DOT Project PDFs

[Mergingtraffic]

I have quite a few CTDOT Project pdfs saved on my computer.  I would like to share them on this site, however the site only allows files up to 128kb and most of my files are 2mb in size.  Anyway I could scale down my documents to share them?

[FLRoads]

Why would there need to be a disclosure if anyone wants to share a pdf on the forum of a road project? I would say all one would need to do is maybe also attach a link to the website where it came from. That would be as far as I would go as far as a disclosure goes. Unless of course that is what you are referring to.

[Duke87]

Linking to where they came from would be the best idea.

Of course, if the files aren't there anymore, that won't work. In which case, you can always upload them to a free file hosting site such as MediaFire.

[froggie]

Why would there need to be a disclosure if anyone wants to share a pdf on the forum of a road project?

If he's an engineer or planner working on a given project, those are PDFs that can't always be shared with the public.  If they were PDFs that were previously posted on a public webpage, then yes it's a moot point.

[Mergingtraffic]

I've copied and pasted some pdfs from other public websites.  I've posted some on the Northeast Board.  It's the best way to go.

[Alex]

In my job as map researcher, I often requested plans for projects to update the map I worked on. None of the engineers I spoke with specifically told me that these plans were "not public" and mostly were very helpful (the ones that were not just never returned my phone calls...).

I got plans for the flyover ramp for U.S. 98 at Thomas Drive at Panama City, the airport interchange for FL 60/TPA, and was approved to get plans for the Panama City International Airport before I left that project.

[NJRoadfan]

J N Winkler would likely be better at explaining this, but DOT planning documents should at most be a FOIA request away. They have to be a matter of public record because the bidding process requires that it be. If anyone here receives project planning files (diagrams, sign patterns, etc.) via a FOIA request, they can likely post it to their web space with no issues. Public documents can not be bound by copyright restrictions.

One thing to keep in mind though is that if you request such documents, that you may have to pay a fee to cover the agency's costs to retrieve and prepare the requested information. This is usually covered in the FOIA law.

Finally, some states will point you to a 3rd party bidding and procurement site (NJ uses http://www.bidx.com ). Basically the state outsourced the bidding and plan distribution to another company to save tax payer money (I hope). One usually has to pay to access the plans, these costs appear to cover the 3rd party provider's operating expenses (bandwidth, servers, etc.). A quick view of NJ's vendor of choice (Bid Express) says the following about documents in their subscriber agreement.

6. Security

The BidX Web Site facilitates the electronic exchange of procurement notices, procurement documents and bid proposals between parties (Opportunity Providers and Subscribers to this Service). The procurement notices and documents distributed to You are non-confidential and available to the general public.

(source: https://www.bidx.com/cgi-bin/order )

Bottom Line: Request the documents with a written letter to the authority in question following the proper format for a public records request.

[J N Winkler]

J N Winkler would likely be better at explaining this, but DOT planning documents should at most be a FOIA request away. They have to be a matter of public record because the bidding process requires that it be.

In general this is true.  It is all but unknown for a state DOT to try to sequester highway construction plans completely, and only a small minority try to sequester bridge plans and other structure plans.

However, there are a few caveats which are worth keeping in mind.

*  Many state open-records statutes stipulate that a record is not open if it is protected by legal privilege or if its nondisclosure is required by federal law.

*  All states have exemptions to their open-records laws, and in a few (fortunately not a majority of them), these include what is often called "critical infrastructure information," which is usually construed to include construction plans for engineered structures, including road bridges and sometimes even sign structures.  In many states the CII exemption is poorly defined in the law, which means you can find yourself arguing against DOT lawyers who want the exemption to be interpreted as broadly as possible.

*  Generally, when a record is exempt from disclosure, the government agency retains the option, at its sole discretion, of supplying you with the records you request whether they are exempt or not.  In other words, the main effect of an exemption from disclosure is to prevent you from using legal compulsion to get the agency to supply the record, not to prohibit the agency from supplying you or someone else with the record.

*  In the case of construction documentation, especially for highways and other public works projects, it is common for open-records statutes to have an exemption provision which covers "preliminary estimates."  This exemption is usually vaguely worded and I have always operated on the assumption that it applies not just to estimates, but also to plans and specifications since these can influence the cost of the project, and that it ceases to apply only when the project has been advertised for construction.

