IAStructE DOCUMENT No.

2014/01

RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES ON
PROOF CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR
HIGHWAY BRIDGES

Published by
INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
 IAStructE DOCUMENT No. 2014/01

RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES ON
PROOF CONSULTANCY SERVICES FOR
HIGHWAY BRIDGES

Published by

INDIAN ASSOCIATION OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS

Price: ` 1000/-
(Packaging & Postage extra)
 DISCLAIMER:
This guideline is not intended to be used as a legal document to alter contracts between a design
consultant / proof consultant and Owner. Neither the members of the Governing Council of
IAStructE, nor the Association will be liable for any direct, indirect, consequential, special,
exemplary, or other damages arising from the content of this guideline.

ii
FOREWORD
In recent years, proof checking of structural design of bridges has been a subject of
deliberations at various forums. In the absence of proper guidelines, and increasing
complexity of structures, the task of ensuring safety in their design and compliance
with relevant codes of practice are of great concern to structural engineers. The
procedure adopted for designing the structure by the Design Consultant and
submission of the same along with drawings to Proof Consultant should be considered
as a good system to get safety in design and achieving economy in the end product.

The Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE) has been deliberating the
subject in the recent past. In one of the seminars conducted by IAStructE, eminent
speakers suggested different models for proof checking. Due to the importance of
proof checking, it should be made mandatory on various designs prepared by
structural engineers as a part of disaster mitigation programmes. The
recommendations made during the seminar were based on the engineering profession
in developed countries. It is regulated by code of ethics and self- regulating statutory
regulations. Though the engineering profession is the largest profession affecting day
to day life of the society, there is no existing regulation to regulate the same in India.
In the absence of regulated engineering practice in the country, any person calls
himself as 'Bridge Engineer' and approves design and drawings involving structural
safety even without adequate qualification and experience.

IAStructE constituted a sub-committee to go into the matter threadbare and prepare

guidelines for proof checking of bridges. The first draft of the guideline was prepared
by Mr. Alok Bhowmick and the sub-committee comprising of expert structural
engineers, had several brainstorming meetings to finalise the draft. Finally, the
committee brought out the guidelines on proof consultancy services for bridges as a
document.

I thank all the members of the committee in sparing their valuable time in bringing out
this document. A number of experts opinion was sought to bring out this document.

I hope the document on guidelines on proof consultancy services for bridges will be
found very useful for design consultants, proof consultants, the clients and others
involved for the successful completion of the project.

(S C MEHROTRA)
President, IAStructE

iii
PREFACE
These guidelines have been framed with the aim of providing owners/clients and
contractors with a set of procedures for the selection of proof consultants / technical
review consultant, depending upon the level and category of services expected from
them. The document provides various procedures that need to be adopted by the Design
Consultant (DC) and Proof Consultant (PC). The accountability and expected fee
structure for different category of poof checking is also included in this document. The
overall objective is to ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that highway bridges and
structures are safe and serviceable while in use and fit for their intended function.
The work of preparing these guidelines for bridges was entrusted to the undersigned by
the Governing Council (GC) of IAStructE. A sub-committee comprising of following
members of GC was entrusted with the responsibility of finalizing the document.
1. Mr. Mahendra Raj Founder President
2. Mr. S C Mehrotra President
3. Mr. Alok Bhowmick Author
4. Mr. Manoj Mittal Convener
5. Dr. Harshavardhan Subbarao Honorary Secretary
6. Dr. Abhay Gupta
7. Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma
8. Mr Deepak Thakur
The initial draft was discussed by the sub-committee at several meetings and finalized
by the Governing Council on 4th November, 2013.
It is hoped that availability of these guidelines will impose a discipline on the process
that encourages good practice and should bring in a positive culture for effective proof
checking to reduce the possibility of errors affecting structural fitness of Bridges.
Acknowledgements:
The undersigned is deeply indebted to members of the sub-committee as well as the
members of Governing council of IAStructE for their active contribution in finalizing
this document. Valuable suggestions received from Prof. Mahesh Tandon (GC
Member), Mr Jose Kurian (GC Member) and Mr T Viswanathan (Aarvee Associates)
are thankfully acknowledged. Valuable inputs from Mr. R. Gogia and Shri Mahendra
Raj has enhanced the contents and deserves special thanks.

(ALOK BHOWMICK)
Member, Governing Council, IAStructE

v
 IAStructE GOVERNING COUNCIL FOR THE TERM 2012-14

President
Mr. SUBHASH C MEHROTRA
Past President
Mr. SRIKUMAR GHOSH
Vice-President Northern Region
Mr. MANOJ K MITTAL
Vice-President Eastern Region
Dr. K K GANGULY
Vice-Preisdent Southern Region
Mr. S P ANCHURI
Vice President Western Region
Dr. RASVIHARI N VAKIL
Honorary Treasurer
Mr. RAHUL K PATEL
Honorary Secretary
Dr. HARSHAVARDHAN SUBBARAO

Mr. SITARAM AGGARWAL
Mr. VIPUL AHUJA
Mr. ALOK BHOWMICK
Dr. S CHATTERJEE
Mr. SUSHIL K DHAWAN
Mr. ABHAY A GHATE
Dr. RAJEEV GOEL
Mr. O P GOEL
Members
Mr. R GOGIA Mr. ASHOK D PAVATE
Dr. DULAL GOLDAR Mr. SANNA RATNAVEL
Dr. ABHAY GUPTA Dr. BIDHAN C ROY
Mr. HARI OM GUPTA Prof. VINOD R SHAH
Dr. VINOD JAIN Prof. MAHESH TANDON
Mr. GANESH JUNEJA Ms. SANGEETA WIJ
Mr. JOSE KURIAN
Mr. MAHENDRA RAJ

CENTRES
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Mr. S MAHENDER REDDY
GUJARAT STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Dr. R N VAKIL
KARNATAKA STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Mr. ASHOK PAVATE
MAHARASHTRA STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Mr. AVINASH SHIRODE
TAMIL NADU STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Mr. ZACHARIA GEORGE
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Mr. MANOJ K MITTAL
WEST BENGAL STATE CENTRE
Chairman: Dr. K K GANGULY
VISAKHAPATNAM CENTRE
Chairman: Prof. P SRINIVASA RAO

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Scope, Purpose & Objective 1
1.2.1Scope 1
1.2.2 Purpose & Objective 1
1.3 Definitions & Notations 1

