Action: Notice, request for comments.
Web posting date: 02/19/2009
Federal Register Notice of Finding Publication Date:
Effective Date of Federal Register:
Close of public comment period:
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is seeking comments on whether a waiver of the Buy America requirements of 23 CFR 635.410 should be granted to permit the use of non-domestic Stainless-clad reinforcement bars for experimental project in the state of Delaware.
FHWA will only consider a Buy America waiver when the conditions of 23 CFR 635.410( c) have been met: (1) when the application of the provision would be inconsistent with the public interest; or (2) when steel and iron products are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities, which are of a satisfactory quality.
The FHWA will consider all comments received in the initial 15-day comment period during our evaluation of the waiver request. Comments received after this period, but before notice of our finding is published in the Federal Register, will be considered to the extent practical. Follow-up coordination on the comments received may result in a delay in the publication of our waiver finding in the Federal Register. Comments received during the 15-day comment period after notice of our finding is published in the Federal Register will be reviewed, but the finding will continue to remain valid. Comments received during the comment period after the effective date of the finding will be reviewed, and may influence the FHWA's decision to terminate or modify a finding.
|Lloyd Welker 02/19/2009|
Short answer is NO. My reasoning for this is the following: 1. There is nothing really experimental about the clad stainless steel. The expected performance is already documented from other experiments through the past years. |
|Raymond Schnell 02/19/2009|
I believe that a non-domestic stainless clad product should not be permitted for use in this research project in Delaware, when there are currently solid stainless steel domestic products readily available, which supports the Buy America requirements. Solid stainless steel reinforcing bar products, such as 2205 and 316LN, are readily available, and are melted and manufactured in the U.S. In addition, my company, Talley Metals, located in South Carolina, manufactures a grade of solid stainless steel rebar called EnduraMet 32 (XM-28 or UNS24100). This grade, as compared to the 316LN, has significantly lower Nickel and Molybdenum contents. The addition of Mn, which replaces the Nickel contained in similar grades, such as the 316 LN, provides excellent corrosion resistance. In recent testing, this grade has shown comparable corrosion resistance, strength and durability, to the 316LN and as such, it is very cost competitive, and in fact, it is less expensive, than the stainless clad product. The product is weldable, with no worry of cracked or spalled cladding, and no worry of flaking during fabrication. It does not require end caps, such as with the stainless clad product, and it is readily available, in significant quantities. Accelerated corrosion testing has clearly demonstrated that this product, EnduraMet 32, has a life expectancy of 100+ years. |
|Jiten K. Soneji 02/19/2009|
Mr. Welker, Thanks for your comments. We have not used this type of bars in Delaware, and would like to get the results here. Jiten K. Soneji, P.E. Bridge Design Engineer |
|Jiten K. Soneji 02/20/2009|
Mr. Schnell, The University of Delaware has done some research in the past, and we would like review it's field application results. Thanks for your comments! Jiten K. Soneji, P.E. Bridge Design Engineer |
|Wes Miller 02/25/2009|
Additional research is not required as the product capabilities are well documented. |
|Gena Peters 03/02/2009|
According to the requirements of 23 CFR 635.410(c), there is no reason to use non-domestic stainless clad rebar in this bridge. Solid stainless steel rebar is produced in sufficient quantities and of a consistently superior quality right here in the United States. Using non-domestic stainless clad rebar would be inconsistent with the public interest in that, especially now, taxpayers expect their money to fund projects with as much American made material as possible and to get the best quality for the money allotted. |
It is common knowledge that stainless steel clad rebar is, at its core, carbon steel. It is also known that once the cladding is penetrated or if it is left uncoated, it is no better than carbon steel. Now that our leaders are trying to do the right thing and build for the future, and not just their term, choosing something that is really no better than carbon steel is inconsistent with the public interest. When the price of solid stainless steel rebar is competitive with the non-domestic clad bar, it is only logical to choose the solid bars made in the US over the clad bars made outside the US.
|Ajay Kumar 06/03/2009|
Based on the information so far available, I would consider the stainless steel clad as better rebar when compare to other stainless steels types. It is specially important for longer spans and for wider bridges. There are studies showing rebar life in corrosive environment but I could not find any research regarding effect of thermal expansion coefficient of stainless steel rebars on the overall performance of concrete deck. This is very imporatant as deck see a lot of temprature variation over its lifetime and precentage of steel is higher for deck than any other concrete member. There is a opinion that the 30% or so higher thermal expansion coefficient of solid stainless steel provides a form of prestressing force attributed to higher intial expansion due to heat of hydration. Which may be the case but it is not a proved fact. In absence of any research in this regard, stainless steel clad is preferred material and I would not susbtitute it with solid stainless steel. |