Summary

The public-school district (the “District”) retained the Member Firm to perform geotechnical-engineering studies for several buildings at two sites. The Member Firm’s geotechnical reports both contained identical recommendations for “select” fill to be used in constructing the building pads for the schools.

The District retained different design teams for the two schools and the Project Specifications for the two schools, not surprisingly, differed significantly. Neither were completely consistent with the recommendations that the Member Firm provided in their geotechnical-engineering report.

A field representative testing compaction of the building pad fill identified inconsistencies and discovered onsite mixing of native soil with import material, a clear violation of the geotechnical recommendations. The earthwork sub-contractor was forced to remove and replace the structural fill for nearly all of completed pads which triggered a legal dispute. The Member Firm avoided losses emphasizing the importance of field representatives that knew project specifications, observed daily field activities closely, and communicated with project management to identify construction defects and potential risks.

Our Hosts:

Elizabeth is the Principal Geotechnical Engineer at JLT Consultants in Boise, Idaho. Elizabeth has performed and/or assisted with numerous geotechnical investigations throughout Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming managing projects, providing geotechnical design, project quality control, cost and value engineering, and evaluating geotechnical constructability issues.

Abi is a Project Consultant at SME experienced in managing a variety of steel, concrete, coatings, and nondestructive testing projects. She specializes in managing projects related to DOT fabrication quality assurance reviews but also supports project managers throughout SME’s various service groups.

Lessons Learned:

Calls-to-action:

Subscribe

This episode was produced by the following GBA Members: