To: "INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: AISC Code of Standard Practice
From: Mark Gilligan <MarkKGilligan(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 19:51:59 -0400
In construction contracts the Contractor has to do his work in compliance
with the Contract Documents. Inspections and shop drawing reviews are
intended to find as many of the problems as possible as soon as possible to
prevent problems, but at the end of the day the Contractor must comply with
the Construction Documents, even if no problems were found by the
inspectors or in the shop drawing review.
One possible exception would be when the Architect or Engineer says that a
specific non-compliance is acceptable. But this exception would require
that the Architect or Engineer recognize that that there was a
non-compliance and communicate to the Contractor that the deviation was
The above statement is the way most Construction Contracts are formulated.
Given the above, I find it baffling why the Steel Fabricator and hence the
General Contractor should not be responsible for deviations from the
Construction Documents. Language in the AISC Code of Standard Practice
(4.4.1.a), if invoked in project specifications, absolves the Contractor of
any responsibility for errors or for intentional changes as long as they
are reflected on the shop drawings irrespective of whether the Architect or
Engineer may have known of these deviations.
Is the Owner, the Architect, and the Engineer willing to accept
responsibility for these deviations and any cost of repair?
Are you willing to guarantee that the shop drawings are fully in compliance
with the project Contract Documents?