2.0 Project Organisation & Responsibilities 1

2.1 Common forms of Project Organization 1
2.2 Responsibilities of the Organisation Participants 2
2.2.1Owner / Client 2
2.2.2Design Consultant (DC) 3
2.2.3Proof Consultant (PC) 3
2.3 Model Terms of Reference for Proof Consultancy 4
2.4 Frequently asked Questions (FAQ's) in Proof Consultancy 4

3.0 Scope of Services for the Proof Consultancy 4

3.1 Category & Level of Checking 4
3.1.1 Category of Structures 4
3.1.2 Proof Checking Category 5
3.2 Professional Liability 5
3.3 Minimum Qualification & Experience 6

4.0 Technical Approval Procedures 6

4.1 Design & Checking Certification 7
4.2 Technical Approval 7

5.0 Professional Fee Structure for Proof Consultancy 7

6.0 References 7

ANNEXURE-A Model-1 For Proof Consultant's Appointment 8-10

ANNEXURE-B Recommended Fee Structure for Proof Consultancy 11
ANNEXURE-C Minimum Qualification & Experience Requirement for Team Leader of Design
Consultant & Proof Consultant 12
ANNEXURE-D Flow Chart for Technical Approval Procedures 13
ANNEXURE-E Format for Proof check Certification of Compliance (level-1& 2) 14-15
ANNEXURE-F Format for Design Certification of Compliance 16
ANNEXURE-G Model Terms of Reference for Proof Consultancy 17
ANNEXURE-H Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's) in Proof Consultancy 19

vi
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The need for proof checking of structural designs has
long been recognised by the civil engineering community.
Proof checking helps to address the need for public safety
in tandem with the rapid advancement in engineering &
the fast pace of infrastructural development currently
witnessed in the country. The cost of adding confidence
and reducing risk through such a procedure is insignificant
as compared to the enormous benefits in terms of risk
mitigation and safety.
There are no laid down guidelines / procedure for proof
checking of structural designs and drawings. Wide
variations exist in practices being followed, requiring a
semblance of uniformity and thus inculcate a disciplined
proof checking practice. The need for such guidelines
has long been felt by the structural engineering fraternity.
It is hoped that availability of these guidelines will
streamline the practice of proof consultancy and reduce
the possibility of errors, which is affecting structural
safety.
The guideline defines various categories & levels of
proof checking that can be adopted, depending upon the
complexity and size of the project, and the corresponding
procedures that need to be applied. It also defines the
roles and responsibilities of DC, PC & Project Owner /
Client in any project that should be followed to achieve
the desired results that is in the best interest of the end
user. The document further provides model terms of
reference for proof consultancy works, recommendations
about reasonable fee structure as applicable for highway
bridges, sample technical approval schedules and format
for design certificates & check certificates. Frequently
asked questions regarding the roles & responsibilities of
a proof consultant in a project are also answered in this
document.
These guidelines on proof checking broadly cover the
following aspects:
Technical approval procedures & format for design
and check certificates
Minimum qualification & experience for project
specific services
Standard Terms of Reference and the scope of work
Different category & level of services
Inputs to be provided and deliverables expected.
Responsibility towards structural safety
1.2 Scope, Purpose & Objective
1.2.1 Scope
The procedures described apply to the proof checking of
designs & drawings of all permanent as well as major
temporary works (e,g. Launching Girders, Cantilever
Construction Equipment, Staging for cast-in-situ
construction.....etc.) pertaining to highway bridges,
flyovers, culverts, ROBs, FOBs, underpasses, retaining
walls, road signage structures and other highway
appurtenant structures. The guideline is applicable for
new structures proposed to be built and not applicable for
repair, rehabilitation or assessment of strength of existing
bridges. However the concepts given here can be utilised
to develop a model for proof checking of such structural
works as well.
1.2.2 Purpose & objective
The aim of this guideline is to provide a framework of
proof checking procedures for benefits of Project Owners,
Contractors, Design Consultants and Proof Consultants in
order to enable the Owners to be assured of compliance
of the designs and drawings produced by the DC with
all relevant standards, codes, norms & best engineering
practices.
The objective of formulating this guideline is to
standardise the process of proof checking by:
defining the respective roles of Owner/Client, DC,
Contractor and the PC at each stage of the development
of design.
providing a flow chart for technical approval process
and standardising the documentation procedure for
reporting & certification
recommending minimum qualification and experience
requirements of DC & PC depending upon the
category of structure and level of proof checking.
providing guidelines on reasonable professional fee
for proof consultancy services
1.3 Definitions & Notations
For the purpose of this guideline, the following definitions
apply:
 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

Technical Approval
1
Authority (TAA)
2 Proof Checking
3 Proof Consultant (PC )
The organisation responsible for accepting the design certificates and proof check certifi-
cates.
Review of Design & Drawings by an individual expert / organisation who is not involved
with the original design team. It involves checking to ensure compliance with the require-
ments of the governing contract, relevant safety standards, codes and best engineering
practices.
The organisation / individual responsible for the proof checking of the designs & drawings.

Proof Consultants Group of Engineers responsible for checking of the designs. It may comprise of appropri-
4
Team ate mix of specialists under the direction of a proof checking team leader.
5 Contractor The organisation contracted by the Owner / Client to undertake execution works.
A contract is an agreement having a lawful objective entered into voluntarily by two or
6 Contract
more parties, each of whom intends to create one or more legal obligations between them.
Design Consultant
7 The organisation responsible for the preparation of overall design and working drawings.
(DC )
Group of Engineers responsible for the design. It may comprise of appropriate mix of
8 Design Team
specialists under the direction of a Design Team Leader.
Design / Build Con- A contractor retained by an owner to be responsible for both the design and construction
9
tractor aspects of a project.
The person responsible for overseeing and co-ordinating the work of the Proof checking
10 Team Leader team and having authority to sign on behalf of the team. The team leader must be appropri-
ately qualified and competent in the relevant field of engineering related to the work.
The authority who owns the project and engages the Contractor / Design Consultant /
11 Owner
Proof Consultant for their respective roles.
Part of the bridge structure which transmits load from pier or abutment to the ground.
12 Foundation
Foundation can be Open, Well or Pile.
Part of the bridge structure (i,e Piers, Abutments) that support the Superstructure and trans-
13 Substructure
fers the load to foundation.
That part of the bridge structure which carries the vehicular and pedestrian loads directly
14 Superstructure
and which transfers the load to substructure.

