DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN

Effective Date August 12, 2009

______________________________________________________________________________________

SECTION 1 - PURPOSE

This section describes the Quality Assessment (QA) procedures for Construction
Engineering and Inspection (CEI) processes at the District Level. The purpose of
this QA procedure is to provide a uniform, District wide, documentable,
management system to ensure CEI requirements are being met. The procedure
applies to all construction personnel administering construction contracts of any
type.

SECTION 2 - DEFINITIONS

The following definitions are for use with this document:

Assessment Category: One of the major categories of construction work within

the overall project such as, roadway base construction, drainage construction or
signal installation. Each category of construction or "Assessment Category" has
a corresponding list of inspection requirements referred to as a Guidelist and a
corresponding list of Critical Requirements called a Statewide Critical
Requirements List. The latter is used in evaluating how well the Assessment
Category Critical Requirements are performed, by the CEI staff. Current, twenty-
five (25) assessment categories have been identified as shown on the QA
Minimum Annual Review Frequency Table, published on the Department's
State Construction Office Internet website.

Compliance: A satisfactory performance of critical requirements as determined

by a quality assessment review.

Critical Requirement: An essential construction inspection and/or administrative

requirement that must be performed properly in order to ensure that a quality CEI
process is achieved. An essential construction inspection and/or administrative
requirement that must be performed properly in order to ensure that customer
satisfaction concern is addressed. Also, a non-critical requirement that becomes
critical because it is performed improperly on a frequent and widespread basis
and is therefore a persistent problem. When Critical Requirement CEI activities
are not done, they could compromise the satisfaction of the customer, the quality
of the product, use or the safety of the public. These Critical Requirements also
serve as indicators of the quality of those items not being checked.

Delegate Reviewer: An individual who has been delegated the duty to perform a
quality assessment review for a responsible engineer by that responsible
engineer.
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
District Level Staff: The staff assigned to the district construction office, which
includes the District Construction Engineers (DCEs) or their delegates. This may
include other offices that perform independent quality assessments (i.e. Materials
Office, District Bituminous Engineer’s Office, acceptance/maintaining agencies,
etc.).

Innovative Practice: A unique method for superior performance, or an

innovative concept that has already produced excellent results, which the
reviewer believes can be duplicated by using this practice on other Department
construction contracts. These practices should be noted in the QA Reviews and
passed along for future replication as best practices.

Opportunities for Improvement: A non-satisfactory performance of a Critical

Requirement as determined through the quality assessment review process.

Quality Assessment (QA): The process used by the District Level staff to
monitor and ensure that CEI activities are in compliance with predetermined
standards. Quality assessment is not intended to be a project specific review, but
is instead a process-oriented review.

Quality Control (QC): Project level activities performed daily by project level
staff in monitoring established Department requirements, procedures and
standards to assure compliance with contract documents. The inspection and
acceptance of the Contractor’s work is Quality Control.

Responsible Engineer for District Level Reviews: The District Construction

Engineer or their delegate is the responsible engineer for the District Level
reviews.

Statewide Critical Requirements List: A list of the Critical Requirements used

for QA Reviews at the District Level. These lists are worded in such a way as to
focus the Reviewer’s attention on the CEI staff’s performance of inspection and
management duties related to the critical requirements. The Statewide Critical
Requirements lists are available on the Department's State Construction Office
infonet and Internet websites and may be downloaded and printed for field use.

Statewide Inspection Guidelist: These are to be used with CPAM 3.2 Quality
Control Inspection and are no longer applicable to this section. A list of major
items that assists the CEI staff in their inspections of work related to each
assessment category. The guidelist also includes the Critical Requirements used
for QA at the District Level. The guidelists are worded in such a way as to focus
the CEI staff’s attention on insuring the Contractor’s performance. Each of the
assessment categories has a guidelist that covers the significant inspection
requirements corresponding to that category. The guidelists are not a
comprehensive source for identifying everything, which an inspector or
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
construction manager must know. Instead, they are intended to be a guide for
identifying significant and critical areas of concern, the details of which are
covered in the contract documents. The guidelists are available on the
Department’s State Construction Office infonet and Internet websites and may be
downloaded and printed for field use.

