City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Street Transportation Department 2016
1 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Table of Contents
PURPOSE AND SCOPE .............................................................................................................................. 4
BRIDGE INSPECTION QUALITY CONTROL PLAN......................................................................................... 5
PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................................. 5
QUALIFICATIONS OF INSPECTION PERSONNEL........................................................................................................ 5
Program Manager/Consultant Project Manager ................................................................................... 5
Inspection Team Leader ......................................................................................................................... 6
Bridge Inspector ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Inspection Assistants .............................................................................................................................. 6
QUALITY CONTROL ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .................................................................................................. 6
City Program Manager .......................................................................................................................... 6
Consultant Project Manager .................................................................................................................. 6
Inspection Team Leader ......................................................................................................................... 7
Bridge Inspector ..................................................................................................................................... 7
Inspection Assistant ............................................................................................................................... 7
Inspection Team Composition ................................................................................................................ 7
INSPECTOR TRAINING REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................................. 7
Bridge Inspection Refresher Training ..................................................................................................... 7
Inspector Qualifications Documentation ............................................................................................... 8
INSPECTION PLANNING ............................................................................................................................ 8
TYPES OF INSPECTIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Initial Inspection ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Routine Inspection ................................................................................................................................. 9
In-Depth Inspections .............................................................................................................................. 9
Fracture Critical Inspections ................................................................................................................... 9
Underwater inspections ....................................................................................................................... 10
Damage Inspections ............................................................................................................................. 11
Special Inspections ............................................................................................................................... 11
INSPECTION ACCESS AND EQUIPMENT ............................................................................................................... 11
Access Equipment ................................................................................................................................ 11
Access Permit Requirements ................................................................................................................ 12
Traffic Control ...................................................................................................................................... 13
Bridge Records ..................................................................................................................................... 14
Bridge File Review ................................................................................................................................ 15
Proper Inspection Equipment ............................................................................................................... 15
Personal Protection Equipment ........................................................................................................... 16
Forms and Sketches ............................................................................................................................. 16
Annual Training / Team Meeting ......................................................................................................... 17
ARIZONA DOT PRODUCTION GUIDELINES AND REIMBURSEMENT REQUIREMENTS ..................................................... 17
FIELD INSPECTION WORK ....................................................................................................................... 19
GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 19
FIELD INSPECTION SAFETY ............................................................................................................................... 19
Classification of Bridge Entry ............................................................................................................... 19
2 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Working Around Traffic ....................................................................................................................... 19
Lift Equipment Safety ........................................................................................................................... 19
Dust Control Information ..................................................................................................................... 20
INSPECTION NOMENCLATURE .......................................................................................................................... 20
Note Location Nomenclature ............................................................................................................... 20
Structure Direction of Inventory........................................................................................................... 20
Span Numbers ...................................................................................................................................... 20
Substructure Units ............................................................................................................................... 20
Superstructure Members ..................................................................................................................... 20
Lane Numbering................................................................................................................................... 21
Coding of Center Turn Lane.................................................................................................................. 21
Measurement Units ............................................................................................................................. 22
Crack Size Conventions ........................................................................................................................ 23
Longitude and Latitude Measurements ............................................................................................... 23
NBI CODING CONVENTIONS ............................................................................................................................ 23
CULVERT CONVENTIONS ................................................................................................................................. 24
ELEMENT CODING CONVENTIONS ..................................................................................................................... 24
Environment Designation .................................................................................................................... 24
Protective Coating Systems .................................................................................................................. 24
Bridge Rail Elements ............................................................................................................................ 24
Deck Area Measurements .................................................................................................................... 25
Girder Count Convention...................................................................................................................... 25
DEFECT DOCUMENTATION .............................................................................................................................. 26
General ................................................................................................................................................ 26
Girder Defects ...................................................................................................................................... 26
Deck Delamination Surveys .................................................................................................................. 26
Scour .................................................................................................................................................... 27
Critical Findings .................................................................................................................................... 27
FIELD INSPECTION DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................................................ 27
Report Categories ................................................................................................................................ 28
Entry Notes .......................................................................................................................................... 28
Structure Notes .................................................................................................................................... 28
Inspection Notes .................................................................................................................................. 28
Load Rating .......................................................................................................................................... 28
INSPECTION REPORTING PROCEDURES .................................................................................................. 29
GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 29
REPORT PROCEDURES .................................................................................................................................... 29
Notes Day ............................................................................................................................................. 29
INSPECTION PHOTOS ...................................................................................................................................... 30
General ................................................................................................................................................ 30
Typical Photographs ............................................................................................................................ 31
WORK RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 33
CLEARANCE DIAGRAMS .................................................................................................................................. 34
CHANNEL PROFILES ....................................................................................................................................... 34
SKETCHES .................................................................................................................................................... 35
As-Bulit Plan, Elevation and Cross Section Drawings ........................................................................... 35
3 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
INSPECTION DELIVERABLES .................................................................................................................... 36
ELECTRONIC INSPECTION DATA ........................................................................................................................ 36
BRIDGE INSPECTION REPORTS .......................................................................................................................... 36
LOAD RATING CALCULATIONS .......................................................................................................................... 36
QUALITY ASSURANCE REVIEWS ............................................................................................................. 37
QUALITY ASSURANCE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................................................. 37
QUALITY ASSURANCE SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING METHOD ................................................................................ 37
SELECTION OF SAMPLE ................................................................................................................................... 38
POST INSPECTION QA REVIEWS ....................................................................................................................... 38
QUALITY ASSURANCE FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... 38
BENEFITS OF QA REVIEWS TO THE PROGRAM ..................................................................................................... 39
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................... 40
APPENDIX A – DOCUMENTATION OF INSPECTOR QUALIFICATIONS .......................................................................... 41
APPENDIX B – ENTRY CLASSIFICATIONS ............................................................................................................. 43
APPENDIX C - QUARTERLY INSPECTION PROGRESS REPORT TEMPLATE ..................................................................... 47
APPENDIX D – VERTICAL CLEARANCE DIAGRAM EXAMPLE ..................................................................................... 48
APPENDIX E - CAD DRAWING SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................................................... 49
APPENDIX F – REPAIR ACTIONS AND UNIT COSTS ................................................................................................ 52
APPENDIX G – FIELD INSPECTION REFERENCE GUIDE (NEXT 7 PAGES) ..................................................................... 54
APPENDIX H – POST INSPECTION QA REVIEW FORM ........................................................................................... 61
APPENDIX I – DUST CONTROL INFORMATION ..................................................................................................... 63
APPENDIX J – BRIDGE CLOSURE PLAN ............................................................................................................... 65
APPENDIX K - AGENCY DEVELOPED ELEMENTS .................................................................................................... 66
4 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Purpose and Scope The City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures describe bridge inspection practices that must be followed when working for the City in order to have uniform interpretation of nationally inspection references. These policies and procedures provide for consistency of bridge inspection throughout the City and ensure consistency with the requirements of the Arizona Department of Transportation guidelines. This policy and procedures document covers the majority of issues that may be encountered while performing and documenting a bridge inspection in Phoenix; however, they are not intended to be exhaustive nor are they intended to replace bridge inspection references and manuals. Adhering to these policy and procedures does not relieve bridge inspection personnel from the responsibility of applying sound engineering principles throughout the bridge inspection process. In the event of conflicting information or requirements between these policies and procedures and the NBIS, the NBIS will govern. The National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) are published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 23 CFR 650, Subpart C. The NBIS set the national standard for the proper safety inspection and evaluation of bridges and apply to all structures defined as highway bridges located on all public roads in the United States. The following are some useful references to be consulted by bridge inspection personnel:
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Part 650, Subpart C (NBIS) • Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s
Bridges (FHWA) • Bridge Inspector’s Reference Manual (FHWA) • Inspection of Fracture Critical Bridge Members (FHWA) • Culvert Inspection Manual (FHWA) • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (FHWA) • AASHTO Manual for Bridge Evaluation • City of Phoenix Safety Policies
5 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Bridge Inspection Quality Control Plan
Purpose As bridges age and deteriorate an accurate and thorough condition assessment of each
structure is essential in maintaining a safe, functional and reliable roadway system. The
accuracy and consistency of the inspection and documentation of the bridge inspection is vital
to public safety. Accurate data is also important since it forms the basis of the entire bridge
management system. Procedures and processes are implemented to maintain the required
level of consistency and to verify the level of accuracy. Documentation of these processes
contained in these Bridge Inspection Practices and Procedures meets the requirements
contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, 23 Part 650 subpart C (23 CFR 650).
These Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures and the Quality Assurance Reviews are a series of
detailed processes that include field reviews and careful examination of all parts of the bridge
inspection program for the purpose of generating greater accuracy and consistency in the
program. To be effective, the inspection procedures (quality control processes) must be
followed by all personnel and the procedures should be evaluated and updated regularly.
Definitions
Quality Control (QC)
Quality control is defined as those functions done within the bridge inspection unit to review the
bridge inspection process and insure quality inspections are being conducted and inspections
are on schedule.
Quality Assurance (QA)
Quality assurance is defined as those functions that involve oversight external to the bridge
inspection unit to insure uniformity in the bridge inspection process.
Qualifications of Inspection Personnel
Program Manager/Consultant Project Manager
The position requires a general understanding of all aspects of bridge inspection and
engineering including design, new construction, data management, bridge management
systems, load rating, rehabilitation and maintenance practices.
Minimum Program Manager qualifications:
Have completed a comprehensive training course based on the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual, and
Be a registered professional engineer; or
Have a minimum of 10 year’s experience in bridge inspection assignments as team leader.
6 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Inspection Team Leader
The Inspection Team Leader and is responsible for planning, preparing, performing and
reporting the field inspection of a bridge. There should be at least one Lead Inspector at the
bridge at all times during each inspection.
Minimum Team leader qualifications are those of a NBIS Team Leader:
1. Have completed a comprehensive training course based on the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual, AND
2. Have a minimum of 2 years bridge inspection experience with the City of Phoenix or as approved by the City Program Manager, AND
3. Be a registered professional engineer; OR 4. NICET Level III or IV certification in Bridge Safety Inspection; OR 5. Have a minimum of 5 years experience in bridge inspection assignments as a team
leader.
Bridge Inspector
The Bridge Inspector shall assist the Team Leader in planning, preparing, performing and
reporting the field inspection of a bridge.
1. Have completed a comprehensive training course based on the Bridge Inspector’s Training Manual, and
2. Be approved by the City Program Manager.
Inspection Assistants
The inspection assistants shall assist the inspection team with performing the field inspection of
a bridge. The NBIS does not set specific training or educational requirements for assistant
inspectors.
Quality Control Roles and Responsibilities
City Program Manager
The City Program Manager is the individual in charge of the bridge program that has been
assigned or delegated the responsibilities for bridge inspection, reporting, and inventory. The
program manager provides overall leadership and is available to the Consultant Project
Manager. The City Program Manager shall approve all staff members to be utilized to complete
the inspection project from commencement to conclusion. The City Program Manager shall also
be responsible for conducting periodic field reviews of the inspection team, spot checking of
bridge inspection reports, and review of the NBI data for errors.
Consultant Project Manager
The Consultant Project Manager provides overall supervision and is available to
the Team Leader to evaluate problems. The Consultant Project Manager is to ensure that all
consultant staff performing National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) safety inspections is
qualified at the appropriate level in accordance with the provisions contained in this
7 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
document. The Project manager is also responsible to ensure each inspector has the proper
equipment available to perform the required inspection.
Inspection Team Leader
The Inspection Team Leader is responsible for planning, preparing, performing and reporting the
field inspection of a bridge. There should be at least one Team Leader at the bridge at all times
during each inspection. The Inspection Team Leader is responsible for the overall condition
assessment, work recommendations, inventory data, and appraisal ratings of the bridge.
