nanog mailing list archives

RE: Facts, Statistics and Urban Legends from the backhoe conventi on


From: Roeland Meyer <rmeyer () mhsc com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2000 01:32:48 -0800


From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean () donelan com]
Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2000 6:59 AM

I noticed these two points, from you message, and moved them together.

If this is the current business case, for excavators;

A review of 582 damage incidents caused by excavator error resulted
in an average cost to the excavator of $1,488 per incident.  
It is often
less expensive for the excavator to dig through the utilities than
around them.

Then what do you think would happen if the real costs were 
passed on for them to pay?

Sprint estimates the cost to repair a single cable cut between
$50,000 to $65,000.  Loss of Use costs may be over $200,000.

This sounds real accurate. Why aren't the excavators seeing 
these costs? I'd bet a saw-buck that their behavior would be 
modified if this was what they were hit with.

In one court case, the excavator's president testified that it was
his company's standard practice to ignore OSHA regulations, 
ANSI standards,
and guidelines set out in Bell South brochures and to always 
excavate with
mechanized equipment directly over the orange paint marks showing the
location of underground telecommunications facilities.  He further
testified that his company averaged one and one-half cable 
cuts a month,
and considered damging underground facilities as simple a 
cost of doing
business.

I'm only a businessman, but this sounds like he's a creature 
that has adapted adequately to his environment.

My questions: If he always dug directly over the orange paint 
marks, why
was the locate so poor he only hit a cable once ever month and a half?

This one made ne laugh for a solid five minutes. ROTFLMAO!



Current thread: