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

RE: Bridge Inspection And Rating - NOT Public Facility

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
No reason, only that it will obviously be more expensive. I am not a
"BRINSAP contractor" and so would have to engage an acquaintance of mine,
who does BRINSAP inspections, to do this one. The question is, then, "is
there any point to doing so?"

The physical inspection is one thing, but if I understand correctly, that is
not the entire procedure. For example, I know that such programs include
registering the bridge(s) in the master database. Don't know if the state
would even accept the data for inclusion, if it is not a public facility.

That's why I say this is a "fish or fowl" question, because it raises issues
such as "why do they administer such a program in the first place?" The
ultimate reason is, I think (and to which you alluded) "Federal funding."

I don't think this bridge gets "federal funds". I think the owner pays for
all the maintenance, etc., even though it is performe or at least
administered by the county.

William L. Polhemus, Jr., P.E.
Polhemus Engineering Company
Katy, Texas
Phone 281-492-2251
Fax 281-492-8203


-----Original Message-----
From: David Finley [mailto:pec(--nospam--at)isgroup.net]
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 9:31 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Bridge Inspection And Rating - NOT Public Facility


After saying all of that, is there a particular reason for not following the
state's procedures?


* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org