FHWA Specs - Special Provisions (SP) or Special Contract Requirements (SCR) 1

[Trillers]

I have been tasked to lead the design of two small accessory buildings for a county highway project using FHWA (FP-09) specifications. It is NOT a DOT/FHWA project, just the project design scope states that our specification master will be the FP.

We paged and labeled the specs for these buildings as "SP" pages. We received two conflicting comments from the reviewers...one stated that we needed to separate the specs into divisions (the 000XX series), while the other stated we need to just change the labeling and call these SCR provisions.

Our in-office spec writer insists that DOT projects usually utilize SP provisions for technical/material specs in construction contracts (which this is) as instructions to the contractor, and SCR's are usually (not always) reserved for administrative or regulatory provisions.

None of the DOT literature seems to provide a firm and final on this subject.

Anyone have experience with this issue or can direct us to a good reference to clarify?

Thanks.

 

[DDBPE]

I manage a Heavy Highway Contractor/Materials company and I checked with our Contract Administrator, and his main concern if you have the two different labeling of specs is which one would take precedence and that would have to be written in the specifications.
Also, he would look to make sure the SCR or SP do not conflict with each other or conflict with the plans or specs.
We usually do not concern our selves with the labeling, just the order of precedence as this is what you would legally have to abide by.

 

[cvg]

why wouldnt you just resolve this with the reviewers?

 

[bimr]

A particular specification is amended or replaced with a special provision to resolve project-specific issues. The decision to amend or replace any standard specification with a special provision is made during the design process and is based upon the sound engineering judgment of the project designer.

Special Contract Requirements generally cover contract requirements like joint powers agreements, real estate related agreements, and contracts that require unique or special contract terms like disadvantaged business issues, etc. Specifications should not be in the special contract requirements.

I do not believe that accessory buildings are included or covered in the Standard Specifications, at least not the ones that I work with. There is a standard specification for roads, but not for buildings.

It is not good practice to specify an accessory building with the special provisions, but I have seen firms do it on small projects. The risk is that something will be left out of the specification or missed. I have also seen firms put the division specifications into the special provisions. Again, for small projects.

If your project is small, you can probably get away with it. However as noted by DDBPE above, you will need to list in your Contract document what specifications are included, the order of precedence, and make sure that you do not miss something.