Bridge Inspector
The Bridge Inspector shall assist the Team Leader in planning, preparing, performing and
reporting the field inspection of a bridge. Typical duties include helping to organize bridge
inspection trips, taking measurements, compiling notes, and taking photographs. Bridge
Inspectors may accrue the necessary experience to become a Team Leader over time. Bridge
Inspectors learn to assess the condition of bridge components and elements, determine
condition and appraisal codes, learn City conventions, and assist in report writing and other
inspection documentation. The Bridge Inspector shall have the ability to work at heights above
the ground, over water, wade in up to 30 inches of water, inspect from a boat, and enter and
work in confined spaces.
Inspection Assistant
The Inspection Assistant accompanies the Inspection Team during on site bridge inspections.
Typical duties include helping to organize bridge inspection trips, taking measurements,
compiling notes, taking photographs, and provide added safety for boat inspections, confined
space entry, and wade and probe inspections. Qualifications of Inspection Assistant are based
on the task and needs of the inspection team.
Inspection Team Composition Qualified personnel used in conducting safety inspection of in-service bridges typically consist of
two individuals: a Team Leader and a bridge inspector or inspection assistant. At least one of
these inspectors must meet the requirements of Team Leader. There are instances where
additional team members are required to complete the bridge inspection safely. These
instances typically occur when the inspection is conducted in and around water or a permit
require confined space entry is made. Other instances may occur when due to high traffic
volumes, there is a need to expedite the inspection to minimize traffic delays. Qualifications of
the additional team members are based on the task and availability.
Inspector Training Requirements
Bridge Inspection Refresher Training
Bridge Inspection Refresher Training as required by 23 CFR 650 is intended to increase
uniformity and consistency of the inspections both within an organization as well as nationally.
Bridge inspection refresher training shall provide a review of the National Bridge Inventory (NBI)
inspection methods including discussions on structure inventory items, structure types, and the
appropriate codes for the Federal Structure Inventory and Appraisal reporting. This training
8 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
includes both NBI Condition Ratings and American Association of State Highway Officials
(AASHTO) Bridge Element Inspection Manual. This training should be conducted every five years
or as needed to recalibrate inspectors to national and City standards as required by the CFR.
Inspector Qualifications Documentation
The form in Appendix A is used to document the training and qualifications of all inspection
staff.
Inspection Planning The key to the effective, safe performance of any bridge inspection is proper advanced planning
and preparation. The inspection plan should be developed based on a review of the Bridge
Record and may require a pre-inspection site visit.
The inspection plan should ensure that:
Inspection personnel are assigned in accordance with their qualifications.
The level of effort and frequency of inspection is consistent with the type of structure and details, condition and the potential for failure.
Unique structural characteristics and special problems of individual structures are considered in developing an inspection plan.
The proper access and inspection equipment is available for the inspection.
The inspection team is aware of any special safety requirements.
Types of Inspections
The Project Manager shall determine the type and depth of inspection to be performed and
ascertain the level of effort, budget requirements and the subsequent required activities.
The type of inspection may vary over the useful life of a structure in order to reflect changing
condition. Items such as the extent of access to structural elements, level of detail required for
physical inspection and the degree of testing will vary considerably in each of the following five
types of inspection.
Justification for inspection work that is beyond the limits provided for in this Policy and
Procedures is required to submitted to the City Program Manager prior to scheduling the work.
Initial Inspection
An Initial Inspection is the first inspection of a structure as it becomes part of the structure file.
The elements of an Initial Inspection may also apply when there has been a change in the
configuration of the structure such as widening, lengthening, supplemental bents or a change in
ownership.
The Initial Inspection is a fully documented investigation performed by persons meeting the
required qualifications for inspection personnel and it must be accompanied by an analytical
determination of load capacity if not already completed.
9 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Routine Inspection
Routine Inspections are regularly scheduled inspections consisting of observations and/or
measurements needed to determine the physical and functional condition of the structure, to
identify any changes from “Initial” or previously recorded conditions, and to ensure that the
structure continues to satisfy present service requirements. These inspections are generally
conducted from the deck; ground levels, water levels, or both; and permanent work platforms
and walkways, if present. Inspection of underwater portions of the substructure is limited to
observations during low-flow periods, probing for signs of undermining, or both.
Routine inspections are conducted on a designated frequency, typically 24 months, but may
vary. Certain culverts, with the approval of FHWA have had their routine inspection frequencies
extended to 48 months. Bridges with higher risk may be inspected at a 12-month interval or
more often as determined by prudent bridge inspection practices.
The Routine Inspection must fully satisfy the requirements of the National Bridge Inspection
Standards with respect to maximum inspection frequency, the updating of Structure Inventory
and Appraisal data including City requirements.
All routine inspections shall meet the following requirements:
1. Visual access from the ground or access equipment if deemed necessary 2. All noted conditions, problems and areas to be repaired shall be photographed 3. Structure condition shall be documented in text form, with NBI Condition Ratings,
photographs and with Element Level Inspection data. 4. Enter all data and recommendations using the current version of the AASHTO Bridge
Management Software.
In-Depth Inspections
An In-Depth Inspection is a close-up, hands on inspection of one or more members above or
below the water level to identify any deficiencies not readily detectable using routine inspection
procedures. Fracture critical and underwater inspections are considered in-depth inspections.
Full documentation of all defects including notes, locations, and photos is required.
Traffic control and special equipment, such as under-bridge inspection equipment, staging and
workboats, should be provided to obtain access, if needed. Nondestructive field tests and/or
other material tests may be needed to be performed to fully ascertain the existence of any
deficiencies.
Fracture Critical Inspections
Fracture critical inspections are to be conducted visually at arm’s length in accordance with the NBIS requirements and may utilize non-destructive testing equipment if warranted. Fracture critical inspections are required at intervals of 24 months or less and should be scheduled with the routine inspection if possible. Fracture critical inspections shall be conducted in accordance with an established fracture critical inspection plan.
10 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Underwater inspections
Inspection of the underwater portion of a bridge substructure and the surrounding channel,
which cannot be inspected visually at low water by wading or probing, generally requires diving
or other appropriate techniques. Inspections should be scheduled during low flows or
drawdowns whenever possible to reduce costs and improve the inspection quality. The
structure number, name and water crossing shall be listed in the schedule for any structure
requiring an underwater inspection. All underwater inspections employing divers shall comply
with Title 23: Highways PART 650—BRIDGES, STRUCTURES, AND HYDRAULICS Subpart C—
National Bridge Inspection Standards - § 650.309 Qualifications of personnel. (d) An
underwater bridge inspection diver must complete an FHWA approved comprehensive bridge
inspection training course or other FHWA approved underwater diver bridge inspection training
course. Inspect underwater structural elements at regular intervals not to exceed 60 months.
Other In-Depth Inspections
In depth inspections may be warranted in situations other than those defined as determined by
the Program Manager. Examples of other in-depth inspections include:
A hands-on (arm’s length) inspection may be performed on one or more members of
a non-fracture critical steel structure. ADOT will reimburse for in-depth inspection of
non-fracture critical steel structures every four years.
A hands-on (arm’s length) inspection may be performed on any concrete structure
whose current NBI condition rating of the deck, superstructure or substructure is less
than 5.
A concrete structure with members or elements that exhibit signs of distress/crack
patterns, severe deterioration and/or damage that will affect the integrity of the
structure or reduce the load-carrying capacity of the structure may also warrant a
hands-on inspection.
In general, an in-depth inspection is not required for concrete structures. But ADOT
will allow an in-depth inspection frequency of concrete bridges on an 8-year cycle, if a
self-inspecting agency would like to perform in-depth inspection of concrete
structures.
The in-depth inspection frequency of concrete bridges may be reduced to a more frequent cycle
if any of the follow conditions exist:
The previous inspection of the concrete structure resulted in an NBI rating of the
deck, superstructure, or substructure less than 5 or
Members/elements exhibit signs of distress/crack patterns, severe deterioration, or
damage that will impact the integrity of the structure or reduce the load-carrying
capacity of the structure.
Non Destructive Testing
Non-destructive tests may need to be conducted to assist the inspector in determining the
condition and safe load carrying capacity for the structure. Non-destructive testing may be
scheduled for known past deficiencies on critical structural elements, details or connections.
11 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Nondestructive testing beyond typical routine inspection activities shall be approved in advance
by the City Project Manager prior to the start of field work.
Damage Inspections
A Damage Inspection is an unscheduled inspection to assess possible structural damage
resulting from environmental factors (e.g., flooding, fire, deterioration, etc.) or human actions
(e.g., traffic impact, vandalism, fire, overloads, explosions, etc.)
The scope of the inspection should be sufficient to determine the need for emergency load
restrictions or closure of the structure to traffic, any conditions that pose a safety hazard to the
public, and to assess the level of effort necessary to affect a repair. The amount of effort
expended on this type of inspection may vary significantly depending upon the extent of the
damage. Damage inspections may be performed as needed with approval from the City
Program Manager. The City Program Manager will in turn notify ADOT within 48 hours of the
damage inspection.
Special Inspections
A Special Inspection is an inspection scheduled at the discretion of the structure owner. It is
used to monitor a particular known or suspected deficiency, such as foundation settlement or
scour, member condition, operations of load posted structure, and can be performed by any
qualified person familiar with the structure and available to accommodate the assigned
frequency of investigation. Special inspections are limited in scope and separate from other
inspections done, but shall be entered into BrM as a special inspections.
Inspection Access and Equipment
Access Equipment
Proper planning is important to ensure that appropriate access to the structure is available for
the type of inspection to be performed. The variation in types of structures to be inspected
requires that the bridge inspector use a broad range of access methods and equipment.
Common methods of inspection access include:
Ladders Climbers (or Spiders)
Cables and platforms Lift trucks
Scaffolding Under-bridge inspection vehicle
Boats or Barges
Use of Lift Equipment
Appropriate lift equipment shall be utilized for inspections that require close inspection access.
Snoopers, man-lifts or bucket trucks shall be used based on the type of inspection being planned
or in cases of known deficiencies that require up close inspection.
Lift Trucks
12 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Lift trucks may be utilized when under clearances are greater than 30 feet and access under the
structure is available. Lift trucks may also be used for in depth inspections of structures less
than 30 feet in elevation.
Under Bridge Inspection Trucks (UBIT or Snooper)
Under-bridge inspection equipment may be used if the under-clearance height is greater than or
equal to 30 feet and cannot be accessed from underneath utilizing a lift truck. Under-bridge
inspection equipment (UBIT or snooper) is not required for routine inspection of bridges that
can be accessed from underneath or that have an under-clearance height of less than 30 feet.
Concrete structures with NBI conditions of 5 or less may warrant the use of under-bridge
inspection equipment for in-depth inspections. The use of the UBIT shall be approved by the City
Program Manager prior to the start of field work.
Boat Use
A boat may be required to inspect structures over waterways that are too deep or swift to
surface wade and that have insufficient freeboard clearance for an access vehicle. Inspection
scheduling shall take advantage of the dry season or periods of low flow to minimize the need
for boat inspections. The use of a boat for inspection shall be approved by City Program
Manager prior to the start of field work.
Access Permit Requirements
Inspections in canal areas or in the vicinity of railroad lines may require special access permits.
The appropriate permits shall be acquired prior to attempting to begin field inspection activities.
Work Over or Near Rail Lines
Prior to inspecting bridges which carry or cross over railroad tracks, a permit may need to be
obtained from the railroad company. When necessary, appropriate railroad flaggers shall be
utilized for the safety of the inspection team. The structure number, name, route, milepost and
railroad crossing shall be listed in the inspection schedule for each structure requiring a permit
or flagger.
Arizona Railroad Companies:
Railroad Address Phone
Southern Pacific Lines
1200 Corporate Center Drive Monterey Park, CA 91754
(213) 780-6967
The Atchinson, Topeka & Santé Fe Railway Company (AT&SF)
One Santé Fe Plaza 920 Southeast Quincy Street Topeka, KS 66612-1116
Unknown
Union Pacific Railroad Company
19100 Slover Avenue Bloomington, CA 92316
Phone (908) 879-6611 Fax: (908) 879-6289
13 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Canal Entry Permits
When inspecting a structure over a canal, a right-of-entry permit to access the gated and locked
underside of the structure may be required. The structure number, name, water crossing and
governing agency shall be listed in the inspection schedule for each structure requiring a boat
rental. SRP Contact information is as follows:
Canal Owner Address Phone
Salt River Project (SRP)
PO Box 52025 Phoenix, AZ 85072-2025
(602) 236-5900
Traffic Control
Bridge inspection activities that require traffic control should be planned in advance of the
inspection using a traffic control plan. The purpose of a traffic control plan is to define the time
of day, sequence of inspection, degree of lane restriction and traffic control signage needed.
Traffic control is usually required for complex bridges and interchanges, high-speed freeways,
when lift equipment is utilized or during bridge deck delamination surveys. The type of traffic
control required depends on the type of roadway, roadway location, number of lanes, ADT,
access method and the features intersected. The following are common inspection scenarios
warranting traffic control:
Bridge inspections requiring a deck delamination survey on high volume roadways, with poor sight distance or other traffic safety concerns
A bridge inspection requiring the use of an under-bridge inspection truck or lift truck on the bridge deck
If a UBIT is used on a bridge, traffic control may be used on the bridge. If a snooper is used for an underpass bridge, traffic control may be used on the bridge and/or under the bridge.
If a bucket truck is used for an underpass bridge, traffic control may be used for under the bridge.
The need for traffic control for routine inspection shall be determined by the Project Manager
based on inspection needs and traffic safety policy. If the bridge has access through a sidewalk,
shoulder, median, or center left/right turn lane, the need for traffic control must be approved by
the City program Manager prior to the start of field work.
Traffic Regulations
All traffic and/or traffic control devices for bridge inspection shall be provided, maintained
and/or controlled as specified in the City of Phoenix Traffic Barricade Manual, and addendums
thereof. Permission to restrict City streets, sidewalks and alleys (street closure permits) shall be
requested as specified in Chapter 3 of the Traffic Barricade Manual, and addendums thereof.
Unless otherwise provided for in the following "Special Traffic Regulations", all traffic control for
bridge inspection shall be regulated as specified in Chapter 4 of the Traffic Barricade Manual,
and addendums thereof. No deviation to the "Special Traffic Regulations will be allowed or
implemented unless submitted to the City for review and approval two (2) weeks prior to
14 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
proposed work. Only City of Phoenix certified contractors can set, move, or remove temporary
traffic control devices (signs, barricades, etc.).
Off Duty Police officer
An officer may be required to be on site during the inspection when:
City of Phoenix mandates it.
The inspection is performed at nighttime.
The bridge is located on an interstate, or a high speed or ADT roadway.
Officers used on this contract must be either:
City of Phoenix
Maricopa County
Department of Public Safety (DPS) - DPS officers must be used for all work
performed in ADOT right-of-way.
The name, address and phone number of vendors supplying off duty police service shall be
approved by the City Program Manager prior to the start of field work. The structure number,
name, route and milepost shall be listed in the inspection schedule for each structure requiring
an officer.
Bridge Records
A bridge record contains the cumulative information about an individual structure. 23 CFR
650.313(d) requires each agency to prepare bridge files as described in the AASHTO Manual for
Bridge Evaluation (MBE) and to maintain reports on the results of bridge inspection together
with notations of any actions taken to address the findings of such inspections. The bridge file
should provide a full history of the structure over its life. Typical components of a complete
bridge record include:
Construction plans and specifications
Shop drawings
As-built drawings
General correspondence
Load rating records - calculations stamped, signed and dated by the professional engineer responsible
Posting records and legal documentation of load capacity
Inspection plans for fracture critical members, underwater elements, or other special features
Inspection history - all previous bridge inspection reports stamped, signed and dated
Maintenance records with repair recommendations and other maintenance activities
Photographs and/or sketches of the structure with descriptions including date and orientation
15 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Scour analysis for all bridges over water and a plan of action and plotted soundings for Scour Critical Bridges
SI&A Data
Accident records
Flood data
Paint history
Other general information that an agency is required to maintain includes:
A master list of all bridges within the agency’s jurisdiction that have fracture critical members, require underwater inspection, and/or warrant special attention because of their design, location, or strategic importance.
Bridge File Review
Proper preparation for inspection includes reviewing previous inspection notes, photos and
other documentation contained in the bridge file to ascertain the required tools, equipment,
and any safety concerns. The inspection team will develop a general idea of the expected
condition of the bridge prior to conducting the inspection. The inspection team shall develop a
systematic plan for how they plan to conduct the inspection to insure that all areas of the bridge
are covered.
Proper Inspection Equipment
In order for an inspector to perform a comprehensive inspection, the proper tools must be used
during the inspection. The follow list of inspection tools are recommended to be available:
Tools for Cleaning
Wisk broom
Wire brush
Scraper Tools for Inspection
Hammer/pick
Paint pens
Keel or Lumber crayons Tools for Visual Aid
Flashlights/lighting
Batteries
Binoculars Tools for Measuring
6’ folding ruler
25’ tape measure
100’ rag tape
Electronic distance measurer
Thermometer
Crack Comparator
Plumb bob
2 ft. and 4 ft. Level
Ultrasonic thickness gauge Tools for Documentation
16 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Clip boards
Pen, pencils & highlighters
Documentation
Calculator
Digital Camera
Laptop computer
Tools for Access
Ladder
Rope
Personal Protection Equipment
Hard hat
Safety vest
Work boots
Safety glasses
Gloves
Dust masks4
First aid kit
Insect repellent
Bee veil
Bleach spray bottle
Harness
Lanyard
Rope
Life vest
Rubber boots
Probing rod
Respirator
Replacement cartridges
Air monitoring device
Tripod with work winch and fall protection winch
Confined Spaces Entry Card
Confined Space Entry Permit / Non-Permit Required Confined Space Entry Permit forms
Forms and Sketches
Photo copies of all standardized forms and sketches shall be made prior to the beginning of the
field work to ensure uniformity and thoroughness for the entire project. Typical forms include:
Inspection forms.
o Vertical/horizontal clearance diagram
o Streambed profile table
Field Notes shall include:
o Location map
o Structure plan and profile sheet
17 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
o Previous inspection report
o Notes from previous inspection
o Photos from previous inspection
Annual Training / Team Meeting
The Project Manager shall conduct a team meeting annually and prior to the start of the field
inspection work to cover all of the topics addressed in the Policy and Procedures. This meeting is
generally conducted at the beginning of the inspection cycle and includes safety topics, City
Policy, prior cycle QA findings and other changes in the inspection program requirements. The
Consultant Program Manager shall determine the timing and extent of this training necessary to
achieve consistent inspections in accordance with this policy and procedures and other defined
reference material.
Arizona DOT Production Guidelines and Reimbursement Requirements
ADOT will assist self-inspecting agencies with federal funds from ADOT’s Bridge Inspection Sub-
Program at a maximum to be determined by the department. In order to qualify and receive
federal funds a cost proposal from the self-inspecting agency must be submitted by January 31
of each year, detailing the planned.
ADOT has the authority to review and ensure reasonable cost-effective estimates and proposals
from self-inspecting agencies if federal funding sources are involved. The purpose of the review
is to ensure inspection methods and related work is compliant with federal regulations.
An Intergovernmental Agreement will be required to be established through ADOT’s Joint
Project Agreement (JPA) Section, prior to the upcoming Fiscal Year and renewed each year
thereafter, with updated estimates for each inspection project. Separate IGA’s are required for
both On-System and Off-System bridges, as defined by FHWA.
Inspections performed prior to authorization, will not qualify for federal fund reimbursement.
The self-inspecting agencies not utilizing the ADOT Bridge Management provided BrM software
shall provide, in accordance with prescribed deadlines the following to the ADOT Bridge
Management Section:
Quarterly inspection progress reports shall be submitted
Annual NBI data in FHWA prescribed text format. Error checking and corrections
must be done prior to submittal
Annual NBI Bridge Elements in FHWA prescribed XML schema based on the AASHTO
MBE
Annual BrM XML export file(s) without customized data fields for import into ADOT
Bridge Management’s BrM master database
Annual digital photographs for performed inspections for import into ADOT Bridge
Management’s BrM
Annual digital PDF’s of completed inspection reports
18 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
The Program Manager is responsible for developing an inspection schedule that takes into
consideration the structure size, design type, documented condition and type of inspection to
be performed when developing the schedule. Regardless of the scheduled inspection hours, the
Team Leader is responsible for spending the time necessary at the bridge site in order to
perform a thorough inspection in accordance with these procedures and referenced
requirements. If a more detailed inspection is required beyond the typical inspection hours
listed below, the Team Leader shall identify the need for an in depth inspection to be completed
at a later time.
To aid in the planning for the inspection schedule, the Arizona Department of Transportation
(ADOT) has established the following inspection production guidelines. These guidelines are to
be used for inspection planning purposes. To ensure cost effective bridge inspections with
optimum use of equipment, traffic control, and other resources, ADOT encourages the following
consideration:
Routine inspection of bridges and culverts should include four or more structures
per day if feasible.
In-depth inspection of bridges should normally include two or more structures per
day. Very large, complicated or other special structures shall have the in-depth
inspection based on a reasonable scope of work.
Equipment rental and traffic control arrangements should be coordinated in the
most cost effective method if feasible.
In general, an inspection scope and hour breakdown may be based on the design type, length
and type of inspection, as shown in the ADOT’s “Cost Proposal Guidelines for Self-Inspecting
Local Public Agencies Performing Bridge Inspections Requesting Reimbursement” document.
This document defines the maximum reimbursable levels for inspection activities based on
inspection type, design type and length. Deviations from the reimbursable hours and scope of
the inspection items as stated in these guidelines will require justification and approval by the
City Program Manager.
The cost proposal for hours necessary to complete each field inspection and reporting must be
broken down into categories, such as preparation/mobilization, travel, field inspection,
reporting, quality control/assurance, and miscellaneous items (i.e., administration, printing,
mailing, unforeseen interruption, etc.). Each bridge should be identified by listing structure
number (N8), structure name (A209), facility carried (N7), feature intersected (N6A), material
(N43A), design (N43B), length (N49), width (N52), inspection frequency (N91), next inspection
(A228), inspection labor(total hours as indicated above/cost), lift equipment (type/cost), traffic
control (type/cost) and water access (type/cost).
The cost proposal shall be broken out into both On-System and Off-System (NHS) inspection
estimates.
19 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Field Inspection Work
General The field investigation of a structure should be conducted in a systematic and organized manner
that will be efficient and minimize the possibility of any element being overlooked. Routine
inspections shall be conducted in such a manner that every element on the structure receives a
thorough visual inspection regardless of past documented conditions. Any element that has
been previously identified as deficient shall be more closely examined to detect any further
deterioration
Field Inspection Safety
Classification of Bridge Entry
Seven entry classifications have been developed to categorize the hazards encountered during
the inspection, the actions to be taken and the appropriate personal protection equipment to
be used. These entry classifications, actions, and personal protective equipment are summarized
in Appendix B.
Working Around Traffic
The inspection team shall conduct as much of the inspection as possible from areas protected
from traffic. The use of areas behind rails or on sidewalks should be utilized for note taking and
inspection whenever possible. Crossing live traffic lanes shall be avoided on higher volume
roadways if possible. If a member of the inspection team needs to enter a traffic lane, the
second team member should watch traffic while the inspector is examining the bridge. The
inspection team should work together to improve the overall safety of the inspection, especially
when working in traffic lanes. For higher speed and/or higher volume roadways, traffic control
and off duty police officers should be utilized as needed for the safety of the inspection team
members.
Lift Equipment Safety
Aerial lift equipment requires additional considerations for the safety of the operator and
equipment. Prior to using any lift equipment, make sure that you review the safe operation of
the specific lift being used and perform a complete pre-operation check per the manufactures
owner manual. Special care should be given when operating lift equipment near power lines, on
uneven terrain or in windy conditions.
When working in lift equipment over water the risk of being attached to the lift equipment
should it fail and become submerged must be considered by the inspection team. A personal
flotation device is always required when working over water and a fall restraint system is
required when operating lift equipment. However, consideration may be given to detaching fail
restraint systems while over water when the safety of the inspector is increased by being able to
swim away from potentially submerged lift equipment.
20 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Dust Control Information
Maricopa County requires that dust control measures are observed when working on unpaved
surfaces. A dust control permit is required when working and parking off paved roads when
conducting bridge inspection activities. More information can be found in Appendix I and at the
following web site: http://www.maricopa.gov/aq
Inspection Nomenclature
Note Location Nomenclature
The following standard conventions shall be used for structure orientation and locations to
ensure that all field notes are taken in a consistent manner so that subsequent inspections can
easily identify the location of priori observations:
Structure Direction of Inventory
The direction of inventory is defined by the general direction of the roadway facing either North
or East. See coding convention for NBI Item 5E below.
Span Numbers
Spans are numbered sequentially (starting with the number one) with respect to the direction of
inventory.
Substructure Units
Abutments (Abutments 1 & 2) and piers (Piers 1-99) are numbered sequentially with respect to
the direction of inventory.
Superstructure Members
Beams, stringers, girders and bays are numbered sequentially (starting with the number 1) from
left to right.
Floor beams are numbered sequentially (starting with either zero or one) looking ahead in the
direction of inventory.
21 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Lane Numbering
Lane numbering is from left to right when looking in the direction of travel and shall indicate the
direction of travel. Center turn lanes shall be designated as such. Example: A North-South
oriented bridge with 2 lanes in each direction and a center turn lane would use the following
lane descriptions: Southbound lanes 1 and 2; Northbound lanes 1 and 2; center turn lane.
Coding of Center Turn Lane
Full or partial length turn lane on structure.
Right of Way Management - Lane Assignments:
22 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Both examples above are showing a total of 6 lanes on the bridge
Showing 6 total lanes on the (left) and 5 total lanes on the (right)
Measurement Units
Record all units as standard alpha abbreviations: in (inch), ft. (feet), LF (lineal feet), deg (degree).
DO NOT USE “ (inch) or ‘ (feet) notation in reports as this causes data transfer problems.
23 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Crack Size Conventions
Crack sizes that are estimated are recorded as fractional inches and cracks that are measured
are recorded as decimal inches to 3 places:
1/64 0.016
1/32 0.031
1/16 0.063
1/8 0.125
1/4 0.250
1/3 0.333
3/8 0.375
1/2 0.500
5/8 0.625
2/3 0.667
3/4 0.750
7/8 0.875
Longitude and Latitude Measurements
The latitude and longitude for each structure shall be obtained by GPS at the beginning of the
structure (Abutment 1) near the right edge of structure with respect to the direction of the
route (South to North and West to East). Deviations from this convention should be
documented in the User Bridge Notes field on the Phoenix Tab in BrM.
NBI Coding Conventions
NBI Item #5D – The Route Number shall be coded as 0000 since none of the roads in the
city have route numbers
NBI Item #5E – coded as either North or East for the direction of the inventory route.
NBI Item #58 – Maximum 6 - if Element 12 or 38 has a concrete cracking defect in state
2 or lower.
NBI Item #113 – All bridges and culverts built since 1970 will be assumed to have been
designed to modern scour standards and should be coded 8 - "Stable above footings". If
there is evidence of field scour the rating can be lowered. Under no condition are
inspectors to code a 6 - "Calculations not made" or a U - "Unknown". Notify the Project
Manager if a scour analysis is required for a bridge based on the inspection. There are
several structures previously rated a 3 and they should stay the same unless conditions
worsen.
Items 36A, 36B, 36C and 36D shall be coded as N for all elements outside the clear
recovery zone and for culverts under fill.
24 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Culvert Conventions
The coding of several NBI data fields for culverts is dependent on the depth of fill over the
culvert. Use the following conventions for all culverts.
Culvert Coding Conventions
< 1 ft. of Fill ≥ 1 ft. of fill
Curb to Curb Width (N51)
Record Actual 0000
Out to Out Width (N52)
Record Actual 0000
Deck Structure Type (N107)
Record Actual N
Traffic Safety Features (N36)
Record Actual NNNN
Element Coding Conventions
General
The City of Phoenix has adopted the AASHTO Bridge Element Inspection Manual as the basis for
element inspection. City defined elements have been defined to supplement the AASHTO
manual as follows:
Pedestrian Rail Elements #860 – 863
Wearing Surface Elements #800 – 802
Protective Coating Elements #890 – 892
Refer to the Appendix K for a condition state language for these items.
Environment Designation
Bridges in the City of Phoenix shall use an element environment of 2 in most cases. There are
two defined exceptions:
State 3 – Ahwatukee area only with landscaped areas with irrigation above
State 3 – Bare concrete decks with an average ADT of 5000 or more per lane
Protective Coating Systems
The quantity may be estimated if it cannot be measured.
Bridge Rail Elements
The reported element quantity shall be the limits from the beginning of the bridge to the end of
bridge regardless of approach configurations and rail continuity.
Code combination type rail as Other Bridge Rail (Element #333).
Pedestrian rail on top of a full height vehicular concrete rail shall not be reported in the
elements
25 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Deck Area Measurements
Record the maximum area of the bridge deck (total length times deck width, out to out).
Girder Count Convention
Girder counts shall consider the number of units that could be individually replaced. For
example, three adjacent precast box beams shall be counted as three girder lines. A single T-
beam shall be counted as one girder line. A double T-beam shall also be counted as a single
girder line.
26 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Defect Documentation
General
Observed defects shall be documented in a concise manner that will define the type of defect
(crack, spall, delamination, etc.), the location of the defect (what element and where) and the
size of the defect (length, area or area and depth, etc.). Locating a defect includes tying it to an
established permanent reference. Care shall be taken to avoid using references that change
over time. If the cause of the defect can be determined, it should be reported. If an element is
in Condition State 2,3 or 4 there must be a corresponding condition statement to describe the
defects in that element.
Inspection notes should be provided for all bridge components. This includes situations where
components are in good condition. For example and if appropriate, the inspector should remark
that “overall superstructure is in good condition”.
When previously reported defects are not visible, inspectors should maintain previously
documented condition ratings unless actions were taken to improve the condition of the
element since the last inspection. Those actions must be documented in the inspection report
and bridge file. A note clarifying that the element is not visible or accessible should also be
added. A common example is when a bridge deck is overlaid since the last inspection.
Girder Defects
When quantifying damage to a girder element, consideration is given to the type of damage, the
implications of that damage, and how it will be repaired. For example, cracks in a prestressed
girder indicate loss of prestressing force and a reduced load capacity. Although the cracks may
be localized, the entire girder is affected and the entire girder quantity shall be downgraded to a
lower condition state. Likewise, repair of this girder will require replacement of the entire girder
and should be estimated accordingly. In contrast, a minor spall in a prestressed girder does not
affect the girder strength and only the length of the girder with the spall is downgraded to a
lower condition state and the repair is estimated based on that length.
Deck Delamination Surveys
Reinforced concrete bridge decks that have visible signs of distress such as spalling,
severe cracking, heavy scaling or unsound areas warrant a deck delamination survey.
Reinforced concrete bridge decks with an NBI deck rating of 5 or less should have a deck
delamination survey performed every 4 years or more frequently as conditions warrant.
Deck delamination surveys shall be conducted using the chain dragging technique of
non-destructive testing. For the safety of the inspection team, traffic control will
typically be required when performing a delamination survey on bridge decks unless
traffic volumes are very low.
27 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Bridge decks with an asphalt concrete overlay, concrete or epoxy overlay or bare
concrete with a National Bridge Inventory (NBI) deck rating greater than 5 do not
require a delamination survey.
Scour
All bridges that have been determined to be scour critical due to observed conditions (Item 113
= 0, 1, or 2) or due to calculated conditions (Item 113 = 3) shall have a Scour Plan of Action
(POA). The POA will be evaluated by the inspection team during the inspection. The inspection
team may recommend changes to the POA as observed field conditions change. Proposed
changes to the scour (113) to a 0,1,2 or 3 shall be discussed with the Project Manager.
Critical Findings
23 CFR 650.305 states that a critical finding is a structural or safety related deficiency
that requires immediate follow-up inspection or action.
Any critical findings discovered during a structure inspection must be reported to
immediately. The inspector shall call 911 and take reasonable actions to limit
operations of the bridge if there is a collapse risk. The City Program Manager will notify
ADOT who will in turn notify the FHWA. The FHWA will review the critical follow-up
reports prepared by the bridge inspector and track the progress to verify that the self-
inspecting agency promptly reported needed repairs and completed the repairs within a
reasonable period. ADOT can find the City of Phoenix to be in noncompliance if it fails
to provide timely notifications of a critical finding.
Field Inspection Documentation
Field inspection documentation shall be clear and detailed to the extent that notes, sketches
and photographs can be fully interpreted later by fellow inspection personnel. All signs of
distress and deterioration should be noted with sufficient detail and accuracy so that future
inspectors can readily make a comparison of present conditions. Photographs shall be taken of
any significant distress or deterioration.
Field notes shall be written in report format, existing condition statements shall be updated to
the conditions observed in the current inspection, Element and NBI data shall be entered into
the current version of AASHTOWare Bridge Management (BrM), and validated prior to leaving
the bridge site. Photos shall be reviewed for quality and accuracy at the structure at the
conclusion of the inspection. Notes and repair recommendations will also be entered into the
AASHTOWare Bridge Management in the field. All documentation including photo logs and
work recommendations shall be in the Arial 12 point font.
NBI condition and appraisal ratings shall be based on the directives contained in, “The Recording
and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nation’s Bridges, December
1995” or subsequent updates.
28 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
The AASHTO Bridge Element Inspection Manual 2013 and supplemental elements as defined
shall be used by inspectors working in the City of Phoenix.
Inspection notes are typed in a Word document and will be copied into BrM for the final report.
The file name of the document shall consist of the 5 digit structure number including leading
zeros followed by the letter corresponding to the inspection year. Example: 09784JNotes.doc
Report Categories
Inspection notes describing the conditions observed during the inspection shall be grouped by
structure components. Each note shall be numbered and preceded with an alpha character for
the component category. For example, “Deck Component” conditions are numbered D1, D2,
D3, etc. The following are the typical structure component categories and the alpha character
associated with each condition note:
General – G
Deck component - D
Superstructure component - P
Substructure component - B
Approach - A
Waterway - W
Culvert - C
Entry Notes
Entry notes are used to identify equipment, traffic control, attendants, boats and other items
necessary for the inspection. Example: Traffic control and 60' man lift used with fall protection.
Aviation supplied 1 escort plus off-duty City of Phoenix officer with cruiser.
Structure Notes
Structure notes are used to describe the structure type. Example: 143 foot long simple span
cast-in-place post-tensioned concrete box-girder bridge on reinforced concrete seat type
abutments on spread footings.
Inspection Notes
Inspection notes are used to provide miscellaneous information to the inspectors at the next
inspection. Example: Heavy vegetation and sediment in barrels. Top side inspected 9-20-07;
Bottom side inspected 10-3-07
Load Rating – If no load rating information is available, enter 36 tons for the Inventory and 60 tons for the Operating Ratings.
29 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Inspection Reporting Procedures
General A bridge inspection report is an engineering document that should be written using appropriate
technical terminology. Technical descriptions should be complete, detailed yet concise and
quantitative (where possible). The completed inspection report reflects the current bridge
conditions and must be printed and signed by the engineer responsible for the inspection. A
professional engineers (P.E.) seal is required on all Bridge Inspection Reports.
Abbreviations
No abbreviations shall be used in the final reports.
Report Procedures
Notes Day
The bridge inspection reports and photos are reviewed in final form on the last business day of
the field inspection week. The inspection team will clean up, as needed, written inspection
notes, repair recommendations and photo descriptions in BrM. All field data entries shall be
reviewed for accuracy, completeness and blank entries. The Validation Check in BrM shall be run
and all validation errors shall be corrected if possible. Quantities and descriptions for elements
in lower condition states shall be verified. Questions and unresolved issues arising during the
week’s inspections shall be brought to the attention of the Program Manager for discussion and
resolution. The Goal of Notes Day is to make all necessary reviews and revisions to the weeks
inspection reports so that they are ready for final printing.
Draft Report
Upon completion of the draft report by the Team Leader, the Consultant Project Manager shall
review the draft report. Comments that the Consultant Project Manager cannot resolve shall be
provided to the Team Leader to be addressed and incorporated into the reports. After all
comments are properly addressed in the report, a copy shall be printed to submit to the City
Program Manager for review.
Upon receipt of a draft report from the Consultant Project Manager, the City Program Manager
may make comments directly on the COP draft report in red ink. Upon completion of the City
Program Manager’s review, the reports shall be returned the report to the Consultant Project
Manager to be addressed.
Final Report
Upon receipt of the inspection report comments from the City Program Manager, the
Consultant Contract Manager shall incorporate the comments into the report or provide written
clarification to the City why the changes will not be made.
After all comments are properly addressed in the report, a Final copy of the report shall be printed for submittal to the City Program Manager.
30 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Resolution of Data Errors and/or Omissions
As a result of quality control procedures and quality assurance reviews of the inspection reports
and data, errors will inevitably be discovered that are significant enough to warrant changes to
the reports and database.
To the extent possible, all errors and data omissions identified through the quality
control procedures shall be corrected during notes day or during the draft review
stages.
Review of NBI Data to check for errors shall be performed prior to submitting data to
FHWA.
Changes to the inspection procedures and commonly occurring errors that are identified
through the quality assurance reviews shall be communicated to the inspection teams
and the Consultant Project Manager during annual training and within two weeks of the
inspection QA review so that the findings can be quickly incorporated into the
inspection procedures.
Inspection Photos
General
The following is general guidance related to bridge inspection photos:
Inspection personnel should strive to obtain the best possible photographs with utmost clarity and exposure.
Photos should include a scale such as a folding ruler whenever possible
Photographs should be referenced in inspection notes. The only exceptions are the following five standard photograph types (A-E defined below)
Inspectors should not refer to photographs taken during previous inspections. Instead, new photographs should be taken.
Inspection personnel should not take an excessive number of photographs of a typical
problem. For example, a single typical photograph of similar cracks would suffice
Digital Format The following format shall be used for all photo files:
Stored in JPEG format in an individual file for each photo
Minimum pixel size shall be 1024 x 780.
Maximum file size should be between 500 and 1,000 Megabytes.
Naming Convention The following naming convention shall be used on all photos:
All file names must contain 14 digits
The first five digits should indicate the structure number including leading zeros
The next 8 digits are the date of the photo in YYYYMMDD format
The last digit id an capital alpha letter sequencer (A-Z)
Example: photo #1 taken for structure 01234 taken on January 25th 2016 (0123420160125A.JPG)
31 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Typical Photographs
Typical Inspection Photos
Alpha
Character
Photo Type How to take Notes
A
Roadway Approaches –
Looking North or East
Take from roadway if
safe or from side of
road
Frame photo so rails
are both visible at
edges of photo frame.
B
Roadway Approaches –
Looking South or West
Take from roadway if
safe or from side of
road
Frame photo so rails
are both visible at
edges of photo frame.
C
Elevation Looking South
or East
Take from within
channel is safe
otherwise from the
bank
Frame photos so both
abutments can be
seen in the frame if
possible.
D
Elevation Looking North
or West
Take from within
channel is safe
otherwise from the
bank
Frame photos so both
abutments can be
seen in the frame if
possible
E
Typical Soffit Photo Take from the
roadway under,
channel as
appropriate. No
culverts
Show the full width of
typical section if
possible
As Needed
Channel/waterway
Photos
Required from the
deck looking up and
down stream in
washes
Lined channels shall
be taken only when
conditions have
changed
As Needed
Deteriorated conditions Photos should be
taken once for each
item where the
element is in
condition state 2 or
higher or work is
recommended
Photos include bridge
ID and a scale at a
minimum if possible.
Substructure elements
should show flow
direction where
appropriate.
As Needed Other Photos Other situations were appropriate to enhance
the report text or document noted items.
32 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Photo Log A Photo Log shall be kept as photographs are taken. The log shall be written in a format suitable
for the photo title in the final report. Additionally, the log must be written in a neat and legible
format with a minimum of abbreviations. All photos shall include the following information
documented using the Photo Log Form:
Bridge Identification Number
Date of Photo
Location on the bridge
Description of the element or problem or both
The field photo log shall be transferred to a Microsoft Word document for use in entering the
photos and descriptions into BrM. The file name of the document shall consist of the 5 digit
structure number including leading zeros followed by the letter corresponding to the inspection
cycle and the word “Photolog”. Example: 09784JPhotolog.doc
The following is a sample of the format and content of a typical photo log:
Photo Print Order
Photos shall be printed out on the report in accordance with the alpha designation shown in the
typical photos section of this manual.
33 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Work Recommendations
All repair recommendations will be made in BrM under the Work Tab of the inspection module.
Type of Work BrM provides a pick list of typical work activities to properly classify the work.
Candidate Id The default name shall be changed to a sequential alpha character, i.e. A, B, C. Work ID values
must be unique in the database. If you encounter a problem saving progress to the next letter
until the save is achieved.
Structure Unit Structure unit typically is listed as “All Units”. Only if the bridge is coded in different structural
sections or units would you use a unit ID.
Element Select the AASHTO Element for this work recommendation if appropriate.
Action Types Actions are typical bridge repair and rehabilitation type actions. Refer to Appendix F for typical
bridge actions and costs.
Priority A maintenance priority shall be assigned to each repair activity:
High – Work that should be done with in One (1) Year
Moderate – Work that should be done with in One (1) to Five (5) Years
Low – Work that should be done in Five (5) or more years
Date Recommended Enter the date the recommendation is being made. If the recommendation is repeated in a
subsequent inspection report but not changed, leave the original date recommended. If any
changes are made to the recommendation, change the date recommended to the current date.
Target Year Target year for work to be done should match the convention for Priority. Generally, the target
year will be the latest future date that still maintains the safe use of the structure.
Work Assignment Enter whether a contractor or City force will do the work. In general City forces only do asphalt
repair and non-structural concrete repair.
Status This is the state of this work candidate moving forward to actual construction. You will always
select Item 1 – Under review when first making a work recommendation. This item can later be
changed by the City Program Manager once the work item has been assigned to a project.
34 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Estimated Cost Enter the estimated cost of work for the recommended action. Include cost for design,
construction and project management. When estimating the cost of repair to a girder element,
consideration is given to the type of damage, the implications of that damage, and how it will be
repaired. For example, cracks in a prestressed girder indicate loss of prestressing force and a
reduced load capacity. Although the cracks may be localized, the entire girder is affected and
the entire girder quantity must be replaced to restore the original load capacity.
In contrast, a minor spall in a prestressed girder does not affect the girder strength and the
repair is estimated based on repair of the localized spall. Typical cost ranges for actions can be
found in Appendix F.
Work Recommendation Notes
Enter detailed notes for type of work to be done as well as the location of the repair. These
notes should include what needs to be done, where the work is needed, and how the repairs are
to generally be performed.
Clearance Diagrams
The clearance diagram shall graphically document lateral and vertical clearances. The following
guidelines should be adhered to when preparing clearance diagrams:
Vertical clearances shall be measured from items attached to the superstructure such as lights
and signs if they result in lower vertical clearances.
Depending on accessibility and the type of inspection that is being performed, the inspector may
not be able to verify the previous measurements. In that event, this should be noted in the
inspection report
Lateral under-clearance should be measured from edge of travel lane to:
The face of an obstruction such as pier, abutment walls, traffic barrier, or face of curb;
for relatively flat ground.
The toe of slopes steeper than 1:3, regardless of whether the slope is going up or down.
The inspector should be aware that widened structures may require new vertical and horizontal
clearance measurements.
Channel Profiles
The Channel Profile Diagram shall graphically document the cross-section profile underneath the bridge. The diagram is required for natural bottom channels and not required for concrete lined channels. Channel profiles shall record both upstream and downstream elevations at all substructure elements and every 25 feet along the span or a quarter points in the span for longer spans. The location of the edges of the main channel should be identified along with the channel elevation.
35 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Sketches
Sketches should be prepared whenever they are needed to better illustrate a condition encountered during the field inspection. A field condition that cannot be appropriately documented with photographs and written observations would require a sketch to be generated. An example of a needed sketch is when the inspector is trying to convey deteriorated areas of a bridge deck. A sketch could delineate and show dimensions of the affected areas. Another situation that may require a sketch is collision damage to a girder.
As-Bulit Plan, Elevation and Cross Section Drawings
Plan view, elevation and cross section drawings for each structure shall be created, verified
during the inspection, and modified as needed to show the most current information. The CAD
draft person shall edit or create, as needed, plan view, elevation and cross section sketches for
each structure. See Appendix E for the Computer Aided Drafting (CAD) specifications.
36 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Inspection Deliverables
Electronic Inspection Data
Updated BrM inspection data.
CD or flash drive of digital photographs and digital photo logs
CD or flash drive of Location Maps and Sketches
PDF file of all inspection reports
Bridge Inspection Reports
Location Map
Sketches
Element Inspection Information
Inspection Notes
Structure Inventory & Appraisal Data
Repair Recommendations
Photographs
Copy of Field Notes
Scour Analysis Form (if applicable)
Scour Plan of Action (if applicable)
Streambed Profile (if applicable)
Load Rating Report (if applicable)
Copy of Permits (if applicable)
Special Inspection and Load Rating Reports
Special Inspection reports detail the findings of any special inspection done during the
inspection cycle shall be submitted in a separate bound book or binder.
Load Rating Calculations 23 CFR 650.313(c) requires inspecting agencies to rate each bridge for its safe load-carrying capacity in accordance with the AASHTO MBE, as referenced in 23 CFR 650.317(b). Once the safe load carrying capacity has been determined it would not typically change unless field observations warrant a recalculation. Common field observations that would warrant a new load capacity analysis include:
Structural modifications (widening, strengthening, etc.)
Field observed deterioration, section loss, decay or similar
Damage to structural members from any source
Scour
Placement of an overlay The inspector is responsible for determining the need for an initial calculation or recalculation of
the safe load capacity of each bridge based on field observations safe and a review of bridge
record. The safe load carrying capacity must be established or reaffirmed as part of a complete
inspection report in order to maintain the safe use of the bridge and to substantiate posting and
permit decisions. The load capacity calculation may be performed by someone other than the
37 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Team Leader for the inspection; however the engineer sealing the report shall be responsible for
the combined information presented in the bridge inspection report.
Quality Assurance Reviews The purpose of the Quality Assurance Program is to evaluate program effectiveness, uniformity,
and compliance with federal, state and city requirements related to bridge inspections.
Quality assurance can be defined as the steps taken to insure that the work is being performed
in accordance with established procedures by qualified inspectors who are properly trained to
perform the work. Quality assurance reviews may recommend inspector training, changes in
policy, and program improvements or other warranted findings that in aggregate will make the
program better.
Quality Assurance Roles and Responsibilities
City Program Manager
The City of Phoenix Program Manager shall be responsible for ensuring that the defined quality
assurance reviews are conducted on an annual schedule and to the extent defined in the quality
control/quality assurance plan. The Consultant Project Manager shall develop the annual listing
of structures to be included in the quality assurance reviews. The findings from the quality
assurance reviews should be reviewed and acted upon by the City Program Manager.
Consultant Project Manager
The Consultant Project Manager shall be familiar with the quality assurance plan and shall
advise consultant inspectors of the potential for quality assurance reviews of their work. Quality
assurance reviews that indicate repeated findings from a Consultant Inspector will be
communicated to the Consultant Project Manager for appropriate action.
Team Leaders and Bridge Inspectors
The Bridge Inspectors shall conduct structure inspections in accordance with the quality control
/ quality assurance plan. Bridge Inspectors shall cooperate with the quality assurance evaluator.
The Bridge Inspector shall receive feedback from the quality assurance reviews in a positive and
constructive manner.
Quality Assurance Evaluator
The Quality Assurance Evaluator shall work with the City Program Manager to select the
structures for annual quality assurance reviews. The QA evaluator shall conduct quality
assurance reviews in an objective and professional manner. The QA evaluator shall
communicate the findings from their reviews to the City Program Manager in a timely manner.
Quality Assurance Sample Size and Sampling Method
38 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Each year a representative sampling of structures shall be selected for quality assurance
reviews. The minimum sampling size shall be 10% of annual inspections. Following the
completion of each inspection cycle, approximately 15-20 structures will be selected for post
inspection quality assurance reviews. The QA reviews will utilize the form shown in appendix H.
Selection of Sample
The specific structures selected for the annual sample can be based on a number of criteria.
Consideration should be given to structures that have load postings, significant work needs,
rapid changes in condition, difficult access, critical findings, lower sufficiency ratings, scour
vulnerability and structures that have undergone major construction. In general the sample
should mirror the composition of the inventory.
Post Inspection QA Reviews
Post inspection quality assurance reviews consist of an independent inspection conducted by a
quality assurance team to determine the accuracy of a past inspection. The findings of the
quality assurance team are typically displayed side by side with the inspector’s findings. Quality
assurance reviews evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the inspection, data quality,
condition assessment, inspection findings and conclusions, work recommendations, etc.
The goal of the quality assurance reviews is to validate and improve the inspection program.
The reviews will focus on the following general areas of interest:
Did the inspector recognize field conditions accurately?
Are defect locations accurately reported?
Is the inspection documentation of defects complete?
Is the overall organization and presentation of inspection findings complete and clear?
Are critical findings accurately noted?
Are the recommendations for repair appropriate?
Is the NBI data and element inspection information accurate and complete?
The Post Inspection QA evaluations shall be documented using the form shown in (Appendix H).
Quality Assurance Findings
Report to Owner
All quality assurance reviews shall include a completed signed quality assurance review form
documenting the findings and recommended actions. The City Program Manager shall evaluate
the nature of the quality assurance review recommendations and take the appropriate actions.
The City Program Manager shall also keep a going log of completed quality assurance review
forms as part of the documented quality control and quality assurance plan as required by
federal regulations.
39 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Disqualification Protocol/Reinstatement
In the event that the quality assurance reviews have critical findings or repeated findings
involving the same inspector, the City Program Manager at their discretion may disqualify an
inspector from performing inspection work for the remainder of the inspection contract period.
Benefits of QA Reviews to the Program
Inspector Training Needs
The quality assurance evaluations shall capture QA findings and feed them back into annual
training and refresher in an effort to improve the inspection consistency and quality.
Policy Changes
The quality assurance inspections may identify policy changes that should be considered by the
City for improvement in the program. Recommended policy changes shall be communicated by
the QA evaluation team in a written summary report to the City.
Program Changes
The program quality assurance reviews will evaluate post inspection program management.
Findings from the program reviews may identify potential improvement areas.
40 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendices
Appendix A – Inspector Qualification’s
Appendix B – Confined Entry Definitions and Entry Flowchart
Appendix C – Quarterly Inspection Progress Report Template
Appendix D – Vertical and Horizontal Clearance Diagram Template
Appendix E – CAD Drawing Specifications
Appendix F – Repair Actions and Unit Costs
Appendix G – Field Inspection Reference Guide
Appendix H –Post Inspection QA Review Form
Appendix I – Dust Control Information
Appendix J – Bridge Closure Plan
Appendix K - Agency Developed Elements
41 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix A – Documentation of Inspector Qualifications Applicant Name Office Phone
Address Cell Phone
City State Zip
E-mail Firm
Refer to the Quality Control section for required qualifications. Forward a copy of this form to
the City Program Manager for each proposed inspection team member.
PART I - REGISTRATION/TRAINING - Complete All Information
Registered Professional Engineer: Yes (Number).______________ No. _________
NICET Level III or IV: Yes (Number).______________ No.__________
(Attach copies of licenses or certificates)
List all relevant bridge inspection training courses completed (Attach certificates)
Inspection Training Course Course
Hours
Date
Completed Firm and Instructor
NHI Safety Inspection of in Service
Bridges
CITY PROGRAM MANAGER APPROVAL USE ONLY! - DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE.
[ ] NHI Based 80-Hour Training Course Certificate [ ] Experience Reviewed/Verified
[ ] Physical [ ] Confined Spaces [ ] Lift Certified
Qualified As
[ ] Program Manager [ ] Team Leader [ ] Bridge Inspector [ ] Assistant Inspector
Reviewed By
Program Manager
Assigned User ID Date:
42 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Part II – INSPECTION EXPERIENCE
A minimum of 5 years of responsible bridge inspection experience or 2 years of inspection
experience in the COP Program for Team Leaders and 10 years bridge inspection experience for
Program Managers must be shown.
Bridge Safety Inspection Field Experience
Please state your experience with various types of bridges (i.e., steel girders, concrete girders,
trusses, slabs, prestressed, girders, culverts, movable bridges, other complex structures, etc.).
Date
from
Date
to
Describe bridge and inspection types Reference name and
phone number
Duration and
% of time*
* Percent of year devoted to bridge safety inspection field work.
I, the undersigned, affirm that all statements and data in Parts I and II are true and correct. I
understand that any misrepresentation is cause to bar you from inspection within the City of
Phoenix and may constitute fraud that will be punishable to the full extent of the law.
Applicant Signature__________________________________________Date________________
43 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix B – Entry Classifications
Entry Class
Potential Hazards Entry Notes and Equipment
Class 1 No anticipated hazards. Proceed with inspection as needed. Use equipment list 1
Class 2 No hazards expected other than debris and/or biohazards.
Debris is small and/or puncture hazards minimal - proceed with caution. Equipment list 2a Debris is hazardous. • Can be rescheduled - Remove and clean area. • Can not be rescheduled - Treat as Class 5 with addition of equipment list 5b Biohazard includes dead animals • Small in size - Equipment list 2b • Large in size - Reschedule and have removed
Class 3 Water hazards (not confined space).
Water < 12 inches - Equipment list 3a • Water > 12 inches, but 3 feet - Equipment list 3b - use extra caution for debris and hidden puncture hazards. • Water > 3 feet - Equipment list 5a and treat as Class 5 entry.
Class 4 Area contains hazards likely to cause serious health or safety risks. These include, but are not limited to: electrical hazards
Slippery surfaces
Falls from height
Piping of chemicals or waste water through enclosed areas, etc.
These areas do not meet the definitions for confined spaces, but present hazards frequently encountered in confined spaces and should be handled accordingly.
Electrical hazards should be inspected for damage and/or exposed wiring. • Exposed high voltage electrical wiring of leaking pipes should be reported and repaired prior to inspection, area is not safe to enter, See Class 7. • Work may proceed around high voltage lines in good condition, provided 10' clearance from lines can be maintained. If clearance can not be maintained, notify appropriate utility for lockout tag out. • Pipe lines containing hazardous material should be inspected for damage and leaks. • Pipe lines that are damaged and/or leaking should be reported and repaired prior to inspection; area is not safe to enter, See Class 7. • Animal waste (pigeon droppings). • Idea situation is to have area cleaned prior to inspections (rarely practical). If cleaned, inspect using normal equipment. • Area not cleaned. Use equipment list 4a. Avoid contact as much as possible. • Fall Hazards. • Working from lift equipment. Use equipment list 4b and Aerial Lift Device Daily Pre-Operation inspection form. • Working on steep slopes or from sides of structures. Use equipment list 4c. • Other hazards. Use appropriate judgment to identify hazards and employ appropriate countermeasures.
44 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Entry Class
Potential Hazards Entry Notes and Equipment
Class 5 These areas contain one or more of the definitions of a Permit-Required Confined Space
Potential hazardous atmosphere
Engulfment hazard
Converging walls or tapering floors
Any other recognized serious hazard
BUT, does not meet the definition of a confined space (i.e., is large enough so that an employee can bodily enter and perform work, has restricted egress or exits, and not designed for human occupancy). This may include waterway inspection under structures in which water is over 3 feet deep or in culverts in which the clear opening is < 4 feet. • Water hazard > 3 feet deep. Use equipment list 5a and have an attendant. • Culverts with clear opening < 4 feet. Use equipment list 5b and have an attendant.
Class 6 These areas meet the definitions of a confined space, as listed in Class 5, and meet one or more of the definitions of a permit-required confine space entry (PRCSE).
The inspector should not enter this space until the hazard has been addressed and an appropriate entry plan is made with the assistance of confined space and rescue professionals.
Class 7 Area is not safe to enter, hazard present.
Atmosphere deviates from normal and can NOT be ventilated to 0% deviation.
Electrical or chemical hazard present.
Other hazards
The inspector should not enter this space until the hazard has been addressed and an appropriate entry plan is made with the assistance of confined space and rescue professionals.
45 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Typical Entry Equipment
List 1 Hard hat, Gloves, Phone, Work boots, Protective glasses, Flash light
List 2a Long sleeve shirt, Gas meter
List 2b Gas meter, Particulate Respirator, Eye Protection, Dust Suite, Rubber Gloves
List 3a 12" boots or hip waders
List 3b Hip waders, Range pole
List 4a Particulate respirator, Gas meter, Goggles, Rubber Gloves
List 4b Fall protection harness, Shock absorbing lanyard
List 4c Fall protection harness, Safety line, Other climbing gear, tripod w/ rescue Winch2
List 5a Boots, Life vests, Safety line, Attendant, Radio1
List 5b Gas meter, Radio, Cellular phone, Attendant
46 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Confined Entry Flow Chart
47 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix C - Quarterly Inspection Progress Report Template
48 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix D – Vertical Clearance Diagram Example
Page ___ of ___
Supplemental Page to Bridge Inspection Report
Roadway Under Looking ________ on _________________
Minimum Vertical Clearance
Date
Initials
Clearance
Structure Name
Structure Number
Roadway Under
Roadway On
Traffic
49 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix E - CAD Drawing Specifications The base template will consist of 2 or 3 panels 8.5 units by 11.0 units.