2.0 PROJECT ORGANISATION & The contract model for appointment of proof consultant
RESPONSIBILITIES
2.1 Common forms of Project Organisation
The responsibility for procurement of design consultant
and proof consultant lies either with the owner or the
contractor. The choice of procurement strategy is a
key determinant as to who should be responsible for
procurement of design consultancy & proof consultancy.
An employer-designed project is one where the contractor
is responsible for providing the construction services
required to deliver a facility, designed by (or on behalf of)
the project owner. A contractor-designed (or Design-and-
Build) project is one where a contractor is responsible
for the design, management and delivery of the project,
on time and within budget, taking into account whole-life
costs and fitness for purpose in accordance with a pre-
defined output specification provided by the owner.
for bridges vary according to the nature of the project
& nature of contract. Some of the commonly adopted
models for appointment of PC are provided in Annexure-
A. These models identify few examples of the reporting
relationship of PC with the Owner / Contractor / DC /
Concessionaire.
As the area and scope of proof consultancy is wide and
extensive, it is extremely important that the Owner clearly
defines the scope of work and precise areas which needs
to be checked by the PC.
2.2 Responsibilities of the Organisation Participants
Irrespective of the model of appointment of proof
consultant opted for, the various stakeholders in the
project have particular responsibilities in terms of the
effective proof checking, as described below:
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 
2.2.1 Owner
Regardless of the contractual relationship between
the Owner and the PC, in order to ensure that the
construction of bridges meets the appropriate standards
and specifications, the owner shall assume the following
responsibilities:
Ensure by way of contractual stipulations that the DC
and PC appointed is having the desired qualifications
and required experience to carry out their respective
assignments.
Ensure that the scope of work are well defined for DC
and PC, including deliverables from them defined and
a realistic time schedule is given for Proof Checking.
Ensure that the PC is commercially protected, enabling
the agency to provide an independent assessment
without being subjected to any duress.
Ensure that the Good for Construction (GFC)
drawings are issued to site only after formal approval
/ Stamping by the PC and issuance of proof checking
certification.
Recognise that there can be difference of opinion
between DC and the PC on design issues. Differences
need to be resolved by the Owner and in case it remains
un-resolved, the PC shall still stamp the drawing with
his dissent note recorded in the check certificates.
Ensure that adequate supervision and quality control
is provided during various stages of construction.
Ensure that the construction materials and products
are provided and used as specified in the contract
drawings or contract specifications.
Ensure that the structure is used as intended and
maintained accordingly.
2.2.2 Design Consultant
Shall take overall responsibility for the adequacy
and accuracy of the consultancy work delivered by
him. Unless specifically mentioned in the terms of
reference, the following items are usually not included
in the scope of the design consultant :
topographic survey,
hydraulic investigation and designs,
geotechnical investigation and design,
Shop Drawings
Enabling Structures
In case any of these items are specifically included in the
scope of work of the Design Consultant, he shall assume
responsibility of the same.
The involvement of PC shall not relieve the DC of his
overall responsibility.
Ensure submission of comprehensive design documents
and drawings to the Proof Consultant for proof
checking. The design calculations shall be presented
in a manner which is easily comprehensible. Every
document should have a document number. Every
page of the document shall have page numbers. Design
Calculations shall be presented with adequate cross
referencing to codes, standards, Design Basis Report
(DBR) and other documents, wherever necessary.
Ensure compliance of the observations raised by the
PC. Unresolved disputes between the DC and the PC
shall be submitted to the Owner for resolution.
2.2.3 Proof Consultant
To provide a review of the engineering documents
produced by the DC. The PC should follow the
guidelines as outlined in this document for performing
the review.
Shall maintain complete independence throughout the
review process.
Technical Interaction between the DC and the PC
shall be well documented.
Ensure that the structural scheme & span arrangement
chosen by the DC meets the intended function of the
project and the requirements of the Owner.
Shall take full responsibility along with the DC for
the safety, integrity, thoroughness of the structural
designs performed by the DC. Proof checking shall at
least cover the following tasks :
Check to ensure that design loads conform to the
Code / Contract;
Check and ensure that design criteria and assumptions
conform to the Code / Contract and with accepted
engineering practice;
Check the construction specifications in the Contract
Confirm that the structural design & working
drawings conform to codes and standards following
good engineering practices. The design incorporates
pertinent results and recommendations of geotechnical,
hydraulic and other engineering investigations.
Check the constructability of the designs / drawings.
In case felt necessary, the Proof Consultant shall make
independent calculations to form a basis for arriving
at the conclusions.
All the agencies involved must recognise the fact that
 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges
the PC is an independent agency and not a part of the
design team. In case the design and proof checking work
is progressing simultaneously in a project, the PC should
not become a part of the design development process, with
the design team. The PC may however be consulted by
the DC during the design process to provide preliminary
thoughts, opinions, or comments on critical issues & also
to finalise the DBR.
The Proof Consultant:
must be a qualified practicing Engineer with minimum
qualifications & experience as stipulated in this
document.
must have extensive experience and skill that is
relevant to the design being proof checked.
shall not be part of the DCs Team. Must not have
participated in the preparation of any part of the
design for the project in any manner whatsoever;
must act independently of the Owner, Contractor and
any of their subcontractors or DC;
must be completely free of any other commitment or
obligation to any other party to this Contract and any
of their subcontractors or DC;
must not be changed without written joint understanding
and consent between Client, DC and PC.
In a design and build contract, there is a practice to treat
codes as quasi-legal documents and many a times, the
DC / PC (mis)interprets the code in a manner to find the
solution of their liking. It should be readily appreciated
that this is a seriously misguided practice and liable to
create unnecessary risks to safety. When the provisions
of the relevant standards are not entirely clear, or
considered to be inadequate or inappropriate for the
particular circumstances, the DC / PC shall aim to satisfy
the intent of the relevant standards, and should also
take into account available current knowledge and best
practices. It is important for DC and PC to recognise that
current codes and standards may not cover all matters of
design that can affect structural safety.
2.3 Model Terms of reference for Proof Consultancy
ANNEXURE-G gives a Sample Terms of Reference for
proof checking, which can be utilised for any project
category and for any level of proof consultancy.
2.4 Frequently asked Questions (FAQs)
ANNEXURE-H gives replies to some of the frequently
asked questions on proof checking / consultancy.
3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR THE PROOF
CONSULTANCY
3.1 Category & Structures and Level of Checking
Proof checking desired for a given bridge structure
depends upon several aspects such as:
a) Importance of the project from consideration of the
potential consequence of failure of structures.
b) Complexity of the structure in terms of design &
detailing.
c) Risk as perceived by the Owner / Contractor / Design
consultant.
d) Degree of professional liability that is to be assigned
to the proof consultant
The structures as well as the level of proof checking has
been categorised in this document in order to facilitate
the Owner / Contractor to select the appropriate category
of Proof Checking for a given structure. The Structures
are categorised as A, B, C & D in increasing order of
design and detailing complexity while the level of proof
checking has been categorised as 1 & 2 in increasing
level of liability of the proof checking consultants.
3.1.1 Category of Structures
Bridges & Culverts are classified in following four
categories from consideration of design & detailing
complexity:
a) Category A:
i. Culverts(Span < 6m)
ii. Retaining Walls of retained height less than 3m.
iii. Bridge Furniture Details (Crash Barriers, Expansion
Joints, Approach Slabs, Wearing Coat, Edge treatment,
Lamp post fixtures, Drainage Spouts ..etc.)
iv. Road Furniture Details (Median Kerb, Road Kerbs
etc.)
b) Category B:
i. Structures with a single simply supported span of less
than 30m and having less than 25 skew
ii. Single / Multicell RCC box type bridges.
iii. Earth retaining structures with an effective retained
height of less than 8m
iv. Road Signage Structures
c) Category C:
i. Structures with a single simply supported span of more
than 30m and/or having skew angle more than 25
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 
ii. Structures with continuous span RCC Superstructure.
iii. Earth retaining structures with an effective retained
height of less than 14m
d) Category D:
Structures not within the parameters of categories A, B
or C such as :
i. Structures with complex geometry
ii. Integral Bridges.
iii. Bridges with continuous PSC Superstructure
iv. Precast Segmental Bridges
v. Cantilever Bridges
vi. Unconventional Structures.
vii. Bridges with individual span length exceeding 50m.
viii.Bridges with skew angle exceeding 40.
ix. Bridges with difficult foundation problems.
x. Earth retaining structures with an effective retained
height of 14m or greater.
xi. Enabling Works like Launching Girders, Cantilever
Construction Equipment, Tall formworks, Shoring
for earth retention, Lifting and Handling equipments
..etc.
Bridges with cable supports (e,g. Extradosed Bridges,
Cable Stayed or Cable suspension Bridges etc.) are not
covered in this guideline.
3.1.2 Proof Checking Category
Proof checking is classified in following categories from
consideration of level of proof checking warranted and
the degree of liability of the proof consultant:
a) Level 1
In this category, proof checking is carried out by PC, who
should be from a different organisation than the DC. The
structural calculations along with the design philosophy
prepared by the DC are submitted to the PC for review.
The PC shall review the design philosophy and the
calculations. PC may also carry out his own independent
TABLE 1 : SUMMARY OF VARIOUS CATEGORIES OF PROOF CHECKING
Level of Proof Checking
(PC to check & approve designs
Category of Structures & drawings submitted by DC )
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category D
calculations, which is not obligatory. Proof checking
shall involve the following tasks:
Check and ensure that design loads conform to Codes
/ Contract specifications;
Check and ensure that design criteria and assumptions
conform to Codes / Contract and accepted engineering
practice;
Check the construction specifications;
Check the constructability of the designs proposed by DC.
Confirm that the structural design & working
drawings conform to codes and standards following
good engineering practices. The design incorporates
pertinent results and recommendations of geotechnical,
hydraulic and other engineering investigations.
b) Level 2
This is a higher category of Proof checking. In this
category, proof checking is carried out by PC, who should
be from a different organisation than the DC. The proof
consultant is given the design philosophy for the project
.and the working drawings. The structural calculations
prepared by the DC may or may not be submitted to the
PC. The PC is not obligated to review or check these
calculations and he has to carry out his own independent
calculations as a part of his scope. Proof checking shall
involve the following tasks:
Check to ensure that design loads conform to Codes /
Contract;
Check and ensure that design criteria and assumptions
conform to Codes / Contract and accepted engineering
practice;
Check the construction specifications.
Check the constructability of the proposed design &
drawings.
Carry out independent calculations and give
recommendations after review of the working drawings to
ensure that they are conforming to codes and standards
and they follow good engineering practices.
Level 2
Level 1
(PC to check & approve drawings
submitted by DC, by carrying out
independent calculations)
A1 A2
B1 B2
C1 C2
D1 D2
 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges
Table 1 below gives the summary of categories for proof
checking, which can be followed in practice:
3.2 Professional Liability as a Proof Checking
Consultant
All professionals are considered to owe a duty of care
to their clients to perform their services with skill and
competence. Engineering consultancy service contracts
commonly contain provisions requiring the Consultant
to perform services competently and professionally.
However, even if there is no such formal written contract
between the Consultant and the Owner or even if the
written contract does not expressly provide such a
requirement, this is implied in any contract.
It is however important for the Owner to define the
degree of liability of the Proof consultant in the
contract agreement. If the PC has an advisory role, his
recommendations may or may not be followed. In such
case, the PC has limited liability on the project and
his recommendations are to be treated only as second
opinion. However in case the Owner holds the PC
responsible for the integrity and appropriateness of the
proposal made by DC, the liability of PC is much more.
These aspects will have to be covered well in the contract
between the Owner and PC. It is extremely important
that the PC knows his degree of liability at the start of
the proof checking process. In any case, the maximum
professional liability for the Proof Consultant shall be
limited to the Fees received by the Proof Consultant.
Failure of a Proof Consultant to provide the level of
service required by the expressed or implied terms of
a contract is a breach of contract, for which the Proof
Consultant will be liable, should the Owner suffer loss or
damage as a result. The duty of care may also extend to
third parties potentially at risk if the Proof Consultant is
negligent in the performance of his/her duties.
Financial liability of the PC towards the Owner/Client
shall be limited to professional fees of PC. It is in the
best interest of the Owner/Client to ensure that the DC &
PC are covered by Professional liability insurance, which
provides protection to the insured professional Engineer
or Engineering firm against claims arising out of the
provision of deficient engineering services.
3.3 Minimum Qualification & Experience
The Owner/Client shall make sure that the DC and the
PC engaged for the project have requisite minimum
qualifications and relevant experience for the Team
Leaders and other team members assigned for the
project. This is considered extremely important for the
effectiveness of proof checking. ANNEXURE C gives
a general guideline about the minimum qualification and
experience required for the Team Leaders for various
categories of Proof Checking works.
4.0 TECHNICAL APPROVAL PROCEDURE
The objectives of the Technical Approval Procedures are
to ensure that as far as reasonably practicable, the bridge
structures are safe, serviceable during use and fit for their
intended function. The Technical Approval Procedure
entails a review of the DCs proposal by a Technical
Approval Authority (TAA) and includes certification by
a DC and PC. The TAA in this case may be Owner (City
Municipal Corporation, PWD, MORT&H, Railways,
Metro Authorities....etc.) or Independent Consultant
appointed by the owner / authorities. ANNEXURE D
gives the flow chart for Technical Approval Procedure.
The technical requirements for the design of bridges shall
generally comply with the relevant standards, specifications
and special publications of Indian Roads Congress (IRC)
and be constructed in accordance with the specification
for Highway Works published by MORT&H. Other than
these standards, any special provisions in the contract
agreement in the form of Technical Specifications and the
design basis reports, need to be respected. Whether all the
proposed structures within the Right Of Way (ROW) or
only a select few major structures are subject to scrutiny
and Technical Approval by the authorities, depends on
the approval authority. There are no set norms available
in this regard.
Operation of the Technical Approval Procedures
Consultation shall generally be between the DC and the
PC for acceptance of the designs & drawings. All the
submissions made by the DC for proof checking shall
have the signature of the person responsible for design in
the team of DC and the team leader of the DC .
The PC shall independently review the documents
submitted by the DC. For Level 1 checking, the PC may
either use his own independent analysis or check the
calculations submitted by the Design Consultant. For
Level 2 checking, the PC should not ask for the design
calculations and input files produced by the DC. Proof
consultant shall develop his own independent structural
model for checking purpose.
The DC and the PC must work together in a professional
manner. In case where there is a difference of opinion
between the DC and PC, they must try to resolve the
differences. It is not expected that the PC and the DC will
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 
arrive at the same precise result. A difference in result
upto 5% should be accepted by the PC, when based on
same design philosophy and DBR.
4.1 Design & Checking Certification
The design and check certificates shall be signed by the
DC and PC respectively to declare satisfactory completion
of the work etc. and the same shall be forwarded to the
Technical Approval Authority through their respective
Clients. ANNEXURE-E and ANNEXURE-F shows
the sample format for certification by PC and DC
respectively.
4.2 Technical Approval
This shall entail the acceptance of the Design and Check
Certificates and drawings etc. by the Technical Approving
Authority.
5.0 PROFESSIONAL FEE STRUCTURE FOR
PROOF CHECKING
The recommended professional fee to be charged by the
Proof Consultants for various categories of structures
and for various levels of proof checking is given in
ANNEXURE-B attached.
6.0 REFERENCES
a) BD 2/11 : DESIGN MANUAL FOR ROADS &
BRIDGES - TECHNICAL APPROVAL OF HIGHWAY
STRUCTURES, VOLUME-1, SECTION 1
b) DOCUMENT SEC/CT-301-08 : Recommended
Guidelines for Performing an Independent Structural
Engineering Review in the state of Connecticut.
c) IAN FIRTH : Adding confidence & reducing risk
The role of Independent design checking in major
projects ; IABSE Symposium, Weimar 2007
d) GUIDELINE : Professional Engineers Conducting
Peer or Technical Reviews published by Professional
Engineers, Ontario
e) MANUAL OF PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
published by The Association of Professional
Engineers of Nova Scotia.
f) PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEMINAR HELD IN
NEW DELHI organised by INDIAN ASSOCIATION
OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

