|
Minutes of The Marking Guidelines Meeting
October 24, 2006
Miss Utility Call Center
Hanover, MD 21076
Wayne opened the meeting with distribution of the minutes
of the previous meeting held on September 26, 2006. Upon
review of these minutes, Tom Baldwin wanted to know what
benefit there is when a ticket is established as “high
profile”. Wayne explained that different facilities
establish different meanings for their utility being “high
profile”. With that said the entire group voted
100% in favor that this should be removed from the marking
standards and should be facility owner specific.
Karen Watkins needed clarification on “the typical
service size”. Tom Baldwin was not comfortable
with the verbage of service to identify pipe size.
Again, the entire group voted 100% in favor of changing
the verbage to “typical pipe size”.
The idea of the distance between the corridor markings
being the size of the utility was discussed and the primary
concern was for plastic piping that is installed with
tracer wire. Tom Baldwin stated that BGE requires the
tracer wire be installed a min. of 6” away from
the pipe and therefore the corridor marking being the
size of the utility will create a smaller margin for
error on the locator’s part.
To finalize the reviewing of the minutes:
Voted and accepted: 13/13
To remove the note: Gas mains, electric transmission
lines, water mains, sewer mains, 4” and above
are considered high profile
Voted and accepted: 13/13
Verbage change to: Typical pipe size below 6” shall
be identified by a single marking, and Typical pipe
size 6” and above shall be identified by a designated
corridor pipe marking, see figure 1-2.
Figure 1-2
Discussion of labeling of the utility was discussed.
Wayne stated that labeling of the utility to include
facility owner, material type and size is an industry
standard nationwide.
Kelly Hardy expressed great concern that labeling of the utilities can hurt everyone.
Tom Baldwin explained the importance of labeling as a damage prevention tool
and gave some examples. Wayne reminded the committee that these are recommendations
and will not automatically become law. Tom Hastings put the question out there, “How
specific do we want to be with the labeling?” Dennis Lescalleet provided
an example of why it is so important as an excavator to know exactly what it
is that one is digging to find. Tom Baldwin stated that if these labeling recommendations
become marking standards, that education of the excavating community can be more
mainstreamed.
The committee Voted and accepted that: When known, the size material type and owner of facility
shall be indicated at the beginning and at the end of the locate request area
and site specific in between.
The committee than discussed the importance of offsets
and it was agreed upon that figure 1-3 is an example
of how offsets are usually displayed:
Offsets being a graffiti issue was discussed and the
fact that most offsets are being displayed in the gutter
pan which seems to last forever. It was also discussed
that offsets as well as flags may be used but at the
locator’s discretion.
The committee Voted and accepted that: #15 from the Va. Marking Standards be adopted in
its entirety to preclude with the first sentence of #1. “In area
where marks may be destroyed (high traffic areas, gravel areas, dirt areas, etc.),
or where surface conditions are such that the placement of marks directly over
the utility line is not possible, offset markings shall be used. The offset marks
should be placed on a permanent surface, which is not likely to be destroyed.
When possible, offset marks shall be used in conjunction with marks placed in
accordance with The American Public Works Association’s color codes. Offset
marks shall include an arrow, pointing in the direction of the utility line,
with the distance in feet (measured with an appropriate instrument) to the location
of the utility line shown on the right side of the arrow, and size, material
type and other information on the left side of the arrow. Offset marks should
be legible when facing utility.
To close, Tom Baldwin suggested that we contact any
company and request permission to use information that
we will refer to such as the Va. State Corporation Commission.
Meeting adjourned at 2:15pm.
Next meeting after the MD/DC Damage Prevention Meeting,
November 28, 2006.
| Attendee List |
 |
| Name |
|
Company |
|
Phone |
|
Email |
| Wayne Gilmer |
|
|
|
| Tim VanCleve |
|
|
|
| Tom Baldwin |
|
|
|
| Sherell Stone |
|
|
|
| Tom Hastings |
|
|
|
| Kelly Hardy |
|
|
|
| Dennis Lescalleet |
|
|
|
| Gary Shulties |
|
|
|
| Karen Watkins |
|
|
|
| Dave Dubs |
|
|
|
| Kevin Woolbright |
|
|
|
| Joe Wilkinson |
|
|
|
| Alex Baquie |
|
|
|
|