Frames
Frame 1 is the Plan View
Frame 2 is Location Map
Frame 3 (if needed) is for sketch locating deficiencies noted in inspection report.
Layers
0 - Leave this layer blank.
Frame - Outside border for Frames 1 & 2.
Map - Location Map, City Bird, North Arrow and Title Block.
Notes - Dimensions and notes for use of this drawing (not to be displayed Final)
Sketch - Outside boarder for Frame 3, Sketch locating deficiencies
Plan_View - Plan Elevation, Longitudinal Section, Transverse Section, City Bird, North
Arrow and Title Block.
CAD Drawing Notes: All Bridge numbers are 5 digits and shall include the leading zeros. Example: 07600 is correct;
7600 is incorrect. This is the number that is used in the title block, as a file name and on all
reports for this structure.
When a zoom extents command is performed in AutoCAD (with all layers on) the view seen
must be limited to the outside boards and inside contents. All drawings shall be done in model
space, never use page space. Use of additional layers in final drawings must be approved prior
to submission of cad files.
50 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Bridge Information
Bridge Identification Bridge Name Year Built
Feature Intersected
51 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Tra
ffic
Channel or Traffic Under
Bridge Plan
Approach Roadway Width
Bridge Rail Length_________________________
RC Approach Rail Length____________________
Pedestrian Rail Length______________________
Joint Length______________________________
Approach Slabs ___________________________
Wearing Surface Type & Thickness ____________
52 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix F – Repair Actions and Unit Costs
53 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
54 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix G – Field Inspection Reference Guide (Next 7 Pages)
55 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
56 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
57 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
58 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
59 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
60 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
61 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
May 2016
Appendix H – Post Inspection QA Review Form
BRIDGE INFORMATION
INSPECTION TEAM INFORMATION Inspection Date Bridge Inspection Team Members
Type of Inspection Complexity of Inspection Inspection Note Taker
QUALITY ASSURANCE TEAM INFORMATION
QA Inspection Date QA Inspection Team Members
NBI COMPARATIVE REVIEW
Bridge Identification Bridge Name Year Built
Facility Carried Feature Intersected General Condition
Inspect Team
QA Team
QA Review Comments
Structure Status (41)
Bridge Posting (70)
Inventory Load Rating (66)
Deck Condition (58)
Superstructure Rating (59)
Substructure rating (60)
Culvert Rating (62)
Channel Rating (61)
Wearing Surface (108)
Wearing Surface Thickness (in)
Lanes On/Under (28)
ADT (on) (29)
Deck Area (sq ft)
Traffic Safety Features (36)
Bypass Detour Length (19)
Bridge Roadway Width (51)
Appr. Roadway Width (32)
Appr Rdwy Alignment (72):
Vertical Clearance (53/69)
Main Span Material (43a)
Main Span Design Type (43b)
Approach Span Type (44)
Waterway Adequacy (71)
Scour Code (113)
NBIS Length (112)
62 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
ELEMENT MODEL COMPARATIVE REVIEW Use the most recent inspection report to document quality assurance element /defect review QUALITY ASSURANCE NOTES
WORK RECOMMENDATION REVIEW Recommendation Comments
REVIEW EVALUATION (Select One) Complies with established QC procedures. No noted findings
Complies with established QC procedures. Minor findings noted
Does not comply with established QC procedures. Major findings noted. Does not comply with established QC procedures. Critical findings noted.
Quality Assurance Reviewers Signature _________________________________________________________ Date:_______________ Signature _________________________________________________________ Date: _______________
63 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Appendix I – Dust Control Information
The following is a description of three major steps in the dust control process that must be
followed:
1. Obtain a permit - A dust control permit is required for any dust-generating operation
disturbing 0.1 acres (4,356 sq. ft.) or more. Permits are valid for one year. A new permit
application must be submitted if the project extends longer than one year. Please note:
if a permit is not required, dust control measures must still be met. To obtain a permit,
you must submit a permit application with a Dust Control Plan to the Air Quality
Department. To find the application and Dust Control Plan, visit www.maricopa.gov/aq
and click on Dust Control on the home page.
2. Implement your Dust Control Plan - A Dust Control Plan (DCP) must be implemented at
all times (before, during and after operations). Before work commences, be sure you
and your subcontractors understand all responsibilities in the plan. Give a copy of the
DCP to the subcontractors before commencing work (Rule 310 Sec. 401.2b). Have the
permit and DCP available at the job site. The dust control plan requires the permit
holder to identify a primary and a contingency control measure for each dust-generating
operation. If the primary control measure in the DCP proves to be ineffective, the
contingency control measure must be implemented.
3. Monitor and keep records - Monitor and record dust-generating activities frequently to
ensure your dust control plan is being implemented. For samples of daily recordkeeping
logs (and blank forms), visit the Air Quality Department's website.
Training
A Dust Control Training orientation taught by air quality inspectors teaches the basic
requirements of Rule 310. Each session is designed to last about an hour. Contact the Maricopa
County Air Quality Department at 602-506-6734 for training information.
Basic/Comprehensive Classes
Per Rule 310, all sites greater than five acres require a Dust Control Coordinator to be on-site
during dust-generating operations.
Work sites greater than one acre but less than five acres require, at a minimum, one Dust
Control Coordinator who is certified with basic training on-site.
Certifications for basic training, comprehensive training, water truck and water pull drivers may
be obtained via third parties. Visit the Dust Control section of the Air Quality Department's
website at www.maricopa.gov/aq for a list of third party entities which provide these
certification classes.
Project Site Planning
64 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
The benefits of early dust control planning can save time, money, resources and can significantly
reduce dust emissions. Project site planning actions to consider include:
Phase your project and plan your site layout to minimize the disturbance of soil
Ensure all subcontractors know who is in charge and understand the requirements for
dust control
Ensure all subcontractors have registered with MCAQD and their registration number is
posted so that it is visible to the public
Designate parking/staging areas and site access points to minimize the amount of
disturbed surface area
Restrict vehicle and equipment access on inactive areas
Re-stabilize disturbed surface areas as they are created
Install wind fences/barriers «50% porosity). Place barriers around storage piles, parking
and equipment staging areas
Post the project sign at the entrance of the job site for sites five acres or larger
65 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Appendix J – Bridge Closure Plan
This appendix establishes proper procedure for the emergency closure of a bridge. Conditions
of eminent failure, severe condition, and serious condition are defined as follows:
Closure Definitions
Eminent Failure
The structural integrity of the bridge is so weakened or undermined that continued live loading could result in failure of the bridge.
Severe Condition
The structural integrity of the bridge is so weakened or undermined that a hazard exists which left unchecked could progress to a bridge failure.
Serious Condition
The structural integrity of the bridge is so weakened or undermined that a hazardous condition is developing. Continued adverse conditions could cause the problem to become severe.
Appropriate Actions:
Condition 1 - Eminent Failure: The field inspector shall be authorized to close the structure
immediately upon determining that a condition of eminent failure exists. The use of city
vehicles, Street Maintenance personnel, barricade companies and police should be employed as
needed to stop traffic from entering onto the bridge.
Once the closure is completed and the area is safe, the inspector shall notify the Deputy Director
of Street Maintenance or next highest Management available of the closure. Complete
documentation of the problem shall be made after all safety precautions and notifications are
made. Documentation shall include photographs, written commentary of the problem and all
actions taken.
Condition 2 - Severe Condition: The field inspector shall notify his/her immediate supervisor or
next highest supervisor available that a severe condition may exist. If deemed necessary, the
inspector should request authorization to order or request barricading and/or police to be on
site in the event that the condition worsens. Further evaluation and monitoring plans should be
set up as soon as necessary safety precautions are taken. Complete documentation of the
problem shall be made after all safety precautions and notifications are made. Documentation
shall include photographs, written commentary of the problem and all actions taken.
Condition 3 - Serious Condition: The field inspector shall document the problem with
photographs and a written commentary. A plan for monitoring the problem and safety
response should also accompany the written commentary. The immediate supervisor or next
highest supervisor available shall be notified as soon as documentation of the problem is
completed.
The inspector is making a subjective evaluation of a field conditions. However, observations and
recommendations should be treated as accurate until further field investigations can be made.
Public safety should always be the first concern over public convenience.
66 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Appendix K - Agency Developed Elements
The City of Phoenix has created a number of custom elements to track various characteristics of
their bridges during the routine inspection process. The custom elements are defined within
this Appendix. For all other elements refer to the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) 2013 Bridge Element Inspection Manual. This appendix will
supersede the AASHTO manual in situations where the elements overlap in definition.
The Agency Custom Elements are organized in the general numerical fashion shown below:
Structural Elements 800 - 839
800 - 814 Deck Related Elements
815 - 829 Superstructure Related Elements
830 - 839 Substructure Related Elements
Railing Elements 860 - 879
860 - 869 Pedestrian Rail Elements
870 - 879 Railing Flags & Miscellaneous
Non-Bridge Elements 880 - 889
Miscellanies Elements 890 – 899
67 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 800 — Asphalt Wearing Surface Description: All decks/slabs that have overlays made with flexible (asphaltic concrete).
Classification: ADE - Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft.
Quantity Calculation: Area of the deck/slab that is protected by the wearing surface.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Delamination/Patched
Area/Pothole (Wearing
Surfaces)
(3210)
None Patched area that
is sound. Partial
depth pothole.
Patched area that
is unsound or
showing distress.
Full depth
pothole.
The wearing
surface is no
longer effective.
Crack (Wearing
Surface)
(3220)
Sealed Cracks Crack width 0.25–
0.5 inches wide.
Width of more
than 0.5 in. wide
Effectiveness (Wearing
Surface)
(3230)
Fully effective.
No evidence of
leakage or further
deterioration of
the protected
element.
Substantially
effective.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
slowed.
Limited
effectiveness.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
progressed.
Element Commentary Chip seals should be captured using this element.
68 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 801 — Deck Wearing Surface – Concrete Description: This element is for all decks/slabs that have overlays made with rigid (portland cement)
materials or polyester concrete.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft.
Quantity Calculation: Area of the deck/slab that is protected by the wearing surface.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Delamination/Spall/Patched
Area (Wearing Surfaces)
(3211)
None Delaminated.
Spall less than 1
in. deep or less
than 6 in.
diameter.
Patched area that
is sound.
Spall 1 in. deep
or greater or 6 in.
diameter or
greater. Patched
area that is
unsound or
showing distress. The wearing
surface is no
longer effective.
Crack (Wearing Surface)
(3221)
Sealed cracks Width 0.012–
0.05 in.
Width of more
than 0.05 in.
Effectiveness (Wearing
Surface)
(3230)
Fully effective.
No evidence of
leakage or
further
deterioration of
the protected
element.
Substantially
effective.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
slowed.
Limited
effectiveness.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
progressed.
Element Commentary An unsound patch is one constructed of AC or other unsuitable material or a concrete patch that is no longer sound.
69 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 802 — Epoxy Wearing Surface Description: This element is for all decks/slabs that have overlays made with epoxy materials.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft.
Quantity Calculation: Area of the deck/slab that is protected by the wearing surface.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Delamination/Spall/Patched
Area (Wearing Surfaces)
(3212)
None Unbonded area
that is still in
place. Patched
area that is
sound.
Full depth spall
6 in. diameter or
greater. Patched
area that is
unsound or
showing distress. The wearing
surface is no
longer
effective.
