INDOT Standards Committee Actions Update – April 2018

Summary prepared by Indiana Constructors, Inc. Staff

Effective Date Range: January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2018

SECTION 100 (NO ITEMS)


SECTION 200

 

SECTIONS 207 and 214 – Subgrade and Geosynthetic Confining System
Issue:
Section 207 – Subgrade has a number of issues. There has been a lack of clarity on the subgrade soils requirements, and no requirement for proofrolling currently exists. Also, there is some confusion with what is intended to be paid for in the cost of other items, such as geotextile. A need for a geosynthetic confining system for certain subgrade treatment types has been identified.

Solution: Subgrade soil requirements and subgrade treatment types have been placed into a table. Editorial changes have been made throughout to organize the construction specifications. A requirement for proofrolling has been added. A Geosynthetic confining system has been added to certain subgrade treatment types, and edits to section 214 have been made accordingly.

RSP: 207-R-669 and 214-R-670
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017


SECTION 300 (NO ITEMS)


SECTION 400

 

SECTIONS 401.18(c) – Smoothness Correction
Issue:
The grinding of current pavement bumps over 0.3 inches, as identified by profilograph traces, has been questioned as to whether it is intended to include a range between 0.25 inches to 0.34 inches due to the presumed Department rounding range.

Solution: In order to clarify the intent of the bump correction specification, the significant digits for a pavement bump will be increased and will be represented as 0.30 rather than 0.3. With this revision, any potential rounding of bump corrections would range from 0.295 to 0.304 inches. This range is more in line with the original intent of the bump grinding specification.

RSP: 400-R-667 and 501-R-668
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017


SECTION 500

 

SECTIONS 501.25 – Pavement Smoothness
Issue:
The grinding of current pavement bumps over 0.3 inches, as identified by profilograph traces, has been questioned as to whether it is intended to include a range between 0.25 inches to 0.34 inches due to the presumed Department rounding range.

Solution: In order to clarify the intent of the bump correction specification, the significant digits for a pavement bump will be increased and will be represented as 0.30 rather than 0.3. With this revision, any potential rounding of bump corrections would range from 0.295 to 0.304 inches. This range is more in line with the original intent of the bump grinding specification.

RSP: 400-R-667 and 501-R-668
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 501 and 502 – Recycled Concrete Aggregate
Issue:
RSP 500-R-623 was created after the June 2015 Standards Committee to allow the use of recycled concrete aggregate back into concrete mixtures. Since taking effect, no Contractors have elected to use the specification. Since there is no interest, it does not make sense to maintain the specification or the test equipment required for this spec.

Solution: Delete RSP 500-R-623 RECYCLED CONCRETE AGGREGATE.

RSP: 500-R-623
EFFECTIVE DATE: ASAP
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: NO
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 501.25(c) – Pavement Smoothness
Issue:
The grinding of current pavement bumps over 0.3 inches, as identified by profilograph traces, has been questioned as to whether it is intended to include a range between 0.25 inches to 0.34 inches due to the presumed Department rounding range.

Solution: In order to clarify the intent of the bump correction Specification, the significant digits for a pavement bump will be increased and will be represented as 0.30 rather than 0.3. With this revision, any potential rounding of bump corrections would range from 0.295 to 0.304 inches. This range is more in line with the original intent of the bump grinding specification.

RSP:  501-R-668
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 503.06 – PCCP, Random Crack Remediation
Issue:
Section 503.06 provides the remedies for random cracking in PCCP. The spec is currently too permissive in the repairs available for longitudinal cracking that is more than 18” outside of the longitudinal joint. The reasoning is that within 18” of the longitudinal joint cracks will be held tight by the tie steel, but outside of 18” there is no steel to restrain the cracks. It is also difficult to determine the actual cause of cracks outside of 18 inches. Therefore, repairs such as stitching may not provide an adequate long-term solution and the pavement may not survive the design life without excessive maintenance.

Solution: Require remove and replace as the only repair option for longitudinal and skewed cracks in pavement that are more than 18 inches from the longitudinal joint.

RSP:  503-R-671
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: November 15, 2017


SECTION 600

 

SECTIONS 601, 911.02(f), and 926.03 – Guardrail, Treated Lumber and Alternate Material Guardrail Blocks
Issue:
The transition to MGS w-beam as the Department standard for guardrail supports the AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for installing MASH-compliant safety hardware. The MGS w-beam guardrail standard drawings were approved as revised during the May 2017 Standards Committee meeting (RPD 601-R-658d). Revisions to the Standard Specifications were not included. Revisions to SS section 601 are necessary to add the MGS w-beam guardrail and to differentiate it, where necessary, from the current strong-post w-beam guardrail. MGS w-beam guardrail system uses the same components as the current strong-post w-beam guardrail – w-beam rail section, assembly bolts, steel or timber post, timber or composite blockout. However, the MGS w-beam guardrail assembly makes the system distinctly different.

