Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: CalTrans Screw Up

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
As most of the rest of us, I do not really know the facts behind this issue.
However, we have been involved in some similar circumstances that may account
for what is happening here.
If the Contractor did not conform to the welding specifications that he bid on,
then he would owe the Owner a refund for the work he did not perform as
specified.  When the engineer reviewed what was actually provided, he may have
determined that it was adequate.

A similar example could be that if the drawings called for wall reinforcing to
be #5 bars @ 16 inch spacing, and the Contractor only provided #4 @ 16" o.c.,
then the construction could be called defective.  However, upon evaluation by
the engineer, he finds that he was conservative in his design and #4 @ 16" o.c.
are adequate, then no repair is necessary.  But the General Contractor is still
obliged to credit the owner with the difference between what he bid on and what
was provided.

I am not saying that this is actually what happened here, but this is one
scenario I can think of where it would make sense to call the construction
"defective", and at the same time no repair is necessary.

Lynn


Bill Allen wrote:

> Are these not FACTS:
> 1.    CalTrans has determined that certain welding of rebar is
> unsatisfactory.
> 2.    CalTrans has decided not to correct this problem forcing the general
> public to
> use these structures (approximately 100 bridges statewide).
> 3.    CalTrans is not going to pay approximately 70 contractors for this
> work because
> they have deemed the work unsatisfactory although CalTrans is going to
> accept the
> work.
> ?
> Regards,
> Bill Allen
>