Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Utility Relocation Report
Utility Relocation Report
Utility Relocation Report
INTRODUCTION
It is the Texas Department of Transportations (TxDOT) mission, through collaboration and
leadership, to deliver a safe, reliable and integrated transportation system that enables the
movement of people and goods.
The employees and leaders of TxDOT take our roles as public servants seriously. We know
that the public and the Texas Legislature have entrusted TxDOT with the states resources,
and we must use those resources in a responsible and efficient manner to meet the
following goals:
Deliver the Right Projects Implement effective planning and forecasting processes
that deliver the right projects on-time and on-budget;
Focus on the Customer People are at the center of everything we do;
Foster Stewardship Ensure efficient use of state resources;
Optimize System Performance Develop and operate an integrated transportation
system that provides reliable and accessible mobility, and enables economic growth;
Preserve our Assets Deliver preventative maintenance for TxDOTs system and
capital assets to protect our investments;
Promote Safety Champion a culture of safety; and
Value our Employees Respect and care for the well-being and development of our
employees.
be a lengthy and complex process due to coordination efforts among many different entities.
These efforts require a partnership between TxDOT and the utility industry in order to
successfully move projects forward to the construction phase.
PROCEDURES FOR ACCOMMODATION
As previously stated, the utility relocation process can be complex and lengthy to resolve,
particularly along congested corridors common in urban and metropolitan areas of the state.
The problems of utility clearance generally fall into three categories:
Utilities not fully or effectively involved in early project planning and coordination;
Utilities not beginning work until the TxDOT contractor begins work.
delays. The third point considers delays by the utility to relocate and perform their work,
which causes late clearances for the TxDOT contractor. During Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, FY
2014 and FY 2015, TxDOT has paid highway contractors over $21.9 million in additional
costs and delay claims due to untimely utility relocations. During this same period, the time
delays caused prolonged safety risks for approximately 10,432 days for construction workers
and the traveling public.
FIGURE 1: CURRENT PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The majority of utility relocation conflicts occur in the metropolitan areas of Texas, with the
exception to Beaumont, Lufkin and Waco TxDOT districts. Metropolitan areas have a larger
volume of construction work impacting more utilities in congested right of way corridors. The
Beaumont, Lufkin and Waco TxDOT districts have had significant reconstruction projects on
IH 10, US 59 and IH 35 corridors. (See Appendix A for a complete list of transportation
projects impacted by additional costs and delays associated with utility relocations.)
REIMBURSABLE UTILITIES
3
House Transportation Committee, TxDOT Testimony, May 25, 2016
Texas Transportation Code, 203.094(b) states that TxDOT may reduce the reimbursement
to the utility by 10 percent for each 30-day period or portion of a 30-day period by which the
relocation exceeds the limit specified in the relocation agreement. If TxDOT determines that
a delay in relocation is the result of circumstances beyond the control of the utility, full
reimbursement shall be paid. Unfortunately, this remedy requires a utility agreement to be
executed and in many cases the untimely utility does not sign a utility agreement until their
schedule is more certain considering procurement of manufactured materials and labour for
installation. Oftentimes, multiple utilities are untimely making it difficult for TxDOT to reduce
reimbursements to the utility implement.
On average, reimbursements total approximately $100 million per year on TxDOT projects.
The process involves a public utility determining reimbursement eligibility in partnership with
TxDOT, performing the relocation activity and then submitting invoices to TxDOT for payment.
NON-REIMBURSABLE UTILITIES
Non-reimbursable utilities are authorized for relocation by a permit issued by TxDOT. The
permit sets forth the utilitys timeline for relocation.
UTILITY INDUSTRY WORKSHOPS
In an effort to make the utility relocation process TxDOT hosted a series of Utility Industry
Workshops during the Fall of 2015 and Spring of 2016. The workshops were well attended
by utilities and respective associations. Over the course of the workshops discussions were
focused on the issues of construction delays and additional costs to our customers. Open
communication and early engagement of utilities in the transportation project development
process was also emphasized.
During the workshops TxDOT staff discussed best practices which included monthly utility
coordination meetings for the metropolitan areas of the state and certain TxDOT districts,
quarterly meetings for urban areas and meetings on an as-needed basis in rural areas. In
addition to these best practices, TxDOT Administration offered to issue direction to district
engineers to initiate these coordination meetings with utilities in order to involve them in
long-range project and corridor planning. TxDOT Administration noted that it is important to
involve utilities during preliminary engineering phases of project development and have open
discussions on specific issues to minimize the relocation activities on each project in the
district portfolio.
General consensus was reached that these information sharing opportunities will greatly
improve coordination efforts between utilities and TxDOT.
THE PATH FORWARD
The path forward to improved coordination between TxDOT and utilities can be described as
immediate and mid-term actions. Prescribed utility coordination meetings and periodic statewide industry meetings with TxDOT are the best processes that need immediate action to
4
House Transportation Committee, TxDOT Testimony, May 25, 2016
counterparts in the utility industry. The training also includes an implementation monitoring
phase for the major metropolitan districts to ensure TxDOTs largest and busiest districts are
implementing the strategies taught. Training will begin in June of 2016 in the Austin District.
Additionally, TxDOT district engineers have been given the authority to execute utility
agreements within their respective districts. Previously, signature authority for utility
agreements rested with the TxDOT Right of Way Division Director. Moving signature authority
to the district engineers will maximize local control over the transportation project and
expedite utility agreements.
Lastly, TxDOT is in the process of developing a master agreement for use with recurring
utility companies that states the relocation and accommodation process. The master
agreements will guarantee that once the utility is given a notice to proceed on a particular
project, TxDOT will pay for any costs associated with highway design changes that cause the
utility to change its relocation plans. A smaller supplemental agreement with the technical
aspects would then be entered into on a project-by-project basis. This simplifies the
agreement process and allows utilities to start their process upon a notice to proceed from
TxDOT.
FIGURE 2: PROPOSED PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The most fundamental incentive is the realization that TxDOTs customers are the same as
customers of the utility industry. With this common ground, all parties involved should be
focused on the goals of timely delivery of infrastructure improvements. The Texas public
deserve our best efforts in this process.
6
House Transportation Committee, TxDOT Testimony, May 25, 2016
TxDOT does have the authority to make loans to utilities from the State Infrastructure Banks
(SIB). The SIB was authorized in 1995, as part of the National Highway Designation Act to
help accelerate needed mobility improvements through a variety of financial assistance
options made to local entities through state transportation departments. Texas was chosen
as one of the 10 states to test the pilot program and the Texas Legislature authorized TxDOT
to administer the SIB program in 1997. The overall goal of the SIB program is to provide
innovative financing methods to communities to assist them in meeting their infrastructure
needs. The SIB program allows borrowers to access capital funds at market interest rates
with favourable terms. This has been advantageous to smaller utilities and municipalities
who may have capital difficulty to relocate their facilities.
TxDOT continues to be willing to include utility relocations in our transportation contracts.
This is fairly common in our metropolitan areas with water, wastewater and communication
utilities. Specifications for each utility must be prepared and included in the contract for
bidding purposes. TxDOT encourages this type of partnering because it places control of the
utility relocation process largely in the prime contractors responsibility. Additionally, many
prime contractors will subcontract the utility relocation work to the same companies
performing the work for the utility owner.
Texas Transportation Code, 203.0935(e) provides TxDOT with the authority to relocate an
uncooperative utility after due diligence and proper notice is provided to the utility. It is
possible to seek restitution for TxDOT expenses through legal means. TxDOT may request
the Office of Attorney General to seek an injunction requiring the utility company to relocate
its property, if the utility fails to cooperate in a timely relocation. This legal remedy takes
time to resolve and is rarely used in normal practice as TxDOT uses every opportunity to
resolve these differences.
TxDOT does not have statutory recourse to pass along construction delay damages for an
untimely relocation or the authority to withhold utility permits if a utility is uncooperative or
unwilling to relocate due to statutory authority of utilities to be within public right of way.
CONCLUSION
The key to success is to create an environment of information sharing between the utility
industry and TxDOT. This will be accomplished in part by the state-wide utility workshops
held periodically, but mostly by the coordination meetings held by the TxDOT district offices
around the state that will occur on a frequent basis. In this environment, project portfolios,
corridor planning and project management can occur more effectively. This enterprise
management approach will allow the sharing of portfolio and project information thereby
creating working relationships between entities. Implementation of the new project
development model will allow time for utility relocations prior to letting a project that will likely
benefit all entities.
Utilities are encouraged to include their relocation plans in TxDOT construction plans as to
7
House Transportation Committee, TxDOT Testimony, May 25, 2016
expedite the relocation work while transportation improvements begin. Doing so allows a
more overall coordinated effort by the TxDOT contractor delivering transportation
improvements sooner to our customers.
8
House Transportation Committee, TxDOT Testimony, May 25, 2016
Appendix A.
Spreadsheet of Projects Let in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, FY
2014, FY 2015 and FY 2016 with Time Delays and
Additional Costs.
Information gathered through May 2016.