Crack (Wearing Surface)
(3222)
Sealed cracks Width 0.012–
0.05 in.
Width of more
than 0.05 in.
Effectiveness (Wearing
Surface)
(3230)
Fully effective.
No evidence of
leakage or
further
deterioration of
the protected
element.
Substantially
effective.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
slowed.
Limited
effectiveness.
Deterioration of
the protected
element has
progressed.
Element Commentary An unsound patch is one constructed of AC or other unsuitable material or a concrete patch that is no longer sound.
70 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 860 — Metal Pedestrian Railing
Description: This element defines all types and shapes of metal pedestrian railing. Steel, aluminum,
metal beam, rolled shapes, etc. will all be considered part of this element.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: ft.
Quantity Calculation: Quantity is the total length of metal pedestrian rails. The element quantity is
measured from the beginning of the bridge to the end of bridge if no approach slabs are present. If
approach slabs are present the measurement is from end to end of approach slabs.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Corrosion
(1000)
None Freckled Rust.
Corrosion of the
steel has initiated.
Section loss is
evident or pack
rust is present but
does not warrant
structural review.
The condition
warrants a
structural review
to determine the
effect on strength
or serviceability
of the element or
bridge; OR a
structural review
has been
completed and the
defects impact
strength or
serviceability of
the element or
bridge.
Cracking
(1010)
None Crack that has self
arrested or has
been arrested with
effective arrest
holes, doubling
plates, or similar.
Identified crack
exists that is not
arrested but does
not warrant
structural review
Connection
(1020)
Connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Loose fasteners or
pack rust without
distortion is
present but the
connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Missing bolts,
rivets, broken
welds, fasteners or
pack rust with
distortion but does
not warrant a
structural review.
Distortion
(1900)
None Distortion not
requiring
mitigation or
mitigated
distortion.
Distortion that
requires
mitigation that has
not been
addressed but
does not warrant
structural review.
Element Commentary Coatings shall not be used on pedestrian rails
71 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 861 —Reinforced Concrete Pedestrian Railing Description: This element defines all types and shapes of reinforced concrete pedestrian railing. All
elements of the railing must be concrete.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: ft.
Quantity Calculation: Quantity is the total length of reinforced concrete pedestrian rails. The element
quantity is measured from the beginning of the bridge to the end of bridge if no approach slabs are
present. If approach slabs are present the measurement is from end to end of approach slabs.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Delamination/Spall/Patched
Area
(1080)
None Delaminated.
Spall 1 in. or less
deep or 6 in. or
less in diameter.
Patched area that
is sound.
Spall greater
than 1 in. deep or
greater than 6 in.
diameter.
Patched area that
is unsound or
showing distress.
Does not warrant
structural
review.
The condition
warrants a
structural review
to determine the
effect on strength
or serviceability
of the element or
bridge; OR a
structural review
has been
completed and the
defects impact
strength or
serviceability of
the element or
bridge.
Exposed Rebar
(1090)
None Present without
measurable
section loss.
Present with
measurable
section loss, but
does not warrant
structural
review.
Efflorescence/Rust Staining
(1120)
None Surface white
without build-up
or leaching
without rust
staining.
Heavy build-up
with rust
staining.
Cracking (RC and Other)
(1130)
Insignificant
cracks or
moderate width
cracks that have
been sealed.
Unsealed
moderate width
cracks or
unsealed
moderate pattern
(map) cracking.
Cracks from .012
to 0.05 inches
wide.
Wide cracks or
heavy pattern
(map) cracking.
Cracks greater
than 0.05 inches
wide.
Element Commentary The inspector should use judgment when utilizing the condition state defect definitions, especially
for concrete cracking. The crack defect description definitions describe generalized distress, but
the inspector should consider width, spacing, location, orientation, and structural or non-structural
nature of the cracking. The inspector should consider exposure and environment when evaluating
crack width. In general reinforced concrete cracks less than 0.012 inches can be considered
insignificant and a defect is not warranted. Cracks ranging from .012 to 0.05 inches can be
considered moderate, and cracks greater than 0.05 inches can be considered wide.
72 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 862 — Timber Pedestrian Railing Description: This element defines all types and shapes of timber pedestrian railing.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: ft.
Quantity Calculation: Quantity is the total length of timber pedestrian rails. The element quantity is
measured from the beginning of the bridge to the end of bridge if no approach slabs are present. If
approach slabs are present the measurement is from end to end of approach slabs.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Connection
(1020)
Connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Loose fasteners or
pack rust without
distortion is
present but the
connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Missing bolts,
rivets, broken
welds, fasteners or
pack rust with
distortion but does
not warrant a
structural review.
The condition
warrants a
structural review
to determine the
effect on strength
or serviceability
of the element or
bridge; OR a
structural review
has been
completed and the
defects impact
strength or
serviceability of
the element or
bridge.
Decay/Section Loss
(1140)
None Affects less than
10% of the
member section
Affects 10% or
more of the
member but does
not warrant
structural review.
Check/Shake
(1150)
Surface
penetration less
than 5% of the
member thickness
regardless of
location.
Penetrates 5% -
50% of the
thickness of the
member and not
in a tension zone.
Penetrates more
than 50% of the
thickness of the
member or more
than 5% of the
member thickness
in a tension zone.
Does not warrant
structural review.
Crack (Timber)
(1160)
None. Crack that has
been arrested
through effective
measures.
Identified crack
exists that is not
arrested, but does
not require
structural review
Split/Delamination
(Timber)
(1170)
None Length less than
the member depth
or arrested with
effective actions
taken to mitigate.
Length equal to or
greater than the
member depth,
but does not
require structural
review.
Abrasion/Wear
(Timber)
(1180)
None or no
measurable
section loss
Section loss less
than 10% of the
member thickness
Section loss 10%
or more of the
member thickness
but does not
warrant structural
review.
73 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 863 — Other Pedestrian Railing Description: This element defines all types and shapes of pedestrian railing except those defined as
metal, concrete or timber. Pedestrian rails constructed of combinations of materials.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: ft.
Quantity Calculation: Quantity is the total length of other pedestrian rails. The element quantity is
measured from the beginning of the bridge to the end of bridge if no approach slabs are present. If
approach slabs are present the measurement is from end to end of approach slabs.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Corrosion
(1000)
None Freckled Rust.
Corrosion of
the steel has
initiated.
Section loss is
evident or pack
rust is present
but does not
warrant
structural
review.
The condition
warrants a
structural review
to determine the
effect on strength
or serviceability
of the element or
bridge; OR a
structural review
has been
completed and the
defects impact
strength or
serviceability of
the element or
bridge.
Cracking
(1010)
None Crack that has
self arrested or
has been
arrested with
effective arrest
holes, doubling
plates, or
similar.
Identified crack
exists that is
not arrested but
does not
warrant
structural
review
Connection
(1020)
Connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Loose fasteners
or pack rust
without
distortion is
present but the
connection is in
place and
functioning as
intended.
Missing bolts,
rivets, broken
welds,
fasteners or
pack rust with
distortion but
does not
warrant a
structural
review.
Delamination/Spall/Patched
Area
(1080)
None Delaminated.
Spall 1 in. or
less deep or 6
in. or less in
diameter.
Patched area
that is sound.
Spall greater
than 1 in. deep
or greater than
6 in. diameter.
Patched area
that is unsound
or showing
distress. Does
not warrant
structural
review.
74 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Exposed Rebar
(1090)
None Present without
measurable
section loss.
Present with
measurable
section loss,
but does not
warrant
structural
review.
Efflorescence/Rust Staining
(1120)
None Surface white
without build-
up or leaching
without rust
staining.
Heavy build-up
with rust
staining.
Cracking (RC and Other)
(1130)
Insignificant cracks
or moderate width
cracks that have
been sealed.
Unsealed
moderate width
cracks or
unsealed
moderate
pattern (map)
cracking.
Cracks
from .012 to
0.05 inches
wide.
Wide cracks or
heavy pattern
(map) cracking.
Cracks greater
than 0.05
inches wide.
Deterioration (Other)
(1220)
None Initiated
breakdown or
deterioration.
Significant
deterioration or
breakdown, but
does not
warrant
structural
review.
Distortion
(1900)
None Distortion not
requiring
mitigation or
mitigated
distortion.
Distortion that
requires
mitigation that
has not been
addressed but
does not
warrant
structural
review.
Element Commentary Coatings shall not be used on pedestrian rails.
The inspector should use judgment when utilizing the condition state defect definitions, especially for
concrete cracking. The crack defect description definitions describe generalized distress, but the inspector
should consider width, spacing, location, orientation, and structural or non-structural nature of the cracking.
The inspector should consider exposure and environment when evaluating crack width. In general
reinforced concrete cracks less than 0.012 inches can be considered insignificant and a defect is not
warranted. Cracks ranging from .012 to 0.05 inches can be considered moderate, and cracks greater than
0.05 inches can be considered wide.
75 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 890 —Painted Steel Coating Description: Steel elements that have a protective coating such as paint, or other top coat steel corrosion
inhibitor.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft. (surface)
Quantity Calculation: Should include the entire protected surface of the steel element.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Chalking (Steel Protective
Coatings)
(3410)
None Surface Dulling Loss of Pigment Not
Applicable
Peeling/Bubbling/Cracking
(Steel Protective Coatings)
(3420)
None Finish coats only. Finish and primer
coats
Exposure of
bare metal
Effectiveness (Steel
Protective Coatings)
(3440)
Fully effective Substantially
effective
Limited
effectiveness
Failed, no
protection of
the
underyling
metal
Element Commentary This element shall not be used on bridge or pedestrian rails.
76 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 891 — Galvanized Coating Description: The element is for steel elements that have a protective galvanized coating system.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft. (surface)
Quantity Calculation: Should include the entire protected surface of the steel element.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Peeling/Bubbling/Cracking
(Steel Protective Coatings)
(3420)
None Finish coats only. Finish and primer
coats
Exposure of
bare metal
Oxide Film Degradation
Color/ Texture Adherence
(Steel Protective Coatings)
(3430)
Tightly adhered,
capable of
withstanding
hammering or
vigorous wire
brushing.
Granular texture. Small flakes, less
than 1/2 in.
diameter.
Large
flakes, 1/2
in. diameter
or greater or
laminar
sheets or
nodules.
Effectiveness (Steel
Protective Coatings)
(3440)
Fully effective Substantially
effective
Limited
effectiveness
Failed, no
protection of
the
underyling
metal
Element Commentary This element shall not be used on bridge or pedestrian rails.
77 City of Phoenix Bridge Inspection Policy and Procedures
Element #: 892 — Weathering Steel Coating
Description: Steel elements that have a protective weathering steel coating.
Classification: ADE – Agency Defined Element Units of Measurement: sq.ft. (surface)
Quantity Calculation: Should include the entire protected surface of the steel element.
Condition State Definitions
Condition States
1 2 3 4
Defects GOOD FAIR POOR SEVERE
Peeling/Bubbling/Cracking
(Steel Protective Coatings)
(3420)
None Finish coats only. Finish and primer
coats
Exposure of
bare metal
Oxide Film Degradation
Color/ Texture Adherence
(Steel Protective Coatings)
(3430)
Yellow-orange or
light brown for
early
development.
Chocolate-brown
to purple-brown
for fully
developed.
Granular texture. Small flakes, less
than 1/2 in.
diameter.
Dark black
color.
Effectiveness (Steel
Protective Coatings)
(3440)
Fully effective Substantially
effective
Limited
effectiveness
Failed, no
protection of
the
underyling
metal
Element Commentary This element shall not be used on bridge or pedestrian rails.