No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Locating underground utilities in the United States: A comparative analysis of services provided by private locators
Abstract
The ability to locate underground utilities is imperative for the protection of these facilities and for the coordination of these facilities with transportation projects. The proliferation of underground facilities in the United States has led to an increase in dig-in strikes resulting in loss of services, project delivery delays, injuries, and even deaths. In fact, the Federal Highway Administration found utility-related issues to be one of the top causes of delays for transportation projects. These delays are often attributed to unknown or inaccurate utility location information. This scenario has led to a vast industry of utility location service providers. Additionally, national and state damage prevention laws led to the creation of one-call systems for the purpose of providing a communication conduit between designers or constructors and utility owners and operators. The importance of accurate utility locates and the risk and liability of providing utility location services also led to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) standardizing the practice of Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) into a professional service. Even with this standard, there remains misinformation and misunderstandings regarding SUE and non-SUE services provided by private utility location firms. The differences between the services provided by SUE investigations and non-SUE private locating services that do not meet SUE standards has largely been anecdotal. This study serves as an advancement in understanding the distinction of SUE services versus non-SUE services and provides evidence of industry misunderstanding of differences in these service types.
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) defines utility engineering as a branch of civil engineering that focuses on the plan, position, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of utilities. Additionally, in 2002, ASCE published the first national standard for subsurface utility engineering (SUE) (i.e., ASCE 38). The second version of the ASCE 38 was published in 2022. One of the objectives of ASCE 38 is reducing the number of damages to underground utilities. The number of damages to subsurface infrastructure is a concerning issue in modern cities where essential daily services such as potable water, natural gas, and electricity are delivered through a dense network of underground utilities. This study explores the current understanding and utilization of ASCE 38 in the United States. Accordingly, an online stratified random sample survey was designed to collect relevant information from practitioners in the state of North Carolina. Among other findings, the lack of awareness of the SUE standard and its guidelines is of significant concern. Accordingly, an effort is needed to raise awareness and investment in SUE. Thus, the study results are anticipated to contribute to better utilization of ASCE 38, which helps improve damage prevention efforts in the United States.
The management of subsurface utilities contributes significantly to the resilience of modern cities. Damage to subsurface utilities greatly impacts daily life and has severe consequences, including property damage, scheduling delays, and fatal and nonfatal injuries. One call centers are the cornerstone for preventing subsurface utility damage in the United States. Construction contractors and subcontractors rely on one call centers to notify utility owners about their excavation plans. The shared responsibility approach, which calls for teamwork between excavators and utility owners, is a crucial element of the one call system. This study aims to benchmark one call centers' current practices to improve the overall communication among stakeholders and enhance damage prevention efforts. The provided benchmarking suggests the dire need for better strategies to collect and analyze the data from damage events. In addition, the practical outcomes of the North Carolina Locate Resolution Partnership Committee (NC Resolution Committee) were assessed. The assessment suggests that using data from one call centers could lead to a resilient damage prevention process. Thus, this study delivers a better understanding of the current practices of one call centers and a new approach to improving damage prevention efforts beyond the traditional role of one call centers.
There are increasing incidences of damages to underground utilities and services during maintenance and construction works. These have posed significant challenges to utility owners regarding the magnitude and costs associated with remediation works. Therefore, this study investigates the management activities for underground utility maintenance works in New Zealand to establish the significance of as-built drawings as a mitigator of these challenges. Data for the analysis was obtained through a questionnaire survey of asset owners, consultants, and contractors based in three major city centres in New Zealand. The responses are analysed descriptively and inferentially for ease of understanding of the study findings. The findings established the challenges around the as-built records, which were significant to utility damages during construction operations in New Zealand. The study participants highlighted other factors such as poor project management, site records, communication, excavation operator competencies, and inadequate site inventory. Generally, more investment in asset documentation is recommended for asset owners. Innovative approaches to information capture, monitoring and updating of as-built drawings are also suggested to improve on current routine processes. Other solutions relate to skills acquisition and development in the management of underground utility maintenance projects.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
Vital services like clean water, sewer, and electricity utilize underground infrastructure. Unfortunately, many damages to underground utilities are happening during the course of construction activities. Therefore, there is a need for a greater understanding of damage causes to better manage risks to underground utilities during construction work. Understanding the root causes will help stakeholders and policymakers make the best possible decisions to reduce future damages. In this study, utility locators’ perspectives regarding the damage causes and overall prevention process were collected, analyzed, and compared to excavators’ perspectives and responses that were previously reported. Surprisingly, the results suggest that stakeholders’ behaviors (i.e., human factor), rather than technology limitations or current policies, significantly contribute to a breakdown of the damage prevention process. Specifically, communication between stakeholders, excavators’ behaviors, and locators’ working conditions have been identified as crucial factors in the damage prevention process. There are few, if any, empirical studies that have recognized the human factor as a contributing element to utility damages. Thus, the findings will help improve future policy development. In addition, the clear and detailed description of damage causes and prevention processes will help stakeholders understand the contribution of their behaviors to the damage prevention process, which will result in a more reliable and workable process.