ANNEXURE A

MODEL-1 FOR PROOF CONSULTANTS APPOINTMENT

EXAMPLE 1 : TYPICAL MODEL FOR OWNER DESIGNED PROJECTS

Notes :
1. The proof consultant & design consultant is appointed by the owner. Contractor receives the GFC drawings for
execution.
2. All correspondences regarding proof checking between design consultant & proof consultant shall be routed through
owner/client.
3. The proof consultant is reasonably free to use his own engineering judgement & give his independent professional
opinion. He is not commercially dependent to the design consultant or to the contractor.
4. It is desirable that the design and proof checking is substantially completed before invitation of tenders for the
execution. Client is able to have better control in the construction schedule in case the GFC drawings are given to
the contractor at the start of project.
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 

ANNEXURE A

MODEL-2 FOR PROOF CONSULTANTS APPOINTMENT

EXAMPLE 2 : TYPICAL MODEL FOR DESIGN & BUILD PROJECTS

Notes :
1. The proof consultant is appointed by the owner.
2. The proof consultant in this model is reasonably free to use his own engineering judgement & give his independent
professional opinion. He is not commercially dependent on the design consultant or on the contractor.
3. Project owner needs to be conscious about the time frame since any delay in proof checking can lead to claims by the
contractor. Sufficient time must be allocated in the construction schedule for design submission & proof checking of
the designs. in this model owner is responsible for certification of the designs through the proof consultant.
10 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

ANNEXURE A

MODEL-3 FOR PROOF CONSULTANTS APPOINTMENT

EXAMPLE 3 : TYPICAL MODEL FOR DESIGN & BUILD PROJECTS

Notes :
1. The proof consultant is appointed by the Design & Build contractor, either in consultation with the owner or from
the list of empanelled consultants provided by the owner.
2. All correspondences regarding proof checking between design consultant & proof consultant shall be routed through
design & build contractor.
3. The proof consultant will be under control of the contractor to conclude proof checking within a stipulated time
frame which will enable the contractor to control timelines.
4. The proof consultant is commercially dependent on the contractor & therefore may not be entirely free to give his
valued engineering judgement and considered technical opinions to owners. This may sometimes lead to conflict of
interest.
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 11

ANNEXURE B

RECOMMENDED FEE STRUCTURE FOR PROOF CONSULTANCY

PROFESSIONAL FEE MINIMUM PROFESSIONAL FEE (FOR LEVEL 1)

AS % OF STRUCTURAL COST
AS % OF DESIGN
CATEGORY OF
COST (In INR)* FEE % CONSULTANTS FEE
STRUCTURE
(1) (2) (3) (4)

20 Crores 0.60% TO 1.00%

40% TO 50%
50 Crores 0.45% TO 0.60%
Category A
100 Crores 0.30% TO 0.45%
30% TO 40%
> 100 Crores 0.25% TO 0.45%

20 Crores 1.00% TO 1.25%

40% TO 50%
50 Crores 0.60% TO 1.00%
Category B
100 Crores 0.45% TO 0.60%
30% TO 40%
> 100 Crores 0.30% TO 0.45%

20 Crores 1.15% TO 1.40%

40% TO 50%
50 Crores 0.80% TO 1.15%
Category C
100 Crores 0.55% TO 0.80%
30% TO 40%
> 100 Crores 0.40% TO 0.55%

20 Crores 1.25% TO 1.60%

40% TO 50%
50 Crores 1.00% TO 1.25%
Category D
100 Crores 0.60% TO 1.00%
30% TO 40%
> 100 Crores 0.45% TO 0.60%

(*) Cost for FY 2014-15. For subsequent years, cost increase @ 8% per year may be taken.

