Reporting of Assessment of Conditions of Unfinished/Abandoned Construction Work...

[DLWigwam]

I am looking for guidance/standards/examples pertaining to engineer's assessments of unfinished work. Context is that there is a facility (comprising multiple buildings or appurtenant works, etc.) that, for whatever reasons, were not completed. And a new firm is hired with the intent to complete the work.

We're going into this anticipating that what was built so-far was built in accordance with the plans. However, we can't be 100% sure.

Obvious concern is that there is a lot of risk for the firm taking on the work, but there's also a lot of risk to the owner if there's not a thorough assessment of what was actually built.

What we have:
1. The unfinished work.
2. The original contract documents in a complete form.
3. Some shop drawings.
4. No as-builts.
5. Probably half of the construction manager's files.

I'm hoping there's a book or an agency/code official regulation or other resource I could get my hands on and, if it's ideal, cite it in a contract regarding format, content, etc. to a third-party inspection company.

 

[RobertHale]

I have not seen any document to deal with what should and should not be check for a condition assessment like this. Just on the face of it, I think my assessment would deal with several aspects:
[ol 1]
[li]Look at the original contract documents and assess the design as documented. At a minimum I would look at the load path; are there any glaring holes or problems? I would check the load criteria for two items: Were the original loads correctly derived, and how does this compare to the latest adopted code? I would also check a few members to make sure the numbers work. Since you are looking at completing the work, checking the whole design is probably the path you want to take.[/li]
[li]Look at the shop drawings in comparison to the design documents. That will give you an indication if the project was going sideways. If there were wholesale changes to the design as indicated in the shops, you might just want to walk away[/li]
[li]After I did the document review above, I would go to the site and see if everything that can be observed is in accordance with the design documents/shop drawings. Based on your limited description, I would think that most of the structural elements could be observed without having to do a bunch of demolition of the nonstructural gingerbread. This visual observation will give you another checkpoint to potentially stop the process at something that will not work. You will also be able to assess the degradation of the work, I assume there has to be some.[/li]
[li]If everything is still looking positive that the job wasn't a disaster, then I would formulate a testing regimen. Taking cores to establish if the concrete strength is in accordance with the design documents, uncovering conditions that aren't visible (like foundations), scanning for reinforcing in concrete members, UT of steel connections, etc.[/li]
[/ol]
I think you would need to have an in-depth conversation with the Owner about the process. A tiered approach to the assessment is likely to save everyone pain in the end. Any reports that I would generate would be painfully explicit above the nature of the assessment and the potential gaps that limited observations or tests pose.

 

[dik]

When was it constructed? What code was in effect? Is it still valid? I'm not aware of any 'guide' texts.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik