Forwarded as requested ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nat Hager III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 2001February06 17:24 Subject: [USMA:10876] Utah DOT > Document from Utah DOT from last summer... > > Nat > > http://www.dot.state.ut.us/esd/otheresdpages/cecu/08%2D23%2D00.htm > > > UDOT/CECU (Consultant Engineers Council of Utah) LIAISON COMMITTEE MEETING > MINUTES for August 23, 2000 > Place: UDOT 4th Floor Conference Room > Date: August 23, 2000 > Time: 9:00AM > Prepared By: Lee Arnold > > <snip> > > Item 7 > > Tom also led discussion on the Local Government cooperative agreements where > the local agencies prefer using English Units. UDOT no longer supports > anything but metric and that means the agencies and their consultants are > responsible for all costs associated with making the conversion of specs, > standard drawings, V-drawings, design standards, etc. They are also > responsible for all mistakes, omissions and incorrect standards in the bid > package. Tom handed out an insert to be included in cooperative agreements > and asked for feedback before the end of the month. > > Randy asked, "Should we be going back to English Units?" This generated a > lot of discussion. Tom said of the 40 DOT's that converted to metric, only > 17 remain and half of those will go back to English soon. There is a high > degree of risk where conversion of standards is required or when double > dimensioning is required when dealing with the likes of Union Pacific > Railroad. Randy stated that a lot of state money was spent in meeting the > Federal mandate to convert to metric and it would cost a lot to go back. The > state would not have any interest in going back unless the Feds would agree > that it would be for the long term. They definitely would not want to go > back to English if there was any chance the Feds come back in two years and > mandate metric again. Randy pointed out its a lot cheaper for the local > agencies to do those designs using metric since the support is there. >
