MnDOT-ACEC/MN Annual Consultant Conference

March 5, 2012

• Leveraging SUE Data for Utilities on Projects

• Tom Swafford- Utility Mapping Services, Inc.

What will be covered: Utility Challenges What is Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE)?

Leveraging SUE data for:

DesignersUtilitiesProject OwnersContractorsExcavators

My Experiences

State Aid Precons

Preparing for Region Utility Engineer Interview –SUE

My First Phone call to Telecom as Region Utility Engineer

Co Project “contractor is responsible for coordinating all utility relocations”

State Utility Engineer- “Reasonable Notice Issues”

Utilities Best Practices

3 C’s of Project Utilities Efforts

Communication (Early and Often)

…and Coordination

…result in…Cooperation

Lessons learned from Design Build “…contractors must include utility companies in the project development process at the very beginning and make them active members of the team.”

Observations.…

Perception…..Utility Company Incentives must be monetary…..

Reality…..Showing a commitment to minimize utility relocations and efficient use of utility crews are highly recognized incentives.

What is SUE?

• Engineering Process to manage risk utilities bring to the project

– ASCE 38-02 “Standard Guideline for the Collection and Depiction of Existing Subsurface Utility Data”

• Utility Information Quality Levels A,B,C,D

– Utility Conflict Analysis– Utility Coordination

Nightmare-Unexpected encounter

(SUE) Spaghetti Utility Engineering

Quality Level “D”

The least reliable utility data- Great for Project Planning Purposes

• Plotted on plans from records.

• Sometimes a field visit - to look for utility indications on the site - is made.

• Sometimes “verbal recollections” are plotted.

Quality Level “C”- Traditional utility depiction

• Surface Appurtenances are surveyed and accurately plotted on a current site plan

• Utility data from records (QL D) are correlated to the appurtenances

Quality Level “B”

A significant upgrade in quality

• Surface Geophysical Methods used to search for and trace existing utilities.

• Designated utilities are then surveyed and plotted on site plan.

SUE Provider Typical Field EquipmentMany different depiction and location tools are needed to attain Quality Level “B” on a project.

Quality Level “A”A guarantee in 3-D

• Utilities exposed via non-destructive air-vacuum means

• Exposed utilities are then surveyed and plotted on site plan

• Elevations, Size, Condition, Materials, Precise Horizontal Positions are measured and documented

One-Call vs Quality A SUE

One Call Marks do not suffice for design decisions

2-14-2012Whew! I found it. The Telecom duct run is actually where Bill thought it was, on the west side of the south bound bridge, so it is on the bridge that will remain in place. It is definitely there,

you can actually see into a small handhold area on the bridge just

above the duct run (I got some photos of that). I also got it located

out all the way to the north end of the corridor. It is not out by the

street where one-call had it marked on the north side of the bridge, it

is well over 50 feet west of the street, way back in the trees. There is

a phone manhole way back in that area that is a pain to find, but is

the best access to the cables. Anyway, it's done.

Project Development Process

Preliminary Design Phase Design PhaseLetting Phase

PRELIMINARY DESIGN

Preliminary Design Conference

Geometric Schematic Approval

ENVIRONMENTAL

Environmental Clearance

LETTING

PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING

Construction Funding

Identification

RIGHT OF WAY AND UTILITIES

Utility & Right ofWay Certifications

Right of Way Release

PS&E DEVELOPMENT

Design Conference

PS&E Assembly

30% 60% 90%

Start Right of Way Map

Time

Planning PhaseConstruction Phase

Post-Construction Phase

CONSTRUCTION

POST- CONSTRUCTION

Project Award

Construction Start

Construction End

CCC often missing from PD Process

Utility Coordination Process

Preliminary Design Construction

after QLB

Design

additional data

processing

Proj

ect

Com

pleti

on

Post-Construction Utility Permitting

Utility as-builts

Utility Data Input

Utility Data Processing

30% 60% 90%

QLBdata

QLAdata

Project Development Process

after QLA

QLDdata

QLCdata

afterQLD

afterQLC

Planning

Letti

ng

Utility Conflict Resolution

Leveraging SUE for Design

• Perception…

A utility conflict is identified when there is a “direct hit”

Rural City Paver experience with waterline on Dike Road

• Reality…

Very often “indirect” utility conflicts are the cause of costly and time consuming construction field problems…Subgrade Compaction, temp sheeting, vibrations, unstable cast iron utility, utility staging, etc.