Damages to underground utilities are unfortunately a common occurrence on many construction projects. Damaging an underground utility during construction often leads to work delay, road closures, social costs, and safety accidents. Through a combination of damage data analysis and a construction practitioners' survey, this paper examines the current deficiencies in damage prevention efforts as well as the possible root causes. Understanding the current root causes that contribute the most to underground utility damages presents opportunities to reduce future damages. The analyses presented in this paper are the result of a survey completed by 477 excavators who have experienced the current damage prevention efforts. In addition, 11,160 damages in the state of North Carolina have been collected and analyzed. The key contributions of the study include, among others, recommendations to improve education material, tailoring construction firms' plans to address locating delay and inaccuracy, and improving utility owners' locating efforts. Accordingly, the findings can help the industry improve its efforts to reduce the damages to underground utilities and enhance the performance of construction projects.
Reducing damages to underground utilities is one of the primary goals of construction stakeholders. The societal and economic impacts of such damages are substantial. To minimize potential damages to underground utilities, one-call notification programs have been created to coordinate efforts that aim to locate utilities before excavating. One-call centers are distributed throughout the United States and have been collecting damages data for years. However, few, if any, studies have evaluated the overall process of one-call centers and whether their services are adequately designed and efficiently delivered to utility owners and excavators. Thus, the present study aims to fill this gap in practice by investigating underground utility damages and evaluating the overall process. To achieve the aim of the study, two methods of data collection were adopted. Damage data from the state of North Carolina in 2017 was obtained to examine trends and frequencies of damages. In addition, a survey was developed and utilized to evaluate the overall process of one-call centers and identify deficiencies. Among other findings, the results suggest that damages to Telecommunication and Television (Tele/TV) lines are more frequent than other types of damages and that, overall, Tele/TV contractors are the primary contributors to most damages. The study also reveals that locate time is the most deficient component in the locating process. Findings from the present study are expected to help construction stakeholders and state agencies improve the locating process and management of underground utilities.
The fact that people play key roles in nearly all aspects of construction suggests that effective construction research requires proper application of social science research methods. This is particularly true for researchers studying topics that involve human actions or behavior in construction processes, such as leadership, innovation, and planning. In social science research, no single method of data collection (survey, experiment, participant observation, or unobtrusive research) is ideal. Each method has inherent strengths and weaknesses. Careful attention to the methodological ABCs of the design process, as discussed here, can enhance the validity and reliability of a given study. Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches in research design and data collection, however, should be considered whenever possible. Such mixed-methods research is more expensive than a single method approach, in terms of time, money, and energy, but improves the validity and reliability of the resulting data and strengthens causal inferences by providing the opportunity to observe data convergence or divergence in hypothesis testing.
Subsurface infrastructure supports modern cities’ sustainable functionality in terms of services such as gas, electricity, clean water, and sewer. However, damages to subsurface infrastructure are a significant challenge during construction. As a result, damage prevention techniques have received special attention in recent years. The current infrastructure damage prevention techniques in the United States can be categorized as follows: (1) one call system and (2) subsurface utility engineering (SUE). This study illustrates the main differences between them and demonstrates which approach should be utilized based on the project field conditions and the project needs. Finally, the study discusses the constraints that may prevent smaller construction firms from using SUE. As a result, the study serves as a quick reference for construction practitioners to better understand their options for reducing damages to underground utilities during construction.
