Start by finding which tailoring option the issued Section 31 68 13 uses: under the performance option, confirm that the drawings or the Anchor Design paragraph give every anchor’s location, design load, lock-off load, inclination, minimum unbonded and bond lengths, assumed grout-to-ground bond strength, and corrosion protection class, and under the prescriptive option, that the drawings show the complete anchor design. Then check that the anchored structure and bearing details, the boring logs and top of bond zone, the drilling, alignment, and watertightness requirements, the grouting and stressing paragraphs, the test program, and the pay items kept in the section agree with each other and with the wall or foundation drawings.
Assemble the review package
Gather the anchor plan and the wall or structure elevations with anchor numbers, spacing, and inclinations, any anchor schedule with design loads, lock-off loads, tendon type, unbonded and bond lengths, and corrosion protection class, the anchored wall, footing, slab, wale, or thrust block sections with the bearing plate, trumpet, recess, and anchorage cover details, the structural general notes with design loads and concrete strength, the geotechnical report and foundation exploration drawings with boring and core logs, top of rock, groundwater, artesian conditions, drill water losses, soil plasticity, and recommended bond strengths, drawings of any existing structure to be drilled through or anchored, the utility plan and the survey of nearby structures, the excavation and staging sequence, and the issued Section 31 68 13 with Sections 01 20 00, 31 00 00, 03 30 00, 02 32 13, and 01 57 19, plus Section 31 41 16 where the anchors tie back a sheet pile wall. Follow one anchor from its head on the elevation through its free length and bond zone to the boring nearest it before assuming the others match.
WBDG publishes UFGS 31 68 13: Soil and Rock Anchors as a public guide-specification reference (accessed November 8, 2026). Use your project’s issued specification and amendments for the actual comparison; the guide specification does not automatically govern your project. The checklist below is an original suggested review workflow, not a reproduction of the UFGS requirements.
Eight checks to run against the issued set
Use one record per location or system. The CSV contains the same eight prompts plus fields for source revisions, observed evidence, the review owner, the decision, and closure references.
| Check | Sources to compare | Question to resolve |
|---|---|---|
| Tailoring option, design responsibility, and pay items | System Description note (performance or prescriptive option) + General Requirements and Scope of Work articles + Anchor Design note + Unit Prices notes (drilling in soil and rock and anchors by length for the prescriptive option only; Anchors, Complete for the performance option only) + Lump Sum Payment note + anchor plan and bid schedule | Which option does the issued section use, and do the pay items follow it, since the notes keep the drilling and per-length anchor items for the prescriptive option and the Anchors, Complete item for the performance option, where the prescriptive option is used, do the drawings show the location, design load, unbonded and bonded lengths, drilling and grouting method, hole size, corrosion protection, and inclination its note lists, and have the General Requirements and Scope of Work paragraphs, which assign the whole anchor design to the contractor in text with no bracketed alternative, been rewritten to match? |
| Anchor design criteria, schedule, and loads | Anchor Design note and criteria table (location, spacing, hole diameter, design load, assumed bond strength, minimum unbonded and bond lengths, maximum bond length by rock or soil type, corrosion protection class, inclination) + Design Load paragraph + Design Schedule submittal + Stressing article (design and lock-off loads given on the drawings) + anchor elevations and schedule | Are the table blanks filled in and the same as the anchor elevations and schedule, with each soil type in the maximum bond length rows matched to a stratum in the report, do the drawings give a design load and a lock-off load for every anchor, as the Stressing article says they do, is one tendon type, threaded bar or strand, kept, and has the designer considered the group effect of closely spaced anchors on load and spacing, an instruction the guide prints in the Design Load paragraph itself rather than in a note, and then deleted that sentence from the contractor-facing text? |
| Subsurface data, top of rock, and bond zone | Site Conditions note and article (logs on the drawings, lost drill water, cores available for inspection) + Anchor Design note (bond strength from testing of the soil or rock) + Drilling Holes General (top of bond zone elevations from sampling and borings) + Scope of Work bracket (contractor determines top of rock) + Core Logging and Soil Sampling + Records note (Section 02 32 13) + geotechnical report and foundation exploration drawings | Are the boring or core logs on the drawings where the Site Conditions article says they are, with unusual conditions such as lost drill water shown, as its note asks, does the assumed grout-to-ground bond strength trace to tests in the report, are the top of bond zone and top of rock shown on the anchor elevations, or is the contractor told to determine top of rock, and where cores must be logged to verify design assumptions, is Section 02 32 13 issued or its provisions added, as the Records note directs? |
| Corrosion protection class and anchorage protection | Anchor Design note and table (Class I encapsulated or Class II grout protected) + Corrosion Protection note (epoxy not relied on, encapsulation for Class I, temporary anchors) + Anchorage Protection note (compound-filled trumpets only for restressable anchors or permanent load cells) + Anchorage Covers note + Lock-off article (trumpet fill, protective cap, or recess grouted flush) + anchorage details | Do the drawings say which anchors are permanent and which temporary and give one corrosion protection class, as “Corrosion protection must be as indicated” requires, does the anchorage detail show the trumpet, its fill, and either a protective cap or a recess grouted flush, matching the lock-off option kept, are compound-filled trumpets kept only where anchors are restressable or carry permanent load cells, and since the Anchor Design note and the Corrosion Protection note cite different clauses of PTI DC35.1 for choosing the class, has the specifier confirmed which clause of the edition invoked governs? |
