MATERIALS DISPUTE RESOLUTION
PART 1 GENERAL
1.1SECTION INCLUDES
A.Procedures for disputing acceptance or verification test results for the
following materials on Department projects:
1.Section 02056 – Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill
2.Section 02721 – Untreated Base Course
3.Section 02735 – Micro surfacing
4.Section 02741 – Asphalt Mix
5.Section 02743 – Asphalt Mix for Bike and Pedestrian Paths
6.Section 02744 – Stone Matrix Asphalt
7.Section 02745 – Asphalt Material
8.Section 02752 – Portland Cement Concrete Pavement
9.Section 02785 – Chip Seal Coat
10.Section 02786 – Open-Graded Surface Course
11.Section 02787 – Bonded Wearing Course
12.Section 03055 – Portland Cement Concrete
13.Section 03310 – Structural Concrete
B.Procedures for requesting that rejected, non-conforming material be
allowed to remain in place.
1.2RELATED SECTIONS
A.Section 00555: Prosecution and Progress
B.Section 00727: Control of Work
C.Section 02056: Embankment, Borrow, and Backfill
D.Section 02721: Untreated Base Course
E.Section 02735: Micro surfacing
F.Section 02741: Asphalt Mix
G.Section 02743: Asphalt Mix for Bike and Pedestrian Paths
H.Section 02744: Stone Matrix Asphalt
Materials Dispute Resolution – 1 of 7
I.Section 02745: Asphalt Material
J.Section 02752: Portland Cement Concrete Pavement
K.Section 02785: Chip Seal Coat
L.Section 02786: Open-Graded Surface Course
M.Section 02787: Bonded Wearing Course
N.Section 03055: Portland Cement Concrete
O.Section 03310: Structural Concrete
1.3REFERENCES
A.AASHTO R 35: Superpave Volumetric Design for Asphalt Mixtures
B.AASHTO T 22: Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Specimens
C.AASHTO T 24: Obtaining and Testing Drilled Cores and Sawed Beams of
Concrete
D.AASHTO T 121: Density, Yield, and Air Content of Concrete
E.AASHTO T 152: Air Content of Freshly Mixed Concrete by the Pressure
Method
F.AASHTO T 193: The California Bearing Ratio
G.AASHTO T 324: Hamburg Wheel-Track Testing of Compacted Asphalt
Mixtures
H.AASHTO T 342: Determining Dynamic Modulus of Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA)
I.ASTM C 457: Microscopical Determination of Parameters of the Air-Void
System in Hardened Concrete
J.UDOT Materials Manual of Instruction
K.UDOT and Utah AGC Partnering Field Guide
Materials Dispute Resolution – 2 of 7
1.4DEFINITIONS Not Used
1.5SUBMITTALS
A.Contractor’s dispute of acceptance or verification test results.
1.Submit the dispute for approval within one week of receipt of test
results or at least 24 hours before performing any work that may prevent the evaluation, correction, or removal of the lot in question.
2.Include information, engineering analysis, statistical analysis, and
test results related to the dispute.
a.Reasons for disputing the acceptance or verification test
results.
b.The Contractor’s project quality control test results, including
split sample test results. 1) Test results must be from a Department-qualified laboratory using Department-qualified technicians. 2) Include all supporting test data and calculations for reported values.
c.Successful laboratory correlation information when required
by material specification.
d.Statistical analysis or identification of potential outliers.
e.Procedures or issues leading to disputed acceptance test
results.
f.Incentive/Disincentive calculations based on both Contractor
and Department test values, separately.
B.Request to allow rejected material to remain in place
1.Submit the request for approval within one week of receipt of test
results or at least 24 hours before performing any work that may prevent the evaluation, correction, or removal of the lot in question.
2.Submit an engineering analysis.
a.Include reasons that the Department should consider
allowing the rejected material to remain in place.
b.Include materials, durability, and long-term structural
properties from a Department-qualified laboratory as appropriate. Testing may include: 1) Hamburg Wheel Track Testing of Compacted Asphalt Mixtures – Refer to AASHTO T 324. 2) PG Asphalt Binder Tests – Refer to Section 02745. 3) SuperPave Volumetric Properties – Refer to AASHTO R 35. 4) California Bearing Ratio – Refer to AASHTO T 193.
Materials Dispute Resolution – 3 of 7
5) In-place Concrete Properties for Concrete Pavement and Portland Cement Concrete – Refer to AASHTO T 22, T 24, T 121, T 152. Samples from reinforced structures may be taken only as approved by the Engineer. 6) Air Void System in Hardened Concrete – Refer to ASTM C 457.
c.Include an engineering evaluation based on durability and
serviceability relative to the specified product requirements. This includes expected performance compared to design life.
1.6DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURE FOR ACCEPTANCE OR
VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
A.The Contractor may dispute the validity of the Department’s acceptance or
verification tests.
1.The option to dispute the validity of the Department’s test results is
forfeited if laboratory correlation testing is required by specification and is not performed.
B.Contractor disputes will not change the Department-selected option for
materials acceptance based on sampling and testing as outlined in the UDOT Materials Manual of Instruction Section 1011.
1.Quality Control results may be used to dispute acceptance test
results.
C.The Department immediately reviews the submittal when the construction
schedule and contractor information indicates that a rejected lot will be affected within 48 hours by work that may prevent the evaluation, correction, or removal of the lot in question.
1.The Department may suspend work related to the lot in question if
merit is found in the engineering analysis.
D.Resolve differences in test results prior to further production of the
material type in question.
E.The Department and Contractor immediately begin to investigate and
review the engineering analysis and resolve the dispute if merit is found. The investigation includes the following.
1.A test and calculation procedure review. Refer to this Section,
Article 1.7.
2.Validation testing as appropriate. Refer to this Section, Article 1.8.
3.Third party testing and review as appropriate. Refer to this Section,
Article 1.9.
Materials Dispute Resolution – 4 of 7
F.The Department may choose to evaluate the lot using appropriate test
methods if significant errors are identified that cannot be corrected and the quality of the in-place material is in question.
G.The Engineer reviews the analysis and notifies the Contractor in writing of
their decision. The notification of rejection includes the following:
1.Engineering basis for rejecting the Contractor’s analysis including
specific points of objection.
2.Department data and analysis to justify Department position.
3.Time frame for removal of material or pay adjustment to be applied
to the lot.
H.The Department will review the Contractor’s schedule and make
appropriate adjustments to contract time when significant errors are identified in the Department’s testing results based on critical path analysis. Refer to Section 00555.
1.Time lost due to a rejected analysis is not credited to the contract
time.
I.The Department’s response concludes this materials dispute resolution
process.
1.Continuing disputes must be addressed and escalated as outlined
in Section 00727 and the UDOT and Utah AGC Partnering Field Guide.
1.7TEST AND CALCULATION PROCEDURE REVIEW FOR DISPUTED
ACCEPTANCE OR VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
A.The Department and Contractor immediately begin a review of the
acceptance test results when the Department concludes the engineering analysis has merit and test procedures or calculations are in question. The review normally includes the following in an appropriate order:
1.A review of all equipment, procedures, and methods used for
sampling, splitting, and testing.
2.A review of the Department and Contractor’s raw test data and
calculations for documentation or calculation errors.
3.Production and testing of additional correlation samples.
4.Cross-witnessing of test procedures by Contractor Quality Control
and Department personnel.
5.Distribution of any other pertinent information.
6.Discussion of other possible means for variation.
B.The Department corrects the applicable test results and reapplies the
acceptance determination and associated payment if equipment issues or errors in calculations or reporting are discovered.
Materials Dispute Resolution – 5 of 7
C.The Department evaluates the lot using the original test results if no
significant errors are identified.
1.8VALIDATION TESTING FOR DISPUTED ACCEPTANCE OR VERIFICATION
TEST RESULTS
A.Validation testing may be performed by the Department as follows:
1.Department personnel begin retesting on the material remaining
from the original Department test.
a.The Contractor’s representative may witness the testing.
b.The Department may perform the validation testing in the
Department’s Region or Central Materials laboratory.
c.Retest all samples in the lot.
2.Retesting results are used to validate or invalidate original
Department result.
a.Validation test results may not be used instead of
acceptance results.
b.Results within two standard deviations of the original
acceptance results are validated. 1) Use the project acceptance results for the lot in question to determine the standard deviation.
3.Invalidated test results are removed from acceptance lot and the lot
is reevaluated based on the reduced sample size.
B.The Department evaluates the lot using the original test results if no
samples are invalidated.
1.9THIRD PARTY TESTING AND REVIEW FOR DISPUTED ACCEPTANCE OR
VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
A.Third Party testing may be performed as follows:
1.Select an Independent Third Party agreed upon by the Department
and the Contractor to witness sample splitting and testing by both the Contractor and the Department if errors in testing cannot be identified.
2.The Independent Third Party identifies and obtains additional
material for split-sample testing.
3.The Independent Third Party witnesses split-sample testing in the
Department and Contractor Laboratories, evaluates the test procedures, compares the results, determines if there are errors, and provides a report.
4.The party responsible for the identified error pays for the services of
the Independent Third Party.
Materials Dispute Resolution – 6 of 7
B.The Department evaluates the lot using the original testing results if no
significant errors are identified.
1.10REJECT MATERIAL
A.The Contractor may request that rejected, non-conforming material be left
in place at a reduced price. Include an engineering analysis.
B.The Engineer determines whether the lot is to be removed or remain in
place and the associated price reduction if other than specified in the contract.
PART 2 PRODUCTS Not Used
PART 3 EXECUTION Not Used
END OF SECTION
Materials Dispute Resolution – 7 of 7
Utah revises spec sections through supplementals and new editions. We check this one every week and email you the day it changes. Free, no account.
Source: Utah Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, 2026 Edition. Pages 161–167 of 1,331.
View official source ↗