UTILITIES REQUIREMENT FOR GPS LOCATION DATA FOR NEW INSTALATIONS AND PROHIBITION OVERHEAD UTILITY CROSSINGS ON LIMITED ACCCESS FACILITIES Requested by: Michigan Survey Deadline: April 25, 2007 Question: Michigan asks: The Michigan DOT is considering two new requirements for utility installations allowed by permit. One is to require GPS location data to be captured, retained and supplied to the DOT for all new installations. The other is not to allow overhead utility crossings of limited access facilities unless the utility can show underground placement to be impractical or a significant hardship. Has your state required anything similar to either of these concepts? If so, please provide any appropriate detail and/or contact persons in your state. Thank you, Mark A. Dionise, P.E. Michigan Department of Transportation Utility Coordination and Permits Engineer (517) 373-7682 OREGON Oregon has none of these requirements. Matthew C. Caswell, P.E., P.L.S. State Utility Engineer Oregon Dept. of Transportation 355 Capitol St NE Salem, OR 97301-3871 (503) 986-3658 MASSACHUSETTS Massachusetts However, regarding the overhead utility crossing at limited access highways, it has been a preferred mechanism to have the utility can show underground placement to be impractical or a significant hardship. Guy Rezendes, P.E. MassHighway Department Utilities/Railroad Engineer 10 Park Plaza - Room 6340 Boston, MA 02116 (617) 973-7512 FAX: (617) 973-7554 TENNESSEE TDOT started many years ago to capture long-lat for permit installations using handheld GPS. Purpose was to capture the data that could eventually be used to cross check excess land disposals with permitted installations. Utilities are requested to provide the data if available, otherwise the TDOT Utility Inspectors will data. Data is currently limited to the utility site beginning point, end point. Way points are not collected. To require a utility to provide the data would entail a revision to the promulgated rules and regulations. Lateral crossing of controlled access ROW are restricted to 90 degrees, and by location if it is designated a "scenic" roadway. Underground installation, other than electrical, would be a consideration at this time only if it were a scenic roadway. Electrical underground has proven to be expensive and very controversial in Tennessee. Recent news articles can attest to the public sentiments when the utility notifies the rate payers that rates will increase in response to municipal requirements to place utilities underground. Joe Shaw TDOT Utilities Office Suite 600 JK Polk Bldg. Nashville, TN 37243-0337 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: 615.741.2891 Fax: 615.532.1548 CELL: 615.202.7268 ALABAMA In Alabama, we have not considered requiring underground crossings of freeways by electrical utilities. As far as GPS coordinates on new locations by permit, we have considered doing this as well as requiring an as built GPS survey for relocated underground utilities before they are covered up. We haven’t moved forward with this until we have a GIS to make use of that information. Robert G. Lee State Utilities Engineer Alabama DOT 1409 Coliseum Blvd. Montgomery, AL 36110 334.242.6155 MONTANA Montana : No walt Scott Supervisor - Utility Section GEORGIA Georgia’s response: (1) Not yet, but headed that way eventually; and (2) No Jeff Baker, P.E. State Utilities Engineer Georgia Dept. of Transportation 935 E. Confederate Ave., Bldg. #24 Atlanta, GA. 30316 404-635-8045 (w) 404-635-8066 (fax) IDAHO QUESTION: The Michigan DOT is considering two new requirements for utility installations allowed by permit. One is to require GPS location data to be captured, retained and supplied to the DOT for all new installations. RESPONSE FROM ITD GPS coordinates are requested (voluntary) on ITD's Utility Use Permit form but are not mandatory (mainly because ITD permit storage program does not make use of GPS coordinates in recalling stored documents or in performing searches of information). QUESTION: The other is not to allow overhead utility crossings of limited access facilities unless the utility can show underground placement to be impractical or a significant hardship. RESPONSE FROM ITD ITD allows overhead and underground utility crossings of limited access facilities. Robert Linkhart Idaho Transportation Department (208)334-8492 INDIANA Indiana has not required anything like this. The GPS location data has been coming up more and more in the past year or so. OKLAHOMA Oklahoma responds as follows: 1) We do not currently require GPS data. 2) We do not currently have such a policy regarding access controlled facilities. But, we like both of the ideas, especially the GPS data. Kurt A. Harms Chief, Right-of-Way & Utilities Okla. Dept. of Trans. 200 N.E. 21st Street Okla. City, OK 73105 (405)521-2661 Office (405)522-1858 Fax VIRGINIA Virginia currently does not require either GPS coordinates for utility permit installations or limited access crossings be placed underground. In Virginia a utility operator is required by law to maintain reasonable as-built plans of their facilities (location within 2’), this would include those installed under permit. Several of the larger utility operators utilize GPS coordinates for their internal use, we have not made this a requirement to date. We require a minimum of 21’ vertical clearance across any limited access right of way for aerial crossings (Poles are located outside of limited access lines). There have been no instances which would necessitate a need to require these installations be placed underground. Matt Reynolds Assistant State Utilities Engineer (804) 786-2934 SOUTH DAKOTA South Dakota has not required either of these items, however the GPS location is a good idea. MARYLAND Maryland has not considered requiring GPS information on permits, however, we have required GPS information on the as-built plans for resource sharing projects. As for the aerial facilities, Maryland's policy states that the utility company is to replace in kind. If the facility could be replaced aerially and were placed underground the "additional cost" for the installation would be bourn by the requesting party. For example, if the state required the facility to be placed underground, the state would pick up the "additional cost". If the Utility opted to replace the facility underground, the utility would pay the "additional cost". And finally, if a third party requested the facility be replaced underground, such as a municipality, the municipality would pay the "additional cost" over the cost to replace the aerial facility in kind. The in-kind portion of the costs would still be between the state and the utility based on prior rights. Nelson P. Smith, Jr. Statewide Utility Engineer Maryland State Highway Administration 211 East Madison Street, mailstop MLL4 Baltimore, Maryland 21202 (410) 545-5546 email@example.com ARIZONA 1. In January of this year ADOT issued a new stored spec that required all new underground utility installations to include a trace wire to aide designation of the facility in the future. We do not require GPS locating capabilities. I can send you the stored spec if you wish. 2. ADOT does not mandate underground place of overhead facilities either for access controlled conditions or non-access controlled conditions. Undergrounding is considered a betterment that we cannot mandate to the community. Pole placement is usually outside R/W. The utility is required to provide vertical clearance as prescribed by industry standards. Bruce Vana Engineer - Manager ADOT Utility and Railroad Engineering Section 602-712-8681 firstname.lastname@example.org NORTH DAKOTA NO, we do not as of yet for NDDOT WASHINGTON Answers below: Tom Swafford Utilities, Railroad & Agreements Manager Washington State Department of Transportation PO Box 47329 Olympia, WA 98504-7329 360-705-7237 CALIFORNIA This has been proposed and we are exploring the possibility of it as part of a database. 2. Not allow overhead utility crossings of limited access facilities unless the utility can show underground placement to be impractical or a significant hardship. No; in fact we do the opposite. Section 13.04.07.07 of the Right of Way Manual states we will not pay for cost for underground aerial unless there is an engineering need for the undergrounding. We do not underground for aesthetic purposes or scenic highways. If undergrounded, this is a betterment and we will only pay the cost for aerial.
Pages to are hidden for
"Public Utility Easements (PUE's) relating to liability issues - DOC"Please download to view full document