| Anchored structure, bearing plates, and existing structures | Anchored Structure definition + Design Load paragraph (bearing plate design, bearing stress blank, connection under AISC 325 or ACI 318) + opening PART 1 note (anchors installed after the structure is completed or in existing structures; casings, walers, or thrust blocks where anchors are stressed first) + Drilling Through Existing Structures note and article + stressing sentence for existing structures in Field Quality Control + wall, wale, footing, and existing structure drawings | Do the drawings detail the wall, wale, footing, or thrust block each anchor transfers force to, with the bearing area and the reinforcement or stiffeners behind the plate, does the bearing stress blank agree with the concrete or steel the drawings show, where anchors are installed or stressed before the anchored structure is complete, as in a wall built downward as excavation proceeds, have the added requirements the opening note says are then necessary been written, and where anchors pass through an existing structure, are its voids and embedded items shown and the sentence limiting movement during stressing kept where the note’s conditions apply? |
| Drilling, casing, alignment, and watertightness | Drilling Holes General note and article (relocated holes, redesign by the Government or the contractor, waste water) + Drilling in Soil note (duplex method near structures) + Casing + Drilling in Rock note + Alignment note, Tolerances, Alignment Check note, and Alignment Checking Equipment note + Watertightness Testing and Waterproofing Anchor Holes notes and articles + pay items + utility plan | Where the anchor plan shows anchors that could intersect, such as at wall corners, or that pass through structures with voids or embedded items, is the alignment check kept, as its note advises, are the tolerance blanks set from project requirements, as the alignment note directs, is one redesign option kept for relocated holes, with design criteria furnished if the contractor redesigns, are utilities and foundations in the drill path located, and where the logs show open fractures, artesian water, or interconnected holes, are watertightness testing, pregrouting, and redrilling and their pay items kept? |
| Grout, grouting method, stressing, and lock-off | Cement, Admixtures (accelerators not permitted), and Grout for Anchors notes + Polyester Resin Grout note (not in wet holes) + Tendon Fabrication note (fully bonded or unbonded) + Cement Grouted Rock Anchors note (single or two-stage, pressure grouting, cold rock) + Grouting of Soil Anchors note, Pressure Grouting, and Post-Grouting + Stressing note and General Requirements + Lock-off article + Equipment article (stressing frames, access, and temporary supports) | Is the grout type kept suited to the holes, with resin grout dropped where holes are wet, is the bond breaker or two-stage grouting consistent with the fully bonded or unbonded anchor the design assumes, is a specific grouting procedure written in where the design capacity depends on one, as the soil anchor note says, does the Stressing article’s sentence that runs two criteria together, “in accordance with the Contractor’s design” and “the specified strength”, now read as one requirement, and do the lock-off loads on the drawings reflect the structure being anchored and its expected movement, as the stressing note asks? |
| Demonstration anchors, tests, acceptance, and records | Field Quality Control article (demonstration test anchors, all others proof tested, qualified engineer, Contracting Officer acceptance) + Performance Test note (resin-grouted anchors) + Proof Test + Supplementary Extended Creep Test note + Creep Tests pay item + Driller Logs note (ENG Form 1836 and 1836A) + Anchor Records + Acceptance + Replacement of Rejected Anchors and its note + anchor elevations | Can the section of wall each demonstration test anchor represents be identified on the elevations, since the article fixes how many anchors are demonstration tested and holds other anchors in each section until theirs passes, are the anchors that get extended creep tests named, since the article applies them only where specified and the note suggests them for weak rock and plastic soils, does the Creep Tests pay item measure creep tests, since its Measurement paragraph names Performance Tests, are the drilling log forms added, as the note requires, and is the replacement location option chosen, directed by the Contracting Officer or set by the contractor’s redesign? |
Worked example: two load tables, a corrosion class nobody chose, and anchors that cross at a corner
Illustrative example: a new vehicle maintenance facility is cut into a hillside behind a permanent cast-in-place concrete retaining wall restrained by strand anchors bonded in weathered sandstone. The wall elevation gives a design load for each anchor row, while an anchor table on the structural general notes sheet gives different loads for the same rows and no lock-off loads at all. The issued Section 31 68 13 keeps both corrosion protection classes in brackets, keeps the Anchors, Complete pay item together with the drilling-in-rock and per-length anchor items, and has deleted the alignment check, although the anchors on the two legs of the wall’s inside corner cross in plan. The boring logs record lost drill water in a fractured zone near the planned bond zone, but watertightness testing and pregrouting have been deleted, and the anchorage detail shows a bearing plate on the wall face with neither a cover nor a grouted recess.