Notes :
1. The above fee structure is applicable for level - 1 checking only. for level - 2 checking, the above figures shall be
multiplied by 1.4.
2. For repetition of same design component (except foundation) in a project - 50% of original fee shall be charged for
first three repetitions. 25% of the original fee shall be charged for any subsequent repetitions.
12 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

ANNEXURE C

MINIMUM QUALIFICATION & EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENT

FOR TEAM LEADER OF DESIGN CONSULTANT & PROOF CONSULTANT

Minimum Qualification & Experience Requirement for :

Structure / Proof Checking
S. No.
Category
Team Leader of Design Consultant Team Leader of Proof Consultant

BE(Civil) / B.Tech(Civil) or equivalent BE(Civil) / B.Tech(Civil) or equivalent

1 A
with 5 years of relevant Experience with 8 years of relevant Experience

BE(Civil) / B.Tech(Civil) or equivalent BE(Civil) / B.Tech(Civil) or equivalent

2 B
with 8 years of relevant Experience with 12 years of relevant Experience

BE(Civil)/ B.Tech(Civil) with 12 years BE(Civil)/ B.Tech(Civil) with 15 years

of relevant Experience or ME (Struc- of relevant Experience or ME (Struc-
3 C
tures) / M.Tech (Structures) with 8 years tures) / M.Tech (Structures) with 10
of relevant experience. years of relevant experience.

BE(Civil)/ B.Tech(Civil) with 15 years BE(Civil)/ B.Tech(Civil) with 20 years

of relevant Experience or ME (Struc- of relevant Experience or ME (Struc-
4 D
tures) / M.Tech (Structures) with 12 tures) / M.Tech (Structures) with 15
years of relevant experience. years of relevant experience.

Notes :
1 The team leader of both the design consultant as well as the proof consultant shall be a professional engineer who
is actively engaged in the practice of bridge & structural engineering and shall have experience of the design of
bridges with structural systems comparable in size & complexity with those under consideration.
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 13

ANNEXURE D

FLOW CHART FOR TECHNICAL APPROVAL PROCEDURES

14 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

ANNEXURE E

FORMAT FOR PROOFCHECK CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE (LEVEL-1)

Name of Project _______________________________________________________________

Name of Structure _______________________________________________________________

Structure Ref. No. _______________________________________________________________

1. Proof Checking review has been carried out in relation to the Design Basis Report, Designs & Drawings produced by the
Design consultant. Design Calculations & Specifications reviewed are listed in the attached schedule S-1.
2. We certify that reasonable professional skill and care has been used by the Design Consultant in the preparation of the de-
sign of (name of structure). The designs have been checked by us for compliance in accordance with the relevant standards
& specifications as stated in attached schedule S-2.
3. All relevant design actions and design assumptions are covered by the design documents and that these actions and as-
sumptions and the overall concept meet the Owners Project Requirements.
4. A detailed check of individual structural elements and the structure as a whole has been carried out by us and the strength,
stability, serviceability and other engineering requirements, as defined in the Owners Project Requirements are being met.
5. Construction drawings and specifications have been checked. We certify that these proof checked drawings reasonably
describe:
the accuracy of critical detailing and geometry;
the adequacy of specifications for materials;
the adequacy of proposed erection procedures; and
the adequacy of temporary work.
6*. Proof checking review of Geotechnical matters for permanent works and/or temporary works included a review of the
Geotechnical Investigation Report for the bridge. The Geotechnical Report conforms to the requirements spelt out in IRC
codes and standards and includes the recommended design values, material properties and possible failure mechanisms.
7*. Proof checking of the hydraulic/hydrologic aspects of design has included a review of the major design parameters includ-
ing design flood discharges and levels, stream velocities and afflux as well as evaluation of potential for and protection
against scour and bank erosion.
(*) Include only in case applicable.

Signed & Stamped _____________________________________

Name _____________________________________ To be signed & Stamped by

the Team Leader of the Proof
Engineering Qualifications _____________________________________ Consultants Organisation
Date _____________________________________

Encl. Schedule S-1 & S-2

(NOTE : THIS CERTIFICATE IS TO BE GIVEN ON THE LETTER HEAD OF PROOF CONSULTANTS ORGANISATION)
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 15

ANNEXURE E

SAMPLE PROOFCHECK CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE (LEVEL-2)

Name of Project _______________________________________________________________

Name of Structure _______________________________________________________________

Structure Ref. No. _______________________________________________________________

1. An independent Proof Checking review has been carried out in relation to the designs represented by the Design consult-
ants Construction Drawings, Design Basis Report & Specifications as listed in the attached schedule S-1.
2. We certify that reasonable professional skill and care has been used by the Design Consultant in the preparation of the
Design & Drawings of (name of structure). The execution drawings have been checked by us for compliance in accord-
ance with the agreed Design Philosophy and relevant standards & specifications as stated in attached schedule S-2.
3. All relevant design actions and design assumptions are covered by the design basis report and that these actions and as-
sumptions and the overall concept meet the requirements of the Owners Project Requirements.
4. A detailed design of individual structural elements and the structure as a whole has been carried out by us based on the
construction drawings and we certify that the strength, stability, serviceability, durability and other engineering require-
ments, as defined in the Owners Project Requirements are being met.
5. List of Drawings proof checked is given in the attached schedule S-1 and we certify that these drawings reasonably de-
scribe:
the accuracy of critical detailing and geometry;
the adequacy of specifications for materials;
the adequacy of proposed erection procedures; and
the adequacy of temporary work.
6*. Proof checking review of Geotechnical matters for permanent works and/or temporary works included a review of the
Geotechnical Investigation Report for the bridge. The Geotechnical Report conforms to the requirements spelt out in IRC
codes and standards and includes the recommended design values, material properties and possible failure mechanisms.
7*. Proof checking of the hydraulic/hydrologic aspects of design has included a review of the major design parameters includ-
ing design flood discharges and levels, stream velocities and afflux as well as evaluation of potential for and protection
against scour and bank erosion.
(*) Include only in case applicable.

