American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials
Special Committee on
Research and Innovation
FY2023 NCHRP
IMPLEMENTING UTILITY INVESTIGATIONS
Problem Number:
2023-D-08
Problem Title
Guidance
for Implementing Utility Investigations in Alignment with Project Delivery
Background Information and Need For Research
While it
is recognized to be in the public interest to permit the installation of
utility infrastructure in roadway right-of-way (ROW), the practice has
contributed to utility-related issues being one of the leading causes of delays
for transportation projects (FHWA, 2018). These delays are often attributed to
unknown or inaccurate utility locations. Utility investigations, inclusive of
subsurface utility engineering (SUE), are procedures state departments of
transportation (DOTs) can implement to locate utilities and assist their
project development teams with avoiding these issues. However, there is little
guidance specific to an alignment of the timelines for implementing utility
investigation procedures with those of the project delivery process. Further,
there are many factors that influence the optimal approach of utility
investigations for a specific project, such as project type, project
environment, utility types, etc. Further, there are variations in utility
investigation needs based on the timing of design elements within the project
delivery process, e.g. what utilities investigations are needed for alignment
and grade design, and when will that design occur.
SUE is a
standardized process defined by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
38-02 Standard Guideline for the Collection and Depiction of Existing
Subsurface Utility Data. SUE has been presented as a useful tool for utility
investigations but varies in application and understanding. Some state DOTs
have been successful in SUE practices while others are still in the development
of their program. Improved understanding could lead to more widespread
utilization or a change in protocol for many state DOTs. There is a gap in
guidance for the implementation of SUE, quality assurance for SUE deliverables,
and depiction guidelines at state DOTs. While the American Society of Civil
Engineering (ASCE) 38-02 standard is effective in defining the process, there
is still a need for a guide for SUE implementation to help state DOTs in
development of a SUE program. Recent updates to ASCE 38-02 will include
guidance for depiction and present that standard as a more holistic utility
investigation approach.
It should
be clearly noted that best practice does not necessarily involve a linear
application of SUE quality levels to the phases of project development. That
is, it is not necessary to perform SUE quality level D, followed by C, and so
on. A more appropriate practice would be the identification of quality level
needs according to project characteristics, where multiple SUE quality levels
would be collected concurrently but may vary by location and project need.
The
needed guidance for implementing utility investigation approaches therefore
includes:
Application criteria;
Depiction approaches;
Prequalification of service
providers;
Deliverable expectations;
Quality assurance practices;
Alignment of utility investigation to
design phases;
Alignment of design element timelines
to utility investigation; and
Approaches to staffing and roles, and
other programmatic decisions.
Literature Search Summary
ASCE
38-02
23 CFR
645 Subpart A and B
Research Objective
The
primary objective of this research is to develop guidance for DOTs to
strategically align utility investigations to project development phases. The
guidance to be developed will address:
The
strategic implementation of SUE/ utility investigations by
Project Type
Project phase and delivery step/scope
and need
Design element timelines and needs
Project environment (rural/urban)
Documented geophysical site
conditions and equipment selection, including the use of advanced equipment,
such as multichannel ground penetrating radar
Facility Types and densities
Public interest and project risk
Project delays
Communicating
and modeling the utility investigation information should also be addressed in
this guidance for:
Depiction approaches, showing quality
levels on plans
3D modeling and clash detection, to
include buffers and all ranges of conflicts (direct, indirect, etc.)
Risk assessment of 3D subsurface
utility models
Use of information for design/project
development (e.g. schedule changes) decision making
Maintenance of utility investigation
data through the design process
Communicating as-built/relocated
utility information
Quality assurance of information
collected.
The
research objective will be achieved through the completion of research tasks to
be described by the research team that best addresses the research questions
and goals. Possible tasks include:
State department of transportation
surveys
Survey of consultant design firms
Examination of case studies and best
practices, e.g. SHRP2 products R01A, R15B and ASCE 38 Guidelines
Development of guidance documents
Conduct an exploratory workshop for
refinement
Implement a proof-of-concept trial on
a state DOT project
Production of final guidance.
Urgency and Potential Benefits
Inappropriate
utility investigations contribute to the $50 billion drain on the United States
economy cause by utility and highway coordination. This is also a major factor
in utility impacts being one of the top three causes of delays for projects.
The proper investigation of utility locations will help project teams eliminate
substantial risk from DOT projects. DOTs are highlighting the importance of
utility investigation and coordination just as more utilities are being
installed within ROW.
Implementation Considerations
Standards
are needed before these trends exacerbate the previous defined problems.
Recommended Research Funding and Research
Period
The
estimated cost is $400,000 and duration is 36 months.
Problem Statement Author(s): For each author,
provide their name, affiliation, email address and phone.
Written
09/2021Roy Sturgill, Gary Young, Deanne Popp, Corey Biddle, Lance Parve
Potential Panel Members: For each panel member,
provide their name, affiliation, email address and phone.
AASHTO
Utility Project Scoping & Coordination Technical Council Chair
AASHTO
Committee of Right of Way, Utilities and Outdoor Advertising
Utilities
Subcommittee
Patrick
Overton
Florida
Department of Transportation
State
Utility Engineer
605
Suwannee Street, MS 75
Tallahassee,
Florida 32399
Office#
(850) 414-4379
patrick.overton@dot.state.fl.us
Person Submitting The Problem Statement: Name, affiliation,
email address and phone.
Patrick
Overton
FDOT
State Utility Engineer and Vice Chair for Utility Scoping, Coordination, and
SUE TC
Patrick.overton@dot.state.fl.us
(850)
414-4379