Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Cal Trans Sign Structures

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
There probably isn't an engineering reason for rejecting the work.  Work is
rejected when it doesn't meet the State Standard Specifications or the
project's Special Provisions. My experience, direct and indirect, is that
the State does not bend when it comes to these types of situations.

First you must identify and agree or disagree that the work does not meet
the Plans and Specifications.

If you run the gauntlet of trying to "sell" the work because it works from
an engineering standpoint, you will be in for a lot of frustration.   All
attempts, that I'm aware of, to have the State accept sub-standard work (as
defined by State specs), for any reason, have been futile.  They expect you
to build them precisely what they've asked for. It's been done right by
others and therefore no less is expected for this contract.

The State's position will be that the plans and specifications accurately
define the standards of the construction, that thousands of sign structures
have been built accordingly, and that the structure in question does not and
therefore WILL be removed.  Then the general contractor will have to decide
if he wants to pursue the issue further in this manner, possibly risking
[further] contract delay and subsequent LD's, and jeapordizing future
progress payments.

The best bet is to repair or re-construct the work, as they want it,
capturing the costs all the while, and then file and pursue a claim.  The
General must file a Notice Of Potential Claim to initiate the claim process.
There are time constraints as to when this form must be filed.  This form is
available from the State's Resident Engineer for the project.

You will have more success trying to get paid for re-doing the work to the
State's satisfaction than you will trying to get the State to accept work
that does not meet the Standards.

Best Luck,

Brent Koch, P.E.
Livermore, CA

-----Original Message-----
From:	Brad Friederichs [mailto:brad(--nospam--at)]
Sent:	Tuesday, September 22, 1998 3:59 PM
To:	seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject:	Cal Trans Sign Structures

Is anyone familiar with Cal Trans sign structure CIDH piles and anchor bolt

I am interested in your input with regards to acceptability of anchor bolts
that were not constructed perfectly plumb (1:25 slope) and a slightly
sloping top of CIDH.

Cal Trans is rejecting this work saying that it does not meet plans and
specs but I initially don't see any engineering reason why it should not be

Have you heard of situations where Cal Trans has accepted the work as
described above?

Any thoughts?

Brad Friederichs