Who's Fault is it?

[GPGrasshopper]

It's hard to say for sure. It sounds to me that everyone had some part in this. The city locator for putting paint 10 feet away without any means of verifying or validating his marks, the city engineering department for keeping horrible facility records, and the contractor for ignoring the information he gathered during the design phase. Split this turd up, there's plenty to go around.

[phoenix827]

I agree with locatedude, but I think the as-builts also have to come into play on this as well. How are the marks compared to the prints?

[FiosKing]

i do damage investigations all day... keyword in there is "unlocatable" that construction company just purchased that damage... if you guys pay for that your nuts

[Bob at UTA]

I believe multiple parties are at fault. I think that in the future when you have a "high priority or critical line" onsite, it would be in everyone’s best interest to perform an on onsite meeting prior to excavation utilizing a pre construction form for review and for documentation reasons.
Things to consider placing on this form
- Clearly state that there is a high priority line marked on site
- The line is non-conductive and undetectable by conventional electronic means and may not be marked with state specific tolerance levels and for this reason must be verified.
- The marked needs to be exposed and visually verified prior to any other excavation activities.
- The line should be visually exposed every 25' if excavation takes place within 10ft and parallel to the high priority line.
- A place for direct contact information for Locator and Excavator and/or inspector if possible
- Notification that a utility rep must be on site during construction within 10 ft of the line.
- Instructions for the excavator to follow if the high profile line cannot be found when exposing..
- The excavator is responsible for protecting marks onsite and calling for relocates when marks are destroyed or to update the locate request to ensure a valid ticket.
- Signature of Locate Rep and Excavator Rep
Keep a copy and give a copy to the excavator…..

California has a passage in their law that addresses this specific issue:
4216.2.a.2 When the excavation is proposed within 10 feet of a high priority subsurface installation, the operator of the high priority subsurface installation shall notify the excavator of the existence of the high priority subsurface installation prior to the legal excavation start date and time, as such date and time are authorized pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 4216.2. The excavator and operator or its representative shall conduct an onsite meeting at a mutually-agreed-on time to determine actions or activities required to verify the location of the high priority subsurface installations prior to start time.

This above phrase was added to the CA law in 2006 and applies to what lawmakers have identified as "High Profile Subsurface Utilities" which includes pressurized sewer pipes and the passage was part of a Senate Bill that was fostered following a 2004 damage to a large Jet Fuel pipe during excavation activities. The damaged pipe caused an explosion that killed several workers and is now also part of the CalOSHA requirements.
-----------------
* In this very high liability and hazardous industry in which there are detectable and undetectable underground facilities, clear communications can often prevent line damages and increase safety of workers. It is also important to remember that good documentation can help prevent unwanted or unjustified liabilities.
* Every damage can be an opportunity for improvement and the lesson learned can be different depending on the parties perspective. I imagine that the time it would take to meet the contractor prior to excavation would be considerably less that the downtime time it took to repair the line. Not to mention the associated repair cost and loss of product from the pipe. This rings true for all parties involved in this particular project.

[AULupstate]

Everyone say hi to Bob Nighswonger (see above post).

[Mke]

Well Bob,

Before the actuall excavation took place, we advised the design firm of the "high priority" lines that will be in the area. We took the initiative to Pot Hole utilities before construction. (The company that preformed the pot holing is the same company that damaged the line. I personally advised the construction crew, as well as, the Inspector of the line in the area, and that it was "unlocateable". As for having the Utility Rep on site.... they do not require it for this specific line, and during the events that unfolded, they were not prepared for what was uncovered.

Some of the quotes:

"Whats transite?"

"our map shows that its Ductile Iron...."

"we have never fixed a Transite Pipe before.... how is that done?"

my favorite and was said by multiple people....

"i'm not sure, let me call my boss"



*additional update*

Same crew just hit a 2'' coper water line 45min after I walked the track hoe operator through the dig. You'll love this.... he pulled the lines out of the embankment so it would be further away from my paint.

great.... just Great...

[Bob at UTA]

Mke,
It seems that you did take the initiative to locate/expose and verbally advise the contractor of the issues ""We advised the design firm of the "high priority" lines that will be in the area." "I personally advised the construction crew, as well as, the Inspector of the line in the area, and that it was "unlocateable".
MKE, if all of the details of your “above and beyond” communications was officially documented on an official communications form, there would probably be no question of liability…
It’s sad to say that on a damage, line locators are normally guilty until proven innocent with the help of good marks and/or good CYA documentation! CYA documentation performed prior to the damage, trumps any “he said, she said, they said, we said” statements taken after the damage occurs.

[NeverEnough]

Unlocatable is exactly that.....It should have been potholed by the contractor before excavation began.
There is nothing I hate more than a contractor cutting something and trying to drag it away from your marks.

[USIC1]

[QUOTE=Bob at UTA;20004]Mke,
It seems that you did take the initiative to locate/expose and verbally advise the contractor of the issues "
MKE, if all of the details of your “above and beyond” communications was officially documented on an official communications form, there would probably be no question of liability…
QUOTE]



AAAA hhh ?!?!?! the questionable flaw of the law and your so called "OFFICIAL communications form"(whos official form anyway??? THE STATES??? is it that official to the contractor???)- does it proclaim by law that contractors MUST sign said documentation prior to excavation or is this a voluntary official form??? Or that they were made aware of and had HP facilities onsite verified???

To often a contractor will avoid or skirt additional NON MANDATORY DOCUMENTATION, and a locater is at the mercy of persuasion to accomplish such evidence... In a sense why would a contractor sign anything that risks further liability if its not mandatory???
And furthermore whos to say a locater is not creating some unclear legal documentation that implicates them beyond the company or laws that they represent??? It needs to be a standardized form with predefined legal wording representing state law- BETWEEN THE STATE THE LOCATING FIRM AND THE EXCAVATOR... I dont see how a locator should be held any more accountable or responsible to do more than represent the verbal predefined LEGAL scope of a locate ticket regarding locate criteria...

SO IN THE FUTURE LETS INFLUENCE LAWS THAT CONTAIN NECESSARY OFFICIAL ENFORCABLE DOCUMENTATION ON BEHALF OF ALL PARTYS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION...

It does not belong as a grey area left the whims of locaters creating legal binding documentation out of thin air...


Hows them apples???

[Mke]

whoa...... you are correct sir.

Nice forsight on being held liable for any information written down on official or un-official forms.

When it comes down to it, 90% of major construction includes leagal phrasing in their project books, and spec books that put the liability back on the contractor. Then it is between the Contractor and the locators for the cost of damages. Locators are usually not privey to that information. But that is why when a damage occours the Utility charges who ever damages the line, and then from their it rolls down hill to the locator. Very rarely do you see a Utilty company buy a damage, unless its under $500. (drop)

As for having a state sanctioned form that deals with this issue, and that a locator has to get a contractor to sign off on? good luck. I have had to get excavators to sign off on stuff before, its easier said then done.

mke

[scap]

Communication is key, it's as simple as that....without communication you have nothing

[scap]

I have had to get excavators to sign off on stuff before, its easier said then done.

mke

this is where female locators would come into play.

everyone talks about how female locators can't hack it.

here is where they hack it. as long as they take care of themselves, it should be easy for a female locator to get some guy to sign off on a sheet. As long as they aren't some muffdiving nasty swankface lesbo action turnkeys, they should persuade whatever needs persuasion to get the job done.