Geotech Report (and other reports lik...

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 135 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Friday, June 07, 2024 - 11:10 am:    I was told at some point that the Geotech Report would be included in Division 00 as available Project Information, unless it is part of a project where there is significant civil work such as a roadway, or a geothermal field, then it goes in Division 31. Ditto something like the Asbestos Report -- if it is being provided as background information, it goes in Division 00, but if it is part of work that involves remediation, then it would go in Division 02. (And then, it should only be provided, both the report and the spec section, but someone licensed to do asbestos remediation.) Am I right? I am getting pushback. Thank you! (I thought this had been discussed, but I was unable to find it. But my company's firewall makes searching extremely difficult. So I apologize if I am bringing up something that has already been flogged.) ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1631 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Friday, June 07, 2024 - 11:17 am:    Two different conditions. Geotech report is usually used as the basis for Civil and Structural design so it is always Available Information in 00 31 32 unless someone is crazy enough to put their Seal on it as part of Division 31. All cost; no benefit. Re: Asbestos Survey and Report. This gets tricky but bottom line is that if remediation is part of the Work, the existing asbestos information (survey, report, etc.) is Division 00 but the Work (assessment by Contractor, removal, disposal, abatement, remediation, etc.) is all in Division 02. Hope that makes enough sense to help. Take a look at MasterFormat on CSI Resources and search "asbestos". Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 136 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Friday, June 07, 2024 - 12:22 pm:    This is great -- very clear and concise! Thank you! Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 147 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 08:59 am:    Follow up question: I was advised to keep Asbestos reports in Division 00 unless the firm for which I was working was licensed in asbestos remediation design. Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 440 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 09:06 am:    We usually recommend these third party reports get added as appendices to the project manual, outside of the 49 Divisions. ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1641 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 09:18 am:    Per MasterFormat: 00 31 26 Existing Hazardous Material Information We include a separate preamble using that number and add a Level 4 suffix (usually 00 31 26.01) when listing the Reports so they appear immediately after the preamble in the Project Manual. The preambles explain that, like Geotech Reports, the Hazmat Report is not a Contract Document, is provided for the Bidders' use at the Bidders' risk, and that we have no responsibility for its contents or use. Remediation would belong in Division 02 and yes, it should only be generated and issued by a firm licensed in environmental engineering and even then you want to make sure your language is accurate. jpjordan@jordanconsultants.com (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 11:08 am:    In general, these reports (and the site survey) are explicitly excluded from the architect's responsibility. The E&O carrier does not want the architect taking responsibility for them. Usually, the Owner hires these people. I put them in a Division 01 category, and MasterFormat has 00 31 00 - Available Project Information. I usually have a "cover document" that says that the architect has no professional responsibility for it. This has been my way of handling it since I began writing specifications. David G. Axt, CDT, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 2089 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 01:42 pm:    I agree with Peter Jordan. Reports of any kind (existing conditions, geotech, hazardous materials, etc.) are NOT Contract Documents and are only available for the contractor's convenience. Technically they should NOT be included in the project manual. That said, I have put them in at the direction of the architect, because the architect got tired of the requests from bidder to have a copy. I have either put the reports in Division 00 with a cover sheet that has more disclaimers than a roofing warranty or put them in an Appendix at the end of the project manual again with disclaimer cover sheets. David G. Axt, CDT, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC John Bunzick Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1938 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, July 24, 2024 - 03:05 pm:    All of this is true in regards to the architect's potential liability for the content of geotech reports. On the other hand, we can't loose sight of the fact that the builder can't build a proper foundation without them. Hence, we can't just wish they'd go away. Oh yeah, I almost forgot to mention that the structural engineer's foundation design is going to be based on them anyway. This is insurers being insurers, not a practical assessment of what needs to be given to a bidder. Contract language covers soils conditions pretty well. jpjordan@jordanconsultants.com (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Thursday, July 25, 2024 - 10:30 am:    John. Not wanting them to go away. I recognize that they are necessary for the design, and I believe that the Bidders / Contractor should have access to them; however I don't want the information included in such reports to be the designer's professional responsibility. I also include such things as radiation reports for diagnostic facilities, acoustic reports (for site noise), and wind tunnel studies. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 984 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Thursday, July 25, 2024 - 01:03 pm:    The contractor needs the geotechnical report:- --for some design build items --In order to estimate cost of earthwork --So the contractor cannot claim information was hidden from him. Loretta Sheridan Senior Member Username: leshrdn Post Number: 148 Registered: 11-2021 Posted on Friday, July 26, 2024 - 07:55 am:    Well, we had our big meeting, and the Division 00 location prevailed. Yay! a huge "thank you" to all of you for your input. John Bunzick Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1939 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, July 26, 2024 - 10:59 am:    I agree, Peter, that the information in the geotech report should not be the responsibility of the architect. Generally, the owner's responsibility for subsurface conditions is laid out pretty clearly in the owner/architect agreement. Plus, companion language exists in the owner/contractor agreement as to the owner's responsibility. Thus, I think we sometimes worry too much that the geotech report's presence in the project manual manages to assign responsibility to another entity than what the contract's plain language says. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 792 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Saturday, August 24, 2024 - 03:38 pm:    We continue to place reports generated by the Owner's consultants in an Appendix, and address the existence of the report in a Division 00 "Available Information" document. If information or recommendations relevant to the the soils and the foundation design are to be found in the reports, it is the Civil Engineer's and Structural Engineer's responsibility to include them in their designs. It is not the Contractor's responsibility to change the design because they found some unsatisfactory soil in an excavation - they need to get the testing agency to test it and obtain a modification from the Civil Engineer to excavate and replace the soil or have the SE modify the foundation design. We keep seeing CEs include in their specs that the Contractor is to follow the Soils Engineer's recommendations. We always recommend to our Architect to have the CE correct this lazy practice. Phil Kabza FCSI CCS AIA SpecGuy Specifications Consultants www.SpecGuy.com phil@specguy.com