Historically ODOT has made a conscious effort to reduce the Construction Engineering (CE) costs expended on projects. These efforts, although done to some degree in every district, were not uniform. Some loose guidelines were provided but they were never formalized.
Past guidelines concentrated on overtime elimination without regard for the work being completed or the risk to the owner. This manual’s purpose is to provide a staffing guideline for the Districts. If the staffing is properly addressed then overtime will be reduced and CE costs minimized.
The determination of whether to provide a specific inspection level is based on many factors:
The evaluation of the need for inspection as well as the level of inspection can only be made at the project level by the project engineer/project supervisor (PE/PS). This person is the one who has full knowledge of all factors and can best gauge the level of inspection required.
This manual is provided to aid the districts and the PE/PS’s in making the proper decisions with respect to staffing, and bring some uniformity to the inspection and staffing processes throughout the state. The information provided is not absolute due to the many factors encountered at the project level. It is intended to be a GUIDELINE.
This committee reviewed all major items of work encountered during any given construction season. They were analyzed individually with respect to the risk to the owner and the inspection level required.
Work was evaluated based on the owner’s risk if inadequate inspection is provided and the work is not done properly. Although it is recognized that it is the contractor’s obligation to complete the work in accordance with the plans and specifications, it is also understood that high risk items must be inspected thoroughly to assure ODOT, the FHWA and the public that the work is done properly.
The major risks associated with the construction of any project are:
When evaluating any item, these and other factors were considered when developing these guidelines. They also must be considered by the district and PE/PS when staffing projects.
Each item was also evaluated based on the level of inspection necessary to assure the owner that the item was completed to a level that represented the least possible risk.
It should be noted than an item; whose failure represents a high risk to the owner may only require intermittent or minimal inspection due to the nature of the work. The opposite is also true. A low risk item may require more inspection due to the completed product being buried or due to it’s approval being critical to maintaining the sequence of operations. It may also be true when the work only requires one day or involves the last day of a given operation.
The following is a summary of items or groups of items reviewed by this committee and it’s recommendations.
Generally removal operations are considered a low risk operation. Removal of incidental items such as signs, sidewalk, trees, etc. routinely require minimal inspection. They do, however, require that measurements and the layout of the items to be removed be done in advance to assure that the intent of the plan is met.
Removal of large items may require an increased level of inspection when the operation affects the roadway structure (eg. filling basements when under future pavements), the public’s safety (eg. removals over traffic) or the environment (eg. work in environmentally sensitive areas.)
Excavation in general is a low risk operation. The risk does increase with the presence of utilities or when blasting is involved but for the most part this work can go un-inspected until the excavation limits are reached and it is then ODOT’s responsibility to confirm that the work is at the proper grade elevation.
These items all contribute to a properly prepared roadway subgrade. The owner’s risk when an embankment and/or subgrade is not properly constructed is high. Any operation involving roadway integrity should be considered a high priority. In-depth inspection of these items is required.
Based on the current climate within ODOT, ODNR and the EPA, these are high priority items on a project. Properly used and placed they control off-site pollution and prevent possible sanctions and fines. Although high priority, the nature of these items do not require a large expenditure of inspection time. They can be laid out in advance and then inspected for compliance once installed. After installation, periodic inspections are required but they do not require daily efforts or the expenditure of overtime.
Most pavement repair items are considered high risk due to the consequences of the work not being done properly and the inability to completely inspect the work after it is done. Pavement repair operations are fast moving, production, type operations that totally complete work at many locations in a given day. Although the removal of the existing pavement is not usually inspected, the work must be checked for proper layout and the area inspected prior to the start of the next operation. All remaining operations involved in pavement repair require continuous inspection.
Operations such as sawing and sealing represent a low risk to ODOT if not done properly. On operations such as these, full attention should be centered on layout, which is critical to the item, but the use of continuous inspection is not essential to this item once properly located.
Proper construction of these items is critical to the structural integrity of any pavement. The consequences of improperly placed materials are many and high risk. Although there are some individual operations within this broad area that may not require full time inspection, work in these areas can be characterized as requiring full-time, in-depth inspection.