SECTION 3 - PROCEDURE

1 Overview

This QA procedure and its guidance documents explain what a district

construction organization must do to conduct an effective District QA program.
The goal of the QA program is to continually improve CEI performance.
In order to accomplish this goal, the procedure requires construction managers to
formally review the performance of personnel for which they are directly and
indirectly responsible on a periodic basis. This review process is referred to as
"Quality Assessment" (QA) and the reviews that are performed are referred to as
Quality Assessment Reviews or QARs. District level managers conduct QARs by
reviewing and recording how well CEI personnel are performing the most
important responsibilities they are assigned. These responsibilities are referred to
as Critical Requirements and they are displayed on the internet/infonet under
Construction QA Critical Requirements Lists. The frequency at which Managers
must conduct QARs is specified in the QA Minimum Annual Review
Frequency Table, published on the Department's State Construction Office
Internet website. The results of QARs are reported on the Quality Assessment
Review form. On the form, managers record if and why Critical Requirements are
being done properly. When they are not being done properly, the managers have
opportunities for improvement. Managers also record innovative CEI practices
that are discovered during reviews so that these may be considered for
implementation as improved ways of doing business in the future. On the QAR
forms managers also recommend actions that must be taken in order to improve
performance and to set deadlines for when this should take place. The QA
procedure also provides a process for reporting opportunities for improvement
and innovative practices to higher levels of management in order to ensure that
this vital information is addressed properly and is communicated to everyone
who might also benefit from it.

1.1 Minimum Annual Review Frequency

Construction managers at the District level will perform Quality Assessment

Reviews of the CEI processes for which they are responsible. These reviews
must be conducted in at least the minimum frequency shown in the QA
Minimum Annual Review Frequency Table, published on the Department's
State Construction Office Internet website. Decreases from the minimum
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
frequencies must be approved by the Director, Office of Construction with the
following two exceptions.

1.2 Exceptions to Minimum Annual Review Frequency

(A) District Level Responsibilities

If there will be no work related to a specific assessment category in the
Engineer’s area of responsibility then the Minimum Annual Review Frequency for
that assessment category for that Engineer may be reduced to zero. For
example, If there will be no concrete pavement in the district during the fiscal
year the DCE’s delegate may make a note on the District level QA log and the
district level minimum frequency for that category will be reduced to zero without
need of further approvals.

2 Levels of Assessment

2.1 District Level

(A) District Level Responsibilities

The DCE is responsible for all QA activities at the District Level. The primary
focus of the District Level review will be to assess whether or not District Level
QA reviews are being conducted in accordance with this procedure. At least the
following shall be assessed: the completeness and accuracy of all required
forms; the effectiveness of follow up on actions recommended in the QA Review
forms; and the appropriateness of the work mix and staff being reviewed. The
District Level review will also consist of a review of Assessment Category Critical
Requirements. The District Level QA should be a broad-based review covering
several projects and more than one Project Administrator in order to provide a
broad-based assessment of the quality of the District Level QA program. The
minimum frequency of these reviews is outlined in the QA Minimum Annual
Review Frequency Table, published on the Department's State Construction
Office Internet website. The findings will be summarized on the Quality
Assessment Review, Form No. 700-010-96 and maintained in the District QA
file. Each review will also be noted in the Quality Assessment Log, Form No.
700-010-97.

3 Review Findings

(A) District Level Responsibilities

If a QA Review results in significant or major findings, notification which may

include the Quality Assessment Review, Form No. 700-010-96 should be sent
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
to the DCE for informational purposes and possible discussion at the next
Resident or District level staff meeting. Documentation that significant findings
have been addressed at the next level should be retained at that level. Whenever
a significant or major finding is made, the Quality Assessment Review, Form
No. 700-010-96, should include the proposed "actions taken and/or follow-up for
implementing improvement" in section C of the form. Examples of actions taken
or follow-up include providing or requiring additional training for personnel that
need it; discussing practices that need improvement at staff meetings;
recommending the adoption of better or outstanding practices; or establishing a
process that lead inspectors must use to ensure that their inspectors prepare
properly to perform inspections. If findings have statewide significance they
should be communicated in writing to the SCO Quality Review Engineer for
presentation at the next DCE Meeting or immediate distribution to all districts.

4 Maintenance, Transfer and Storage of QA Records

The QA records must be maintained by the responsible engineer in a single

location within the district where the reviews were done. QA records should be
retained for 3 fiscal years after the close of the fiscal year they represent.

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT A

Conducting a District Level Quality Assessment Review (QAR)

I. OVERVIEW

This Guidance document is intended to be used by a District Level (DL) Quality

Assessment (QA) Reviewer or District Reviewer (DR). By fully using these
Guidelines, a DR will be aware of every important QA requirement that should be
examined during a review. The DR must check the following major QA concerns:
Verification of Critical Requirements, QA Process Administration, and Proper
Documentation. Comprehensiveness and Effectiveness of Training should also
be reviewed.

II. VERIFICATION OF CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS

Guidelist Possession - The Statewide Inspection Guidelists include critical

requirements and many other requirements that QA and Quality Control (QC)
personnel must be familiar with, so it is very important that they have Statewide
Inspection Guidelists readily available. The DR should determine whether or not
the inspector and other QC personnel have the QC Guidelists immediately
available while in the field through internet access, or if internet access is not
available a hard copy should be in their truck. Office personnel should have
immediate availability through internet access at their desk. If Guidelists are not
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
available, a General Opportunity for Improvement (OFI) in Section B of the QAR
form should be recorded and an action should be recommended in Section C of
the QAR form.

Critical Requirement Verification - The DR must conduct reviews on

Construction Inspection and Engineering (CEI) personnel as if they were a
Project Reviewer, reviewing the field CEI effort. This means that the DR must
check the QC performance of inspection and other personnel for compliance with
the Critical Requirements List of a specific assessment category. The DR must
also perform reviews on the performance of personnel that are responsible for
QC at the residency, which would include assessment categories such as
Number 16, Claims and Contract Modifications. If the DR finds Statewide Critical
Requirements (CR) that show significant opportunities for improvement
(OFI) either the DR should also check non-critical guidelist, since OFIs of Critical
Requirements may be an indication that non-critical requirements may also show
opportunities for improvement.

III. QA PROCESS ADMINISTRATION (Scope, Frequencies, and Staff)

Process implementation Verification - The DR should ensure that the process

administration items that follow are being done properly.

Scope of QAR’s - The DR must verify that all assessment categories that are
required to be reviewed by the CPAM are reviewed. A DCE, Resident or Project
Administrator (when approved by the DCE) may add assessment categories.
This should take place at the start of the fiscal year and the effected CEI staff
should be informed of the added requirements in May or June before the
beginning of the fiscal year on July 1. A written explanation for the increase
should be provided.

Frequencies - The DR must verify that the frequencies of review for each QA
Category are in compliance with the District’s Minimum Annual Review
Frequency Table. The District should establish its own table if frequencies are
increased from what is required by the CPAM. This table may be issued by the
District Construction Engineer at the start of the fiscal year and must at least
comply with the minimum frequencies required in the CPAM. The District table
will be the same as the CPAM table if the DCE chooses not to add new
assessment categories or increase frequencies. The new District Table should
be determined at the May or June Resident Engineer meeting by the DCE with
input from Resident Engineers. When any district generated frequency table
differs from the CPAM Minimum Annual Review Frequency Table, a written
justification for the difference should be attached to the table or noted on it.
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
Representative Staff - The DR should review as many inspectors as possible
without excessive focus on individual inspectors unless the focus goes beyond
the minimum required due to a need for improvement.

IV. DOCUMENTATION

Storing / Filing and Content of QA Records - The preferred method for storing
QA records is in a loose-leaf notebook subdivided into the following sections: QA
logs, Pending Actions, Example QAR forms, and completed QAR forms
separated by Assessment Category. The following is an explanation of what
each section should contain.

QA Log, Actual - The DR should verify that the QAR Logs are filled out properly.
The first sheet of the Log Section must be a QA Log form for the current fiscal
year and it must show completed QAR’s to date. The information for a review
must not be entered until it is fully completed. If a QAR results in OFIs or
Innovative Practices (IPs), the letters OFI or IP should be placed in the upper left
corner of the date space for that review. This provides a quick method for
reviewers to determine which QAR reports have OFIs or IPs without having to
review each QAR report. Log forms for previous fiscal years may be kept at the
end of this section. The Planned Frequency column must be filled in and must
correspond to the CPAM, District Minimum Annual Frequency Table whichever is
applicable. When any planned review frequency differs from what is on the
CPAM Minimum Annual Review Frequency Table, a written justification for the
difference should be attached to the QA Log Form or noted on it along with the
next level reviewers initials as in the case of no work or little work.

QA Log, Planned - The second sheet of the Log Section should be a schedule
of QAR’s planned for the upcoming fiscal year and the existing QAR Log form
may be used for this by identifying it as such by entering the word “Planned” at
the top. A schedule should also be filled out for DL reviews. These schedules
may be sub-divided into three month (quarterly) intervals. The reviewer should
anticipate, based on the workload for the coming year, which reviews are likely to
be possible for each interval. The reviewer should review these schedules on a
monthly basis in order to avoid missing reviews because work is already
complete and to revise the schedule of anticipated reviews based on work
underway.

Pending Actions - This section should contain all QAR forms that show actions
to be completed at a date later than the QAR date and should include actions
associated with OFIs and IPs. This allows reviewers to examine these actions
easily. It also provides one location for the primary reviewer that enters the action
on the form, to periodically - once a month is desirable - check if actions have
been completed. Once actions have been completed, the QAR form should be
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
transferred from the Pending Actions Section to the applicable QA Category
Section.

Example QAR Forms - The QA training sessions conducted by the District

should include a handout that contains example QAR forms. The DR should
check to see that this section, with the examples, is included in the notebook.

QA Categories - There must be a separate section for each assessment

category and the QAR forms that go into a specific category should be in
chronological order with the most current first. The first sheets in each QA
section should be the applicable Statewide QA Critical Requirements List for that
category. This makes it easy for the reviewer to refer to the Critical Requirements
and it also establishes which lists were used since they change from year to
year. The DR must make sure that all QA Category Sections are in the notebook.

QAR Forms - The DR should verify that the QAR forms are filled out properly. All
Statewide Critical Requirements (CR), by number only, must be listed on the
form with a statement indicating why it is either in compliance (Section A) or that
there is an OFI (Section B). Only CR’s that are in compliance, General
Compliances, and IPs are to be listed in Section A, and only OFIs are to be listed
in Section B. Review issues that have to do with QA Administration, Proper
Documentation and Training, versus Statewide Critical Requirements, are
referred to as General QA Issues. General QA issues must be reported at the
start of Section A under the heading "General Compliances" or at the start of
section B under the heading “General OFIs” prior to reporting of CR’s. Non-
critical Guidelist requirements need not be listed unless they are being checked
because the number of OFIs warrants more comprehensive verification.
Compliance must be based on whether the CR being reviewed has been fully
checked by the CEI person responsible for it and NOT whether or not the
Contractor has completed the CR satisfactorily. In other words, the QAR is
evaluating the performance of the inspector, project administrator or
administrative person handling the CEI & M Quality Control for that CR. It is
not for evaluating the Contractor’s performance and should never be used
for this purpose since Contractor performance is evaluated in the Daily
Report of Construction in addition to other documents.

Actions Taken - In Section C of the QAR form, recommended actions taken that
are related to OFIs and IP’s are reported. Recommendations should include a
deadline for any "OFI" that is not resolved during the QAR. Where a deadline
date is entered, the form should be stored in the Pending Actions Section until it
is resolved. The recommended action should be fully implemented or resolved
before it is removed from the Pending Actions Section. The DR should verify that
Section C is being filled out properly and that actions are receiving the
appropriate follow-up.
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
Reporting of Noteworthy Findings - The DR must verify that OFI’s and IP’s are
escalated to the appropriate level when warranted and are reported properly. An
issue should be considered an Innovative Practice for comment in Section C,
only if it is determined that it should be implemented on other current and future
contracts as an improved system, process, method or practice. If desired,
superior performance of personnel may be reported as an outstanding issue only
in Section A. Staff meetings & Resident Engineer meeting agendas should
always include an item for QA/QC and OFI or IP issues should be mentioned in
the minutes. If warranted, the DR should escalate any OFI or IP to the DCE for
consideration and discussion at the next Resident Engineer meeting and/or by
distribution in some other written fashion to all personnel in the District that need
to know. Resident Engineer meeting agendas should always include an item for
QA/QC and OFI/IP issues should be mentioned in the minutes.

V. TRAINING

Comprehensiveness - Training is considered to be comprehensive if all

personnel that are responsible for QA and/or QC - including lead, senior and
junior inspectors - have received of QA training provided by the District
Construction Quality Assessment Coordinator (DCQAC) or designee within the
last three years. All Consultant personnel as well as in-house personnel must
receive this training. Since inspectors as well as others will be receiving QAR’s, it
is important that they understand the reasons and goals of the QA process since
it will affect them directly. The DR must evaluate how comprehensive training has
been and recommend additional or follow-up training if warranted.

New Employees and Consultants - On an as needed basis if there are large

numbers of new employees, at a minimum of once per year, training sessions
should be provided for new employees. Each time a new CCEI team begins
work, the DCQAC or Construction Project Manager should provide a training
session for all Consultant personnel. The DR should verify that this training is
being offered. A copy of current Statewide QA Critical Requirements Lists,
Statewide Inspection Guidelists and the District Minimum Annual Frequency
Table should be given to all new employees during training.

Construction Project Manager Training - If the Construction Project Manager

conducts the training, some instruction about how best to do the training should
be provided by the DCQAC for the Construction Project Manager. The DR should
verify that this training has taken place.

Training Effectiveness - The effectiveness of training will be considered

acceptable when the result of QAR’s demonstrates that personnel fully and
clearly understand what is required by the QA Procedure (CPAM Section 5.9). If
the DR determines that training has not been effective or is inadequate, then
recommendations should be made for additional or more effective training.
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________

SECTION 4 - DISTRICT LEVEL QA PLAN (DISTRICT 5)

The District Level Reviewer will be responsible for all functions of the QA
Process. The DCE and/or the DCQAE are responsible for all QA activities at the
District Level.
The District Level Process Review will also consist of a review of project
personnel in a Residency to verify they are uniformly administering the whole
contract according to the specifications and the project plans. The District will
use the list of items per category established by the District Office.

1 Introduction

This purpose of this document is to establish District Five’s Five Star Approach to
Project Excellence. This plan will establish the minimum Quality Assessment
(QA) responsibilities for District Five Construction Engineering and Inspection
(CEI) personnel as directly related to the management of construction projects. It
will contain procedures for monitoring how well these responsibilities are being
performed and for documenting non-compliance and outstanding areas related to
performance. The procedure applies to all construction personnel administering
construction contracts of any type.

The items to be reviewed will be based on the Guidelists as published by the

State Construction Office and listed on their website. The District may also add
or delete from these Guidelists as necessary and publish their own. Links to the
Updated Guidelists will be distributed to all CCEI staff at the beginning of each
fiscal year along with inspection training if requested. The reviews will be
structured around the items that may need significant improvement or for those,
which if not carried out successfully by the Contractor or by the CEI staff, will
result in severe compromise of project quality.

The goals of District Five’s Quality Assurance Plan are to ensure that the
guidelists are being followed, improve in problem areas identified in last years
reviews, identify trends in the district from one project to another, share
innovative practices between projects, and to educate field personnel.

Our plan takes a five star approach to maintaining quality on our projects:

*1. Project Progress Reviews

A. Confirm that required documentation is present on site
B. Inspect work in progress

*2. Critical Item Review

A. Review areas critical to producing a high quality product safely
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
a. MOT
b. Asphalt
c. Base
d. Environmental Compliance

*3. Targeted Item Review

A. Review specific items during work
a. Drilled shafts
b. MSE walls
c. Signs
d. ADA / Sidewalks
e. Items specified by Resident Engineers a problem areas
f. Items needing improvement as per previous years QA or
Central Office’s Process Reviews

*4. CCEI Oversight

A. On project where CCEI’s are managing contractors or other CCEI’s
a. Ensure Hours are being reviewed
b. That Project Administrator / Manager is up to date on all
SA’s / Work Orders / Time Extensions
c. Schedule is being followed / updated / revised

*5. State Process Review

A. Central office’s yearly reviews will be incorporated into our review
process

1.1 Project Progress Reviews

The purpose of this section of the QA plan is for the Inspector to get an overall
feel for the organization of the project in relation to the contract documents. This
will be determined by a review of the office documentation, and the actual work
being done on the project. Prior to going out into the field, the District Level
Quality Assurance Inspector should familiarize themselves with the project plans,
contract and special provisions.

Part A confirms that all required documentation is present on site. They will look
for the following items:

1. Bulletin Board with all permits is posted on site. These include (NPDES,
Notice of Intent, and SWPPP)
2. Rain Gauge
3. Copy of Project Schedule is available in field office
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
4. MOT Report Logbooks
5. SWPPP Reports

Part B uses the Statewide Critical Requirements List to inspect any work in
progress on the jobsite. The Quality Assurance inspector will meet with CEI
Inspection staff in the field and ensure that they are using the guidelists and
adhering to the Specifications and Special Provisions included in their contract.