Project Plan View

30” Water18” Drainage

Conflict?

How deep is the water pipe?

30” Water

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

?

How deep is the water pipe?

30” Water

Utility Conflict MatrixUtility Owner

ID Sheet No.

Utility Type

Size/ Material

Utility ConflictDescription

Start Sta.

End Sta.

Start Offset

End Offset

Inv. Need

Test Hole

Recommended Action

Rsp. Party

Est. Res. Date

Res. Status Cost Analysis

AWS C16 1 WM 30” ductile iron pipe

Proposed 18” drainage pipe would cross WM.

36+50 47’ LT QLA 17 Review possibility of adjusting drainage pipe up to avoid conflict.

U n/a Utility conflict identified.

CPS C32 1 OE 45’ pole Existing pole in proposed roadway

34+55 40’ RT QLC Pole to be relocated.

U n/a Utility conflict identified.

AWS C43 1 W 12” Proposed sidewalk in conflict with 12” water main.

37+00 53’ LT QLA 21 Highway/sidewalk re-design to avoid utility impact.

D n/a Utility conflict identified.

CPS C54 1 OE 45’ pole Existing pole in proposed curb line

38+30 57’ RT QLC Pole to be relocated U n/a Utility conflict identified.

CPS C55 1 OE 45’ pole Existing pole in area of grade cut

38+50 63’ RT QLC Pole may need to be supported or replaced with taller pole

U n/a Utility conflict identified.

CPS C61 1 OE 45’ pole Existing pole in proposed curb line

40+00 52’ RT QLC Pole to be relocated U n/a Utility conflict identified.

ATT C28 1 OTV 45’ pole Existing pole in conflict with proposed drainage

40+15 65’ LT QLC Pole to be relocated U n/a Utility conflict identified.

Cost Estimate Analysis

Alternative Number

Alternative Description

Alternative Advantage Alternative Disadvantage

Engineering Cost

(Utility)

Direct Cost

(Utility)

Engineering Cost

(DOT)

Direct Cost

(DOT)

Total Cost Feasibility Decision

0 Relocation before construction.

No design change required, no additional cost to DOT.

Cost to utility for relocation.

$10,375 $63,875 $0 $0 $74,250 Yes Selected

1 Protect in-place. Utility can remain in place.

Access to utility for maintenance problematic.

$7,875 $32,375 $0 $0 $40,250 No Rejected

2 Change highway design.

Utility can remain in place.

High cost and project delay.

$0 $0 $95,375 $0 $95,375 Yes Rejected

3 Exception to policy. No cost to utility or DOT.

High risk of damage to utility and maintenance problems.

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 No Rejected

Conflict ID: 1

Utility Owner: AT&T

Utility Type: Telephone

Size and/or Material: Fiber Optic

Project Phase: 60% Design

Leveraging SUE for Utilities

• Observations

Utilities’ initial reaction is wariness

When they hear that they will be involved in design decisions they begin to warm

After multiple meetings to coordinate best design scenario they are part of solution

Leveraging SUE for Contractors

• Pre-proposal utility meeting on TH 610

– Shortlisted DB teams were ecstatic on having quality information to manage their utility risks on the project.

Leveraging SUE for Excavators

• SR 77 UDOT Bridge piling experience

• CRC Geotech experience in damaging sewer line during environmental investigation

Final Thoughts

• SUE is a proven engineering practice and should be sized to project risks

• Purdue University Study shows Average savings of $4.62 saved on every $1 spent on upgrading traditional Quality Level “D and/or “C” data to quality Level “B” and “A” data

• Thank you- Tom Swafford