This item includes a varied number of operations from simply grinding butt joint transitions to full width planing to correct longitudinal and transverse profiles. The risk associated with incorrect work, although it may involve extensive rework, is considered low. Proper layout can be done in advance and the contractor’s work product can be checked periodically throughout the normal workday. Therefore, a large expenditure of inspection dollars is generally not required.
Almost all structure work is considered high risk. In general, work on structures must be inspected at critical points prior to beginning the next operation. Although considered high risk some items, such as tying re-steel and setting forms only require intermittent inspection and normally do not require the expenditure of overtime. However, inspection of an item may require overtime in order to not delay work that may follow that are on the critical path. Operations such as setting beams, erecting structural steel, driving piling, waterproofing, placing drilled shafts, etc. are high risk. These critical items require our full attention.
Some structural items such as setting bridge rail are considered low risk and need only minor attention as it can be fully inspected once the item is completed.
The risk associated with improperly painting a structure is generally aesthetic in nature. Although an inadequate job will affect a structure’s longevity, the risk to the structure is minimal. The bridge painting specifications contain quality control points, which require an operation to be inspected and approved prior to beginning the next phase. Due to these check points, bridge painting may require more inspection than is normally associated with a lower risk operations.
Structure patching is considered a low risk to the owner if not done properly. It is important to identify and limit the areas to be patched and verify the contractors’ methods and materials but the use of full-time inspection and extensive overtime is not required.
Drainage, which includes small conduits, larger culverts, drainage structures, etc., and waterline work are considered high-risk areas. Improper construction can affect the structural integrity of the pavement, the longevity of the pavement, and result in costly repairs if not caught in time. Proper inspection of all phases of these items from bedding to backfilling is critical and for the most part should be continuous.
With the exception of knowing how far the posts penetrate the ground, everything else involved with these items can be inspected after they are complete. Improper construction can be identified and corrected easily. It is recognized that inspection and overtime may be required if the duration of the operation is less than one day.
Items such as sidewalks and curbs represent a low risk to the owner if not placed properly. The work can easily be corrected. As with any item verifying layout is important. The preparation work must be checked prior to concrete placement. Because these are usually high production items more inspection may be required than is normally associated with low risk items.
Retaining walls should be given the same attention as structures. The improper construction of a retaining wall could create major problems, such as landslides, pavement failure and structure failure. As with structures there are many phases of retaining wall construction that do not require continuous inspection. Items like re-steel placement and forming must be thoroughly checked prior to concrete placement, but the expenditure of overtime during these type operations is not normally warranted. Any continuous type operations that affect the structural integrity (e.g. backfill) should be monitored closely.
Failure of an approach slab does, like pavements and structures, represents a high risk to the owner. Usually approach slabs are a slow production item and the type of work that requires continuous inspection only during concrete placement.
The risks associated with temporary pavements, are mostly the same as regular pavements. Care must be taken to provide an adequate pavement structure on which to maintain traffic. Most work required in constructing temporary roads and pavements is considered high risk.
Incidental items such as barrier reflectors, raised pavement markers, rumble strips, small concrete masonry items are low risk items. The consequences of the improper construction are minor in nature. Inspection should only be done on an occasional basis or once the items are complete. Overtime should not be necessary for these items.
With the exception of a few critical signs, such as stop signs, the consequences of a improper sign construction represent a low risk to the owner. Attention should be paid to proper foundation construction and sign locations but continuous inspection is not necessary.
The consequences associated with improper highway lighting construction represent a low risk to the owner. Attention should be paid to proper foundation and underground work but the remainder does not require continuous inspection.
The consequences of improper construction of a traffic signal location represent a significant risk to the owner. Although there are portions of this work that does not require continuous inspection, close attention should be paid to all phases.
Pavement marking operations, in general, are considered low risk to the owner. The consequences associated with improper work are minor. The work can easily be inspected after placement. Layout of new markings is the most critical phase.
Seeding and mulching is generally considered low risk. The consequences of improper construction are minimal and easily corrected. Because the seeding items are usually completed at the end of a project as a short-term operation, an additional inspection effort may be required to determine quantities.
As with seeding and mulching landscape operations are low risk in nature. Occasional inspection is required to assure that the items are being installed properly. An effort should be made initially to assure proper layout. However, with the specification establishment period full time inspection and the expenditure of overtime is not required.