Solution: Revise the Standard Specifications sections 601, 911.02, and 926.03 to complement the MGS w-beam standard drawings and the July 1, 2018 (letting) sunset date for guardrail end treatments. “MGS w-beam guardrail” is used to differentiate the system from “w-beam guardrail” in both the specification and the pay items.

Section 601 revisions:

  • Revise “block” to “blockout” to be consistent with MASH terminology.
  • Revise “wood” to “timber” to be consistent with MGS system FHWA eligibility letter and standard drawing callouts.
  • Add “MGS w-beam guardrail” into the section and distinguish its use (where appropriate) from “w-beam guardrail”.
  • Add sunset date when the 27 3/4” end treatment cannot longer be substituted for a 31” guardrail end treatment. [Prior to July 1, 2018: NCHRP 350 compliant, 31-in. or 27 ¾-in. plus height transition. After July 1, 2108: MASH compliant, 31-in only.]
  • Add requirement for the contractor to provide the manufacturer’s FHWA eligibility letter for both end treatments and impact attenuators. Update language to “NCHRP 350 or MASH”. The approved materials list will control whether devices have been crash tested under NCHRP 350 or MASH.
  • Revise method of measurement and basis of payment, and add MGS pay items.

Section 911.02(d) revisions:

  • Revise “block” to “blockout” to be consistent with MASH terminology.
  • Add language that restricts the use of a timber post for w-beam guardrail and explicitly allows steel or timber for MGS w-beam guardrail. [The w-beam guardrail did not pass MASH with timber posts. The w-beam guardrail did pass MASH with steel posts but the w-beam rail element tore.]

Section 926.03 revisions

  • Revise “block” to “blockout” to be consistent with MASH terminology.
  • Update language to “NCHRP 350 or MASH”.
  • Revise certification requirements to providing an FHWA eligibility letter.
  • IDM sections 49-4.0 thru 49-9.0 are under review and will be provided at a later date.

RSP: 601-R-660
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: July 19, 2017

SECTION 601 – Guardrail
Issue:
The transition to MGS w-beam as the Department standard for guardrail supports the AASHTO/FHWA Joint Implementation Agreement for installing MASH-compliant safety hardware. The MGS w-beam guardrail standard drawings were approved as revised during the May 2017 committee meeting (RPD 601-R-658d). The MGS Long-Span is detailed on sheet 8 of the approved RPD 601-R-658d. The minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail required upstream and downstream of the outermost CRT post is shown to be included with the MGS Long-Span, Type 1 and Type 2 for both the detail and the pay item. For designer and construction clarity, we believe the pay item for MGS Long-Span should only run between the outermost CRT posts and the minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail required upstream and downstream of the MGS Long-Span should be paid for separately. The minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail required upstream and downstream of the outermost CRT post, may also include a guardrail end treatment, terminal end anchor, or transition. By separating the MGS Long-Span and minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail into two pay items, it should clarify that guardrail end treatments, terminal end anchors, and transitions are paid for as each, even though they may be included in the minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail.

Solution: Revise sheet 8 of the approved RPD 601-R-658d by: Changing the following description, “MGS Standard Post Spacing” to “Minimum MGS w-beam guardrail”. The minimum length given on the sheet is not for MGS standard post spacing (6′-3″) but for a minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail which could include a guardrail end treatment, terminal end anchor, transition, or an omitted post in accordance with RDP 601-R658d sheet 6.

  • Revising the limits of the MGS Long-Span, Type 1 and Type 2.
  • Adding dimensions of the minimum length of MGS w-beam guardrail required upstream and downstream of the outermost CRT posts.
  • Editing the last sentence of Note 1 to state, “This length may include the length of a guardrail end treatment, terminal end anchor, or transition.
  • Removing the reference to the table in Note 1.

We also are proposing to add some text to clarify the limits of the MGS Long-Span in the RSP 601-R-660. A revision to the pay will not be required. The current pay item unit for MGS Long-Span is Each.

RSP: 601-R-658d, 601-R-660
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: November 15, 2017

SECTION 615 – Monuments, Markers, and Parking Barriers
Issue:
RSP 615-R-020 WOOD POST PARKING BARRIER has a revised statement that clarifies that the cost of backfill, disposal of surplus materials and all other necessary incidentals shall be included in the cost of the pay items shown in the 615 section but due to limiting Basis for Use for this RSP “Required for all contracts with the Parking Barrier Wood Post pay item” only, this revised statement was missed in contracts with other 615 pay items.

Solution: To discontinue use of mentioned RSP and to create new with the Basis for Use to be included in contracts with any 615 pay items. Also, to be incorporated into 2020 Standard Specifications.