Modular construction has been documented to be superior over traditional construction methods in terms of schedule, quality, predictability, and other project objectives. However, the lack of understanding and proper management of unique modular risks have been documented to result in suboptimal performance in modular construction projects. Although many previous research efforts have focused on the barriers and drivers related to the adoption of modular construction in the industry, no previous research work has addressed the key risks impacting cost and schedule of modular construction projects. This paper fills this knowledge gap. The authors utilized a multistep research methodology. First, a survey was distributed to and answered by 48 construction professionals to examine the effects of 50 modular risk factors that were identified based on a systematic literature review in a previous study. Second, a Cronbach's alpha test was conducted to check survey validity and reliability. Finally, Kendall's concordance analysis, one-way ANOVA, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were conducted to examine the agreement of responses within each as well as among the various stakeholders of modular construction projects. Results showed that the most critical factors affecting both cost and schedule of modular projects are (1) shortage of skilled and experienced laborers, (2) late design changes, (3) poor site attributes and logistics, (4) unsuitability of design for modularization, (5) contractual risks and disputes, (6) lack of adequate collaboration and coordination, (7) challenges related to tolerances and interfaces, and (8) poor construction activity sequencing. This study adds to the body of knowledge by helping practitioners to better understand the key risk factors that should be considered to enhance the performance of their modular construction projects. The outcomes provide insight into the alignment of stakeholders on the different risk factors affecting cost and schedule in modular construction projects. This should help practitioners to establish mitigation plans during the early stages of a project.
Preventing accidental damage to buried utilities is a key area that the civil engineering and construction industry is attempting to make progress on. In addition to the health and safety consequences of operatives striking buried cables or pipes, there are numerous other impacts that can occur as a result of the damage. Many organisations collect data on utility strikes and incidents, but these are not shared across the industry. The research reported in this paper is based on unprecedented access to statistics from nine organisations, which provided a total of 3348 incidents to determine any patterns. The key results were that damage to telecommunications or electric cables was the most common; the frequency of incidents peaked between 09:00 and 12:00 on working days; hand tools were the most common excavation tool involved in utility strikes, closely followed by mechanical excavators; and rules not followed contributed to half of the incidents for one organisation. Furthermore, a definitive list of the...
Underground asset locating practices use new and existing technologies to accurately identify, characterize, and map buried utilities through the integration of professional utility records, visual site inspection, geophysical techniques, survey, and utility exposure. The efficient use of locating practices allows effective condition assessment and renewal engineering applications, which, in turn, improves asset management practices for water utilities. Utility engineers, managers, and practitioners need to be familiar with all locating technologies (working principles, capabilities, and limitations) to have an effective selection of the appropriate technologies for every scenario. There are capabilities and limitations of all existing underground utility locating technologies that are used by water utilities. This paper provides the factors affecting the reliability of underground pipe locating surveys and presents an overview of the capabilities and limitations of the locating technologies to guide water pipeline infrastructure practitioners through literature. Application of underground utility locating technologies by water and wastewater utilities was investigated through case studies and phone interviews. Recommendations on ways to improve locating technology applications for water and wastewater utilities were made based on the literature and practice review.
Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) is increasing in use and becoming a standard process during the planning and pre-engineering stages of a project. Studies performed show a savings benefit on projects that employ either designating or locating activities vs. the traditional one-call approach. Most of the technologies associated with these activities are used throughout the world routinely; however, the choice on which technology is appropriate for a single project is difficult. Currently, the decision is made almost entirely on a person's prior experiences and not so much as a standard process based on facts and data. Research has been done to quantify which ASCE Quality Level is most closely associated with a project based on the level of risk as determined by the amount of known and unknown information (such as utility type, depth, and material). But, after a quality level is determined there is a lack of direction on which technology or method is best suitable for locating utilities for a given project. The research presented in this paper is aimed at producing a decision support tool that will aid persons such as state department of transportation officials, consultants, and whoever else is responsible for utilities on a project. The tool developed consists of two evaluations designed to collect information about how a locating technology operates, its' limitations, data produced, and associated costs. The Performance Evaluation and the Economic Evaluation are filled out for various pieces of equipment and then, in conjunction with the project information sheet, compared to determine the most suitable method for finding buried assets on the project site. The performance evaluation takes into account factors such as soil type, environmental conditions, proximity and type of nearby structures, amount of training required to perform the testing, and material properties of the utility. Field demonstrations are on-going with consultants, municipalities, and State DOTs to further evaluate the tool's effectiveness and refine how the information is presented to the user. The final goal of the research is to take the data gathered and combine it into an interactive tool that can be used to determine a suitable technology to use to locate buried assets while minimizing cost and keeping the quality of data at the desired level. The process can also be used as a training tool for field and office personnel to familiarize themselves with the available technology and its' limitations.
Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) reduces unnecessary utility relocations, unexpected damages of existing utilities, miss-locations of utilities, change orders and claims, personnel injuries, negative factors for productivity, social and environmental damages, and other problems related to utilities through accurate underground information. The benefits are combined with subsequent savings in time and cost for whole projects. Considerable previous research has shown that using SUE can save money on projects involving underground utilities. This paper describes a benefit-cost analysis (BCA) that quantifies the cost savings of SUE with projects developed in Pennsylvania. This study uses both SUE projects and non-SUE projects to quantify the cost savings of SUE on highway projects. This study focuses on a detailed benefit-cost analysis performed on twenty-two SUE projects and eight non-SUE projects.