Signed & Stamped _____________________________________

Name _____________________________________ To be signed & Stamped by

the Team Leader of the Proof
Engineering Qualifications _____________________________________ Consultants Organisation
Date _____________________________________

Encl. Schedule S-1 & S-2

(NOTE : THIS CERTIFICATE IS TO BE GIVEN ON THE LETTER HEAD OF PROOF CONSULTANTS ORGANISATION)
16 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

ANNEXURE F

SAMPLE DESIGN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Name of Project _______________________________________________________________

Name of Structure _______________________________________________________________

Structure Ref. No. _______________________________________________________________

1. The work of preparation of Design & Drawings has been undertaken by us in relation to the designs represented by the
Design Basis Report, Construction Drawings and Detailed Design Calculations & Specifications as listed in the attached
schedule S-1.
2. We certify that the designs, design briefs and performance specifications of those elements of the works as illustrated and
described in the documents listed in scheduled S-1 attached, complies with the design basis criteria and other contract pro-
visions. The designs have been prepared by us for compliance in accordance with the relevant standards & specifications
as stated in attached schedule S-2
3. We also certify that an in-house check has been undertaken and completed to confirm the completeness, adequacy and
validity of the design of the Permanent Works as illustrated and described in the documents scheduled S-1 attached.
4. All necessary and required approval relating to the design of the Permanent Works, as illustrated and described in the
documents listed in the attached transmittal, have been obtained.
5. All effects of the design comprising the submission on the design of adjacent or other parts of the works have been fully
taken into account in the design of those parts.

Signed & Stamped _____________________________________

Name _____________________________________ To be signed & Stamped by

the Team Leader of the
Engineering Qualifications _____________________________________
Design Consultants
Date _____________________________________ Organisation

Encl. Schedule S-1 & S-2

(NOTE : THIS CERTIFICATE IS TO BE GIVEN ON THE LETTER HEAD OF DESIGN CONSULTANTS ORGANISATION)
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 17
ANNEXURE G
MODEL TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR PROOF CONSULTANCY
1. General
Description of the Project needs to be given, highlighting
the salient technical features.
2. Scope of Work
For proof checking of the structural design & drawings,
the Proof Consultant shall adhere to the following
requirements:
2.1 Be Interactive: have regular interaction with the
XXXX (Client) for checking the design basis
report, design philosophy and parameters, checking
of detailed designs/drawings/guidelines as stated
herein.
2.2 Ensure conformance: The design and drawings shall
be in conformity with the contract specifications,
latest IRC codes, MORT&H specifications and in
case these documents are silent, to International
codes of practices. The proof consultant shall also
comment on the appropriateness of the specifications
to be used in the work. For any item not covered in
the aforesaid specifications and guidelines, the proof
consultant shall offer his comments on the draft
specifications proposed by the design consultant.
2.3 Methodology: Define whether it should be a Level-1
or Level-2 check
The complete consultancy project envisaged here is time
bound and is to be completed in two stages.
a) Stage I Pre-Construction Stage
b) Stage II Construction Stage
2.3.1 Stage I Pre-Construction Stage:
During this stage, following works are included in
Scope
(i) To verify and comment on the comprehensive
scheme prepared by the Design Consultant showing
the layout plan of various components of the scheme
including footpaths, central verge, crash barriers etc.
(ii) To study the soil investigation report and
confirm the adequacy of geo-technical report and
recommendations.
(iii) To check and certify the Inception Report / Design
Philosophy / Design Basis of various components of
the scheme and to determine the use of appropriate
National/International codes of practices, standards
and specifications adopted for structural design.
(iv) To check and certify the preliminary designs
including foundation, substructure, superstructure
etc based on relevant IRC codes/International codes
and practices.
(v) To check and certify the General Arrangement Drawing
of various components of the scheme.
(vi) To check and certify the structural system for various
components of bridge e,g. foundation, substructure
and superstructure keeping in view increased
durability and long term serviceability as per
international codes and practices.
(vii) To study and confirm the results of Model tests like
Wind tunnel etc. to be got conducted by the Design
Consultant.
(viii) To check and certify the detailed seismic analysis
and design of the bridge as per relevant Indian / IRC
and International Codes.
(ix) To check and comment / confirm design consultants
proposal regarding methodology of construction,
suitability of materials and technology covering
various alternatives.
(x) To check and certify the Bill of Quantities, detailed
cost estimate of the bridge including all components
and river training work etc for call of tenders.
(xi) To check and certify tender drawings based on
preliminary design, detailed scope of work &
specifications for each item of work and tender
documents etc.
(xii) To check and certify instrumentation system for
monitoring the performance and behavior of the
bridge structure against corrosion etc.
(xiii) To check and certify the detailed structural designs
and drawings for various components of the Bridge.
The proof consultant shall certify these drawings as
Good for Construction.
(xiv) Verifying data input / load calculations and structural
calculations for all components of the scheme (by
independent software or their own computer program
18 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges
for Level-2 checking) and give the comparative
statements of differences if any between the Design
Consultants output and their own with an explanatory
note wherever so required.
(xv) To check and certify the designs and drawings
of river training works, drainage system and any
other ancillary / related structures like foundation
arrangement for light fittings, lifts signages etc.
(xvi) To check and certify the sequence and methodology
of construction.
2.3.2 Stage II: Construction Stage
During this stage, following works are broadly to be
attended to
(i) To check and certify the revision in design / drawings
of any structure due to change in site conditions or
any other valid reason.
(ii) To check and certify the design and drawings of
supporting structures for utility services, if required.
(iii) To assist the Client on any technical matters as and
when specifically requested by the Client and give
their specific opinion / comments.
(iv) To attend the special review meetings as and when
specifically requested by the Client.
(v) To review the Geotechnical data and comment on the
safe carrying capacity proposed by the design consultant
/ contractor for approval by the department.
(vi)To certify the prestressing system proposed as being
safe and adequate for the work from standpoint of
stress level, Safety, long term durability and other
related parameters.
(vii)To check the type of bearings and expansion joints
along with load data and ensure their adequacy
including installation details and provision for their
replacement/maintenance etc.
(viii)To inspect the site / attend special meetings as and
when requested by the XXXX (Client). The cost of
(N) visits (one visit means one meeting which may be
attended by one more key persons) of the key persons
shall be deemed to be included in the Lump sum
quoted fee of Proof Consultancy services. Additional
visits of key person/team leader, if required, beyond
(N) visits shall be payable.
3. Design Requirements
The PC will furnish his detailed reports / comments on
the design calculations and drawings to XXXX (Client)
within a reasonable period of YY days. The PC shall
discuss the deficiencies if any in the design and suggest
the changes to XXXX (Client), who in turn will direct the
DC to submit the revised design calculations and drawings.
The PC shall also check the revised design calculations
and drawings submitted by the DC within ZZ week of
receipt. The scope shall include acceptance of material
specifications, durability, provisional compliance with
design standard / requirements, safety aspects, construction
sequence etc.
The Proof Consultant shall certify the working drawings
for acceptance and approval by the XXXX (Client).
4. Time of Completion
4.1 The total time of completion of proof consultancy is
PPP months. However, the time period for the services to
be rendered during stage I excluding the services to be
rendered during the construction stage shall be limited
to QQQ months. The time period will be reckoned from
the 10th day of the letter of acceptance of offer for proof
consultancy services.
4.2 If the work remains un-commenced or incomplete at
any stage with reference to time schedule, compensation
at the rate of maximum RRR% of the proof consultancy
fee for every (day/week/fortnight/month ..etc.) of delay
subject to maximum 10% (ten percent) of consultancy
fee shall be levied on the proof consultant. The decision
of XXX (Client) as to the period of delay on the part of
the PC and the quantum of compensation for such delay
shall be final and bidding on the PC.
5. Payment Schedule
Cover detailed break-up of Payment Schedule Component
Wise.
6. Input from Clients & Deliverables from Proof
Checker
Cover in detail the various inputs to be given by Client
/ Design Consultants and deliverables expected from
Proof Consultant. Format of deliverables from Design
Consultant & Proof Consultant also needs to be given in
the TOR.
7. Responsibility of accuracy of the project proposal
Cover the professional liability aspects clearly in
unambiguous terms.
 Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges w 19
ANNEXURE H
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS REGARDING PROOF CONSULTANCY
The following questions from Project Owner, Consultants,
Professional Engineers and answers hereby are intended
to demonstrate how the principles outlined in this
guideline can be applied to specific situations.
Q1: What is meant by Proof Checking?
A: Proof Checking is a documented evaluation of the
structural design concept, details based on qualitative
as well as quantitative examination of the structural
design documents by an experienced professional or a
team of professionals with specialised knowledge, who
has not been involved in preparing the design, before the
documents are issued for Construction.
Q2: How is Proof Checking different from Peer
Review ?
A: Peer Review is performed to judge the performance
of the work done by Design Consultant. Proof Checking
is performed to assess the correctness, completeness &
appropriateness of the content in a document produced
by the Design Consultant. Proof Checking will result in
a firm opinion about the quality of the output of work
performed by the Design Consultant while the Peer
Review will only reveal qualitatively the performance
of the Design Consultant and NOT quantitatively the
quality of the output.
Q3:Who should appoint the Proof Checking
Consultant? Owner, Contractor or Consultant?
A: Though all the practices are prevalent, it is desirable
that the PC be appointed by the Owner, so that the
Consultant is not under any duress in expressing his
technical opinion. If PC is appointed by the Contractor
/ Design Consultant, he will be commercially dependent
on his Client, which may put pressure on the PC in
giving his opinion. Regardless of who appoints the PC,
the independence of the PC to express his opinion freely
shall be ensured by the appointing agency.
Q4: Should the Design Consultant share all documents
with the Proof Consultant (including soft copies of
worksheets) to facilitate proof checking ?
A: The documents to be shared by the DC would depend
upon the level of proof checking. This should be clearly
specified in the terms of reference of the contract of both
the DC & PC. For level 1 checking, hard copies of all
design calculations and drawings are to be shared. For
level 2 checking, only drawings and design basis report
is to be shared. PC should not demand for the soft copies
of worksheets from the DC. He should carry out his own
independent design calculations, wherever required.
Q5: What is the way forward in case there is a deadlock
when Design Consultant and the Proof Consultant
disagree on any technical issue?
A: It depends upon who has appointed the PC and DC. In
case PC is appointed by the Owner and DC is appointed
by the Contractor, the views of PC will be treated as
Owners view. In case both the parties are appointed by
Owner, choosing which of two professional opinions to
accept is the prerogative of the Owner. If the two agencies
disagree, the Owner can choose the option that is more
acceptable to him/her. The Owner can take the opinion of
a third party, if he/she feels so, but finally, the decision
regarding how to proceed further, rests with the Owner.
Such difference of opinion needs to be highlighted by
either party while issuing the Design Certificate / Check
Certificate.
Q6:If Proof Checking Consultant fails to identify
deficiency in Design / Drawings prepared by the
Design Consultant, would the Proof Consultant be
held accountable for the oversight?
A: Yes. The Proof Consultant is liable for any deficiency
on his/her part.
Q7: Is the Proof Consultant responsible for failure
arising out of his recommendations?
A: Yes. Proof Consultant is responsible for the opinions
given by him. The degree of liability will depend upon
the terms of reference of his contract agreement.
Q8:Should there be any limit regarding the liability
of Proof Consultant, in the contract agreement with
clients?
A:Yes. The extent of liability must be clearly defined in
the contract agreement between PC and Client.
Q9:Is there any need for the proof consultant to give
comments in writing, formally? Will it not be better to
informally discuss the issues with Design Consultant
& resolve without any exchange of communication, to
save time ?
A:All comments of the PC & the response of the DC
20 w Recommended Guidelines on Proof Consultancy Services for Highway Bridges

