was no allowance in the plan.
As a result, statistical outputs were hard to interpret and the statistical series and the organisation suffered reputational damage. Operating costs rose rather than declined as expected. They say one learns better from mistakes than victories. As the euphemism goes: there were lots of learnings about risk (and project) management from the project!