Ask the structural and geotechnical engineers to issue one anchor table with the design and lock-off loads, to state that the anchors are permanent, and to choose one corrosion protection class, then ask the specifier to keep only the pay items for the performance option. Ask the structural engineer to splay or stagger the corner anchors, show their inclinations, and keep the alignment check there, and to detail the anchor head with its trumpet fill and either a protective cap or a recess grouted flush. Ask the geotechnical engineer whether the fractured zone calls for watertightness testing, pregrouting, and redrilling of the rock holes, and restore those paragraphs and their pay items if it does.
See the published structural revision finding. The illustrative scenario above is separate from that published finding.
Avoid a false conflict
Section 31 68 13 covers soil and rock anchors and their drilling, grouting, stressing, and testing. The anchored wall, footing, or slab follows Section 03 30 00 and the concrete guide, excavation, backfill, and contractor-designed shoring follow Section 31 00 00, steel sheet pile walls that the anchors tie back follow Section 31 41 16, whose Anchors article points to this section, subsurface drilling and core logging follow Section 02 32 13, and waste water containment follows Section 01 57 19, so check those before calling a requirement missing. Post-installed anchors in hardened concrete or masonry are UFGS 05 05 20 and the post-installed anchor guide, helical piles are UFGS 31 63 26.60, and drilling and grouting of rock foundations is UFGS 31 33 10, all Active on WBDG. The opening note says the guide is written for anchors installed after the structure is completed or in existing structures, and that installing or stressing anchors before the structure is complete needs added requirements. Its Cement Grouted Rock Anchors note asks editors to add ACI 306R provisions for cold rock, though ACI 306R is not in the References article, and its Extended Creep Test article runs the test under PTI DC35.1 while taking the load hold periods from a table it attributes to PTI TAB.1, the Post-Tensioning Manual; confirm both against the editions your project invokes. Anchor capacity, bond length, test and lock-off loads, and the interpretation of performance, proof, and creep tests are decisions for the anchor designer, the geotechnical and structural engineers, and the qualified engineer the section asks the contractor to provide, not findings of a document review. The current guide section cites ACI 301, ACI 318-19, AISC 325, API Spec 5CT, ASTM A36, A53, A108, A416, A500, A536, A572, A588, A615, A709, A722, A779, A882, C33, C109, C144, C150, C1107, D1248, D1784, D1785, D3350, and D4101, PTI DC35.1, and PTI TAB.1; confirm the editions your project invokes.
When requirements disagree, follow the project’s document-control and clarification process. Do not assume that drawings always override specifications, or the reverse. Identify the exact sources and request an authorized decision.
Close the issue across the affected documents
Record the location or tag, drawing and specification references, issue dates, observed difference, and the decision needed. Assign an owner and keep the item open until the response identifies the governing requirement. Check the revised drawings and specification references together; a response email alone may leave the issued package inconsistent.
For the overall process, use the guide to drawing and specification conflicts. Mark an inapplicable checklist row with a reason, and distinguish a verified correction from a question that still needs design information.
Where Groundbook fits
Groundbook’s drawing and specification review helps investigate potential disagreements in the documents you supply. Include the relevant specification sections and drawing references, then verify the cited evidence with the responsible reviewers before acting on a finding.