must be documented. The issues may be discussed with
the DC and resolved, but documentation of the comments
and response cannot be dispensed with.
Q10:Should the Proof Consultant give his technical
opinion on issues which is outside his scope of work ?
A:Proof Consultant should give opinions only on those
matters, which is covered in his scope. Giving opinions
on issues which is outside the scope of PC can lead to
undesirable conflict between DC and the PC, which shall
be avoided.
 ABOUT IAStructE

The Indian Association of Structural Engineers, identified as IAStructE,

was conceptualized and constituted in the year 2002 by a group of senior
professional Structural Engineers from all regions of the country. It was
registered under the Societies Registration Act on 20th December 2002.
IAStructE has completed more than 11 years of eventful progress in
enhancing its professional status as well as credibility in the country.

The Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE) is a

professional body whose membership also comprises very prominent
structural engineers from India. IAStructE has a Memorandum of
Understanding with Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE), UK for
mutual cooperation and professional advancement. IAStructE is also a
constituent member of the Engineering Council of India (ECI). The
Association has the prime responsibility, on the one hand to enhance the
knowledge base and professionalism amongst the engineers, while on the
other, to look after their interests. IAStructE promotes Initial Professional
Development (IPD) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD)
courses for its members and like-minded professionals practicing in general
civil and structural engineering.

IAStructE has been organizing Seminars regularly on different topics of

interest to engineers, planners, contractors, suppliers and all stakeholders.

IAStructE has its headquarter in Delhi and State Centres functioning in

Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, Noida,
and Visakhapatnam.