Army COE Standards

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

Author Message Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 423 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 01:35 pm:    Can someone provide a link for access to the Army Corp of Engineers Standards, I'm trying to review one that I've listed in a specification that is being challenged by a contractor. Appreciate any help on this one. Richard Howard, AIA CSI CCS LEED-AP Senior Member Username: rick_howard Post Number: 145 Registered: 07-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 01:48 pm:    Try this link to find DoD documents: http://www.assistdocs.com/search/search_basic.cfm Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 424 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 01:57 pm:    Richard, that's a great link, thanks, but there are no COE documents found using it. Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 502 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 03:41 pm:    The Corps of Engineers don't publish standards any more. Since the "National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995" was enacted, much of the government standards development has disappeared, relying more on the private sector standards such as ASTM and ANSI. What document is it you're trying to find? Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 425 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 03:58 pm:    Ronald So does that mean that one should not reference COE Standards in their specifications? The standard I was looking for was CE CRD C621. Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 503 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 04:32 pm:    CRD C621 is now ASTM C 1107. You can find some of the COE standards at http://wbdg.org/ccb/index.php. When you look at the list, you'll notice that the latest issue of any standard is 1997. CRD-C621 isn't even listed since it has been replaced. You'll find that many of these remaining standards will also fade away as have many of the MIL-STDs and other federal standards and material specifications. However, the DOD will continue writing construction specifications under the heading of Unified Facilities Guide Specifications, which are also available at this site. The UFGS are maintained by all the military departments and NASA. Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP Senior Member Username: lazarcitec Post Number: 426 Registered: 05-2003 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 04:35 pm:    Thanks Ronald Ron Beard CCS Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 223 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 - 05:04 pm:    Jerome: This tread poses an interesting reminder to us all. A specifier should read and understand the scope of every referenced document purposed for use in a given section. I know this is idealistic - like we bearly have time to complete a section much less research every referenced document out there. Never-the-less, we should not forget that is one of our charges. Use of the "Referenced Documents" article [which I detest] only compounds the overuse of this practice. If an outside document is used as a reference, then it should be listed complete with class, grade, type, etc., and application for the specific use. To make a wholesale "list" of various documents, is not only a complete waste of a specifier's time, IMHO, but unenforceable in a large percentage of cases. The current practice, as used by leading guide spec sources and mirrored by manufacturer's suggested guide spex, list a referenced document, but nowhere actually states that a specific material/installation must comply with that document. For example, listing the NEC as a referenced document but nowhere in the section specifically stating that work shall comply with the NEC is a questionable practice. If there is text that specifically states that work shall comply with the NEC, then it is clear and enforceable. Once said, why is there a need to post it in the "Referenced Documents?" I can't tell you how many times I have reviewed a spec section and found a list of 10 or 20 "referenced" documents which are never mentioned again in the technical text. Sorry for my getting off on a tangent from the original question. It just activated on of my latent buttons. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 779 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 08:50 am:    I completely agree with Ron in that a specification must require compliance with a referenced standard, and include the appropriate classes and grades (if there are any). In my opinion, the Referenced Documents article has only one useful purpose, which is a place to put the "long name" of a standard that is referred to multiple times within the text--the text can then use an abbreviated notation--as a way to shorten the text. If a standard is referred to only once, a separate listing is not required. I understand that some government agencies require this listing, for what purpose I don't know. The "leading guide spec" that I use does not list reference standards unless the text requires compliance with that standard (Masterspec). James M. Sandoz, RA, CSI, CDT, LEED AP Senior Member Username: jsandoz Post Number: 21 Registered: 06-2005 Posted on Wednesday, August 22, 2007 - 09:19 am:    Ron, your argument against a referenced documents section is an excellent one and you stated it very well but your earlier point about understanding what exactly the various standards call for is one that we should always keep in mind. Even if we can not find the time to read every standard word for word there is usually an abstract or summary that lets us know if we need to spend more time comprehending a particular standard. I like John's idea too for using a referenced documents article only if it is necessary. Some of the names can be very long indeed. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 65 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Tuesday, August 28, 2007 - 10:13 am:    Although many old COE standards have been transfered to ASTM, ACI, etc., there are actually some COE CRD standards left. Try this link, http://www.wes.army.mil/SL/MTC/handbook/handbook.htm