Two Contradictory Base Details and an Unmarked Water Main
On a $2.4M streetside plaza project (180 calendar days, 5 percent retainage, $1,200/day liquidated damages), the contractor is at Day 95. The drawings show a 6-in. concrete base under the unit pavers; Specification Section 32 14 13 calls for a 4-in. compacted aggregate base. The contractor installed 4 in. of aggregate and now asks you by RFI to "approve what's in place." Separately, on Day 88, while excavating for a seat-wall footing, the contractor severed an unmarked 8-in. water main shown on no utility plan or record drawing; the repair took six working days and idled a crew. The superintendent verbally proposed "going to 6 in. everywhere" and asked you to note it in the daily log, and the owner wants to know who pays for the delay.
1. How do you answer the RFI about the base assembly?
Read the worked answer
Do not approve installed work by RFI. An RFI requests information; an approval of installed work is a submittal, a field observation, or a change order - not an RFI response.
Read the two documents against each other. These are not the same assembly at two thicknesses. A 6-in. concrete base implies a paver-setting bed and a rigid pavement section; a 4-in. aggregate base implies a flexible, permeable-detail section. One of them is a wrong master section copied from another project. The hierarchy-of-documents clause does not resolve this one, because no document is more specific - they are contradictory.
Issue a written clarification (architect's supplemental instruction). State the required assembly, why, and the effective date. Do not confirm anything verbally; a superintendent's verbal modification is not authority to change the work.
Sort out who pays for the 4 in. already placed. Two facts decide it:
- If the specification section was plainly for a different assembly and the contractor should have raised the conflict before installing, the contractor bears removal.
- If the documents were genuinely contradictory and the contractor reasonably relied on the section they followed, the delta is a change and should be priced before proceeding.
Either way: instruct the contractor to submit a price and time impact before doing the corrective work, and document the condition with photographs and the as-built aggregate thickness. Never let a disputed condition be corrected before it is documented - once it is buried, the claim becomes a debate about memory.
2. The water main strike: what is your process, and who bears the six days?
Read the worked answer
Notice first, analysis second. Check the general conditions for the notice period (commonly 14 days for claims and for concealed/differing site conditions). If the contractor gave no written notice, notify them in writing immediately that the claim may be waived and ask for written notice now - you are protecting the owner, not helping the contractor.
Establish the facts you need:
- Was the main on any record drawing, the utility plan, or the one-call ticket responses?
- Was the excavation within the tolerance zone and was hand excavation used?
- What does the geotechnical report say?
Classify the condition. An unmarked utility absent from all record documents and not located by the one-call service is a classic differing site condition - generally compensable in time and, depending on the contract, in cost. If the main appears on a record drawing the contractor had, it is a means-and-methods problem and the six days are theirs.
Analyze the time, not just the event. Six working days of repair does not automatically equal six days of critical-path delay. Run a time impact analysis: was the seat-wall crew the only affected work, or was it float? Ask for a fragnet against the accepted schedule, and confirm the delay was on the critical path at Day 88.
Do not decide by email. Issue a formal determination reserving the owner's rights, and route the cost through a change order with backup. Keep the daily logs, photographs, and the utility company's repair ticket in the project record.
3. The superintendent's verbal request to "go 6 in. everywhere" - how do you handle it, and what does the daily log say?
Read the worked answer
Decline verbally, confirm in writing, and do it the same day. A field directive can bind an owner if it is acted on. Send a memo: "No direction was given to change the base assembly; the RFI response of [date] governs. Do not proceed with any change until a written change order is executed."
What the daily log entry should contain: the date and time, who said what, who else was present, your response, and the fact that no direction was given and none was implied. State it neutrally - logs are discoverable and editorializing reads badly in dispute.
Why it matters here. "6 in. everywhere" quietly changes the assembly in the flexible-paver areas, may conflict with the drainage detail, and will show up later as a claim for an extra the contractor says you directed. The only defense is a contemporaneous written record from the same day.
If a change is genuinely warranted (it may be, if the 4-in. section is wrong for the loading), the correct route is: clarification, contractor's price and time impact, negotiation, executed change order, then proceed. The sequence is the protection - not the outcome.