1.2 Critical Item Review

The purpose of this section of the QA Plan is to review specific areas that the
District has determined are critical to producing a high quality product in a safe
manner.

These areas include:

1. MOT: The QA Inspector will drive the project, and try to meet with the
MOT Inspector checking for compliance before visiting the field office to
review the previous month’s reports.
2. Asphalt: The QA Inspector will review all asphalt roadway reports,
Verification reports, and truck tickets on file at the field office. They will
also include the District Materials Asphalt inspector’s reviews as part of
their report.
3. Earthwork / Base: The QA Inspector will meet with the Contractor’s QC
and the CEI VT and compare density log books for accuracy. They will
also include the District Materials Earthwork inspector’s reviews as part of
their report.
4. Concrete: The QA Inspector will include the District Materials Concrete
inspector’s reviews as part of their report.
5. Environmental Compliance: The QA Inspector will review the SWPPP at
the field office and confirm that the preventative measures in place follow
the plan. They will also include the District’s Environmental Consultant’s
reviews as part of their report.
6. Final Estimates: Final Estimates will be reviewed in accordance with
District 5 Final Estimates QA Plan.

1.3 Targeted Item Review

The purpose of this section of the QA plan is to review specific items as the work
occurs.

These items will be:

1. Items specified by Resident Engineers as problem areas

 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
2. Items needing improvement as per previous years QA or Central Office’s
Process Reviews

1.4 CCEI Oversight

The purpose of this section of the QA Plan is to ensure that on projects where
CCEI’s are managing contractors or other CCEI’s that the following is occurring:

1. CEI is monitoring & documenting contractor hours of operation.

2. Project Administrator / Manager is up to date on all SA’s / Work Orders /
Time Extensions.
3. Schedule is being followed / updated / revised per specifications.
4. Project Manager Review of CCEI: Review of overtime request, does
overtime reflect hours on daily report of construction.

It will be the duty of the QA Inspector to meet with the Project Administrator to
review the above while at the field office.

1.5 State Process Review

This section will ensure that the State’s yearly reviews are incorporated into our
review process. Any areas that are found to be deficient will be added to the
program under Part Three.
 DISTRICT 5 CONSTRUCTION QA / QC PLAN
Effective Date August 12, 2009
______________________________________________________________________________________
QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
MINIMUM ANNUAL REVIEW FREQUENCIES FY-2006/2007

ASSESSMENT CATEGORY NUMBER AND DISTRICT

TITLE LEVEL

1. Clearing and Grubbing Optional

2. Maintenance of Traffic 1 / REO*
3. Environmental Compliance 1 / REO*
4. Earthwork Optional
5. Drainage Optional
6. Base Optional
7A. Asphalt Plant / Lab 1 / REO*
7B. Asphalt Paving / Milling 1 / REO*
8A. Concrete Pavement 1 / REO*
8B. Concrete Materials 1 / REO*
9. Structure Foundations Optional
10A. Bridge Structures General Concrete Optional
10B. Bridge Structures Bearings/Beams/Bolts Optional
10C. Bridge Structures Concrete Decks Optional
10D. Bridge Structures Post Tensioning Optional
11. MSE or Retaining Walls Optional
12A. Signalization Optional
12B. Lighting Optional
13. Traffic Control Aids Optional
14A. Grassing Optional
14B. Landscaping Optional
15. Utilities 1
16A. Claims 1
16B. SA’s, Work Orders & Field SA’s 1
16C. Contract Time Extensions 1
16D. Subcontracts 1/REO*
17. Public Involvement Optional
18. QA Procedure Implementation N/A
19. Maintenance Customer Concerns 1 / REO*
20. ADA - Accessibility Issues 1 / REO*
21. Noise and Vibration Abatement Optional
Notes: 1) Category 18. QA Procedure Implementation is no longer required as all districts have been
certified as having implemented the minimum requirements of the Statewide Construction QA Plan. * REO
= Resident Engineers Office. 2) The procedure governing the quality assessment reviews, shown in the
table above, is now in the revision process. Until those revisions are complete all districts have been
directed to comply with the currently approved procedure.