RSP: 615-R-666
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 629 – Plant Growth Layer
Issue:
Problems have been encountered when phosphorus within existing soils is found to be extremely low. The rates that would need to be added to the soil to bring the mixture into current acceptable range would be detrimental to newly planted vegetation. Since phosphorus is absorbed within the soil structure very slowly, there would also be an increased potential for runoff of excess phosphorus reaching bodies of water.

Solution: Reducing the acceptable range of phosphorus for topsoil mixtures from the existing 46 – 110 ppm to 20 – 80 ppm will help eliminate the detrimental effects on newly planted vegetation. Also, a limit (150 lbs. per acre per year) will be placed on the quantity of phosphorus that can be placed within a soil mixture. Both of these efforts will help eliminate the risk of excess phosphorus within new topsoil mixtures.

RSP: 629-R-630
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: November 15, 2017


SECTION 700

 

SECTION 709.05(e) – Alternate to Concrete Sealers
Issue:
Section 709.05(e) allows the use of an alternate concrete mix design in lieu of surface sealing for barrier rail and bridge railing. The alternate mix design must include one of two supplemental cementitious materials (SCMs), silica fume or ground granulated blast furnace slag (GGBFS). The specification has been in place since the late 1990’s and multiple research projects over the past few years including SPR-3104 by Frosch (2010) and SPR-3864 by Weiss (2016) have further emphasized the significant benefits of including SCMs in concrete. The benefits include reduced permeability, increased durability and reduced strains. The alternate mix option is also attractive to contractors since it eliminates an operation and they do not have to wait 28-days to apply clear sealers. The problem is that the current specification is restricted to railing.

Solution: Revise section 709.05(e) to include bridge decks, bridge approaches, pier and bent caps, and mudwalls.

RSP: 709-C-256
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 718 – Geotextiles for Underdrain
Sec 718 has been revised and there are five geotextile Types for the underdrain application and underdrain Sec 718.10. The current Pay item only has one.

RSP: 718-R-673
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: November 15, 2017


SECTION 800

 

SECTION 801 – Law Enforcement Officers
An RSP was approved to add a pay item to add Indiana State Law Enforcement Academy trained officers to assist with work zone safety.

RSP: 801-R-672 / 801-R-672A
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: NO
APPROVED: November 15, 2017

SECTION 801 – Signs – “Next Level Roads”
Per Governor’s request, a recurring plan detail with shop drawings and typical placement locations has been generated.

SDs: 801-TCSN-02, 801-TCSN-04, and 801-TCSN-05
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: NO
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 805 – Wireless Vehicle Detection System
Issue:
Currently the repeaters and receiver processors for wireless vehicle detection systems cannot be mounted on a sign post. Some cost savings could be realized if sign posts were allowed to support these devices. In addition, the sign posts are much easier to move if the repeaters need to be relocated after a speed limit change or as tree growth begins to interfere with the wireless communication signal strength.

Solution: Revise the recurring special provision for wireless vehicle detection systems to allow a receiver processor or a repeater to be mounted on a sign post.

RSP: 805-T-173
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: NO
APPROVED: January 18, 2018


SECTION 900

 

SECTION 902 – PCC Sealers and Healers
Issue: A frequency manual change to PG binder sampling frequency resulted in confusion as to how to handle a failed PG binder sample, because the current specification was based on daily sampling.

Solution: Revise to ensure clarity. Eliminate lot and sublot system, as it is no longer relevant. Add statement that failed test applies to week’s production.

RSP: 902-C-258
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 902.01 (a and b) – Asphalt Emulsions
Issue: There is little to no oversight in our current emulsion acceptance procedures.

Solution: Implement ITM 593 which is already in place and mimics our current approved binder supplier program.

RSP: 902-R-674
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: January 18, 2018

SECTION 909.02(b) – Epoxy Intermediate Paint
Issue: Some products have a shorter pot life than currently specified in 909.

Solution: Revise to require manufacturer recommended time for pot life.

RSP: 909-C-257
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 910.18 – Fence, Fittings and Gates
Issue: The steel laboratory at OMM performs one hundred or more tests per year on fence and fence materials that rarely fail, and pose little to no risk to the Department if they do fail. This laboratory time could be better used on more critical materials. This also reduces the time spent sampling the materials in the field.

Solution: Revise 910.18 to accept all fence and fence materials by Type C Certification. A draft Frequency Manual revision is also attached.

RSP: 910-C-259
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: September 21, 2017

SECTION 918.01 – Geosynthetic Materials
Issue: Sec 918 is not clear enough regarding the Approved Material List and ITM 806. Also, minor revisions to the properties are needed to expand the current Approved Material List.

Solution: Sec. 918 been revised to include ITM 806 references to help Vendors provide correct documents for material approval. Minor revisions to the properties are included to expand the Approved Material List.

RSP: 918-R-675
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 2018
2020 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS: YES
APPROVED: January 18, 2018

image_pdfimage_print