Subsurface utility engineering SUE is a fast growing industry segment in the civil engineering arena. Subsurface utility engineering is gaining credibility as a significant tool to reduce the risk from informational uncertainty associated with underground facilities in a construction project. Subsurface utility engineering can minimize the risk primarily through mapping existing underground utility facilities, utilizing surface geophysical technologies, surveying and data management systems. This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of SUE to facilitate a better understanding of this emerging industry by the many in the construction domain that are relatively unfamiliar with it. Topics investigated include quality levels in SUE, incorporation of SUE strategy at different stages in the construction project, and cost–benefit analysis of SUE based on 71 actual construction projects where SUE was employed. In addition, the results obtained from questionnaire surveys of State Departments of Transportation DOTs and the SUE industry are analyzed, which reveal the trend of state DOTs in the use of SUE and various aspects of SUE business in private sectors.
The urban underground has become a spider’s web of utility lines, including phones, electricity, gas, cable TV, fiber optics, traffic signals, street lighting circuits, drainage and sanitary sewers and water mains. Utility damages during construction are very significant and on the rise, resulting in construction delays, design changes, claims, property damages, service breakdowns, disruption of neighboring businesses and even injuries and lost lives. The American Institute of Constructors (AIC) reported that damage to utility lines is the third most significant crisis for contractors. The state-of-the-art and the state-of-the-practice imaging technologies that have potential for being applied in locating underground utilities were identified through literature review and case studies and the conditions under which use of these technologies are most appropriate were analyzed. Based on the characterizations of imaging technologies, a decision tool named IMAGTECH was developed in order to provide site engineers/technicians with a user-friendly tool in selecting appropriate imaging technologies. Quantitative data based on questionnaire surveys to State Department of Transportations (DOTs) and Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE) providers was used to present comprehensive insight into the various aspects of the rapidly growing market in SUE. A multimedia educational tool was also developed to facilitate a better understanding of underground utility locating systems by the many in the construction domain, particularly entry-level engineers who are relatively unfamiliar with these technologies.
Subsurface Utility Engineering for Municipalities – Prequalification Criteria and Scope of Work Guide
- Anspach
Anspach, J.H., Scott, P., 2019. Subsurface Utility Engineering for Municipalities -Prequalification Criteria and Scope of Work Guide. Am. Soc..Civil Eng. Press.
https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784415368.
National Utility Review: Utility Coordination Process
FHWA, Federal Highway Administration, (2018a), "National Utility Review: Utility
Coordination Process" FHWA-HIF-18-039, Federal Highway Administration,
Washington, D.C. < https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/utilities/hif18039.pdf> (Accessed
May 30, 2022).
Subsurface Utility Engineering
- Washington D C Fhwa
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), "Subsurface Utility Engineering," FHWA,
Washington D.C., (2018b) [Online]. Available: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
programadmin/history.cfm [accessed May 15, 2022].
Implications of State Departments of Transportation (DOTs): Participation in the One Call Process as an Underground Facility Operator. National Cooperative Highway Research Program
- R E Sturgill
- T R B Taylor
Sturgill, R.E., Taylor, T.R.B., and Li, Y. (2018). "Implications of State Departments of
Transportation (DOTs): Participation in the One Call Process as an Underground
Facility Operator. National Cooperative Highway Research Program."
Transportation Research Board of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering,
and Medicine. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/docs/Task%20389%
20Final%20Report%20Final%20Draft.docx (Accessed May 30, 2022).
NCHRP 20-05 Implementation of Subsurface Utility Engineering for Highway Design and Construction. National Cooperative Highway Research Program
- R E Sturgill
- K Madson
- J H Anspach
- M Decker
Sturgill, R.E., Madson, K., Anspach, J.H., and Decker, M. (2021). "NCHRP 20-05
Implementation of Subsurface Utility Engineering for Highway Design and
Construction. National Cooperative Highway Research Program." Transportation
Research Board. National Research Council. https://www.trb.org/Publications/
Blurbs/182718.aspx (Accessed May 30, 2022)..
Highway/Utility Guide
- J Thorne
- D Turner
- J Lindly
Thorne, J., Turner, D., and Lindly, J. (1993). "Highway/Utility Guide. Report FHWA-SA-93-049", Office of Technology Applications, Washington, D.C. < https://www.fhwa.
dot.gov/utilities/010604.pdf (Accessed May 30, 2022).