In an ideal world, an open-records statute would be a dead letter because all government agencies would operate in the light, with all information connected with their business processes (subject to certain exemptions narrowly based on public safety reasons) easily accessible over the Internet.  In the considerably less than perfect real world which we all inhabit, however, a serious road enthusiast is likely to run into vast quantities of useful official information from a state DOT which he or she cannot be sure of obtaining if he or she "goes through the front door" and files an open-records request.  This means that the road enthusiast has to think carefully about whether publicizing the information received in a public forum such as this Web board can result in the state DOT shutting down the source of the information, either by reprimanding a staff member for talking out of school or by changing the access details for a file transfer server.  The ugly truth is that even the most relaxed state DOTs have an institutional desire to maintain control of presentation.  Disclosure of preliminary information, or work product still in process, conflicts with that.

To quote a few examples:

*  In a state whose highway construction I follow closely, I have received preliminary construction plans for a new freeway which is to be built near a military base.  These plans include plan and profile sheets drawn to the same scale as the eventual final plans and showing the location and configuration of interchanges on the freeway.  The DOT for this state has an online project database which, however, has no entry for this proposed freeway.  Aside from the construction plans, the only other information I have about this project is a press release from the DOT secretary saying that it would be one of several receiving ARRA stimulus funds.  I have considered posting information about this freeway on this board, but have held back because I don't want a representative of the DOT in question finding my post and starting a plumbing job on the strength of it.

*  In another state whose highway construction I follow closely, I made an open-records request for old signing contracts on a certain length of Interstate near a major city.  In the reply I received from the DOT lawyers, I was told that any copy I received (after payment of access fees) would have to be redacted to protect information relating to the sign structures.  This state has a CII exemption which is, however, contingent on a balance-of-probabilities test--the burden is on the government agency (state DOT in this case) to show, within the balance of probabilities, that releasing the information would endanger the critical infrastructure.  In principle I could challenge the DOT's claim of a CII exemption by pointing out that essentially the same information is available from another location where the DOT posts complete construction plans, including structure plans.  But I could win an appeal on this point and still be worse off when the state DOT retaliated by shutting down the other information source.

If anyone here receives project planning files (diagrams, sign patterns, etc.) via a FOIA request, they can likely post it to their web space with no issues. Public documents can not be bound by copyright restrictions.

This is true.  What Froggie notes about material put on the DOT's public website and accessible through a link trail from the DOT homepage is also true.  It is material accessed from nonpublic sources (typically email contact with a DOT engineer or access to a DOT file transfer server) which has to be treated discreetly.

One thing to keep in mind though is that if you request such documents, that you may have to pay a fee to cover the agency's costs to retrieve and prepare the requested information. This is usually covered in the FOIA law.

Yes, most open-records statutes contain stipulations regarding the fees that can be charged.  The DOTs that are the most difficult to deal with are the ones which take advantage of provisions allowing charging for staff time.  There is no good way to make sure that the staff time is spent in the most efficient way possible, and I am familiar with several requests where the DOT has goldbricked in an attempt to block an open-records request.  In one of these cases, the DOT demanded hundreds of dollars' worth of reimbursement for staff time to locate, scan, and redact construction plans which had all been put online, on a publicly accessible website, when the corresponding projects were advertised for construction.

Finally, some states will point you to a 3rd party bidding and procurement site (NJ uses http://www.bidx.com). Basically the state outsourced the bidding and plan distribution to another company to save tax payer money (I hope). One usually has to pay to access the plans, these costs appear to cover the 3rd party provider's operating expenses (bandwidth, servers, etc.). A quick view of NJ's vendor of choice (Bid Express) says the following about documents in their subscriber agreement.

6. Security

The BidX Web Site facilitates the electronic exchange of procurement notices, procurement documents and bid proposals between parties (Opportunity Providers and Subscribers to this Service). The procurement notices and documents distributed to You are non-confidential and available to the general public.

(source: https://www.bidx.com/cgi-bin/order )

Bottom Line: Request the documents with a written letter to the authority in question following the proper format for a public records request.

Bid Express ranks right up there with design-build procurement on my personal enemies list.  The deal they offer to state DOTs, which fortunately few have accepted, is to scan the hardcopy construction plans at no expense to the DOT in exchange for the electronic versions being made available exclusively to Bid Express subscribers who pay $100 monthly for access.  Iowa, New Mexico, and New Jersey are all Bid Express plans-publishing states.

In the case of all three, with the possible exception of Iowa, it is still possible to get electronic as-builts from the state DOT directly.  It means making an open records request, though, and the plans come in arrears, which means projects have to be tracked through advertising, award, and construction--you can't just get the plans at advertising and be done with it.  In the case of New Jersey, the OPRA includes a structures exemption and NJDOT uses this to deny access to the complete plans.  What you get instead are the construction plans with structures sheets removed.  Meanwhile, the uncensored plans are available through Bid Express at the time of advertising.  For a few months in late 2004, before it started publishing electronic plans through Bid Express, NJDOT also had the uncensored plans available on its website.