District
ABILENE
Highway
CR 357
Description
Replace Bridge
Utility Owner
AT&T
5
FM 2230
VA
BS 70-G
BS 70-G
IH 20
Comments
Additional Costs
$0.00
WesTex Telephone
N/A
18
$0.00
40
$0.00
$18,000.00
$3,000.00
Millennium Resources
N/A
AT&T
City of Sweetwater
LEVEL 3 COM
100
$0.00
18
$10,650.00
20
$0.00
N/A
20
$0.00
N/A
19
$0.00
AMARILLO
CS
SH 15
SH 15
CS
LP 335
LP 335
Atmos
City of Amarillo
AT&T
City of Amarillo
90
30
$0.00
$0.00
District
Highway
LP 335
LP 335
Description
Utility Owner
ATMOS ENERGY
ZAYO GROUP
20
20
Comments
Additional Costs
$0.00
$0.00
ATLANTA
FM 1402
FM 1402
Centerpoint Energy
12
FM 1402
Sprint
SH 155
AEP
RM 1826
US 80
AUSTIN
$0.00
AT&T
8
FM 1402
$0.00
Suddenlink
10
FM 1402
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
AT&T
37
$0.00
33
$0.00
District
Highway
Description
Utility Owner
Provide Signalized
Intersections
AT&T
Innovative Intersection
Improvement
AT&T
AT&T
SH 304
Centerpoint Energy
SH 304
AT&T
Intersection Improvements
US 290
US 290
SH 304
SH 80
SH 71
RM 1431
AT&T
Innovative Intersection
Improvements
Atmos
Additional Costs
46
$375,000.00
198
$275,000.00
31
$84,300.28
17
$46,229.19
US 90
US 69
US 69
N/A
N/A
45
$75,000.00
$7,620.55
60
$50,000.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
TBD
BEAUMONT
IH 10
Comments
Air Liquide
21
$0.00
$28,750.00
City of Devers
AT&T
130
$0.00
Windstream (FiberOptic)
108
$0.00
District
BROWNWOOD
Highway
IH 20
Description
Construct Two Safety Rest
Areas
Utility Owner
Additional Costs
59
$27,676.00
AT&T
Comments
N/A
BRYAN
SH 30
AT&T
60
$0.00
District
Highway
Utility Owner
Century Link
SH 30
Enterprise Products
SH 30
Mid-South Synergy
SH 30
US 77
AEP Telecom
US 77
Verizon
AEP
SH 30
CORPUS CHRISTI
Description
FM 2444
Additional Costs
60
$0.00
60
$0.00
60
$0.00
60
$0.00
61
$0.00
30
$0.00
50
$0.00
Comments
Total project delay is anticipated to be approximately 6
months. ROW acquisition activities have delayed utility
relocation (~4 months). The contractor is currently
developing a material escalation submittal for the
Department. Additional costs to be determined at a later
date.
Total project delay is anticipated to be approximately 6
months. ROW acquisition activities have delayed utility
relocation (~4 months). The contractor is currently
developing a material escalation submittal for the
Department. Additional costs to be determined at a later
date.
Total project delay is anticipated to be approximately 6
months. ROW acquisition activities have delayed utility
relocation (~4 months). The contractor is currently
developing a material escalation submittal for the
Department. Additional costs to be determined at a later
date.
Total project delay is anticipated to be approximately 6
months. ROW acquisition activities have delayed utility
relocation (~4 months). The contractor is currently
developing a material escalation submittal for the
Department. Additional costs to be determined at a later
date.
Completed 10/2015. This was prompted by ROW
acquisition and above average rainfall events.
Complete October 2015. This was prompted by ROW
acquisition and above average rainfall events.
District is currently reviewing contractor submitted delay
impact for $ 322,335
District
Highway
FM 2444
Description
Utility Owner
AT&T
50
FM 2444
FM 1069
US 59
DALLAS
SH 78
FM 720
FM 720
FM 720
FM 720
SH 78
$0.00
50
48
$0.00
$0.00
AEP
67
$4,667
TBD
TBD
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
VERIZON
AT&T
CoServ Electric
Grande Communications
Suddenlink
FM 720
Comments
Additional Costs
$200,000.00
Relocation complete
AT&T Texas
$200,000.00
TBD
TBD
Description
Utility Owner
SH 78
9 Intersection Improvements
SH 78
9 Intersection Improvements
SH 78
9 Intersection Improvements
SH 78
9 Intersection Improvements
Fiberlight
District
Highway
IH 30
IH 30
US 75
US 75
US 75
FM 2786
Construct Managed/Hov
Lanes With Two Sets Of
Wishbone Ramps
Construct Managed/Hov
Lanes With Two Sets Of
Wishbone Ramps
Additional Costs
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
TBD
$355,000.00
12
$62,389.00
AT&T
Oncor
GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS
N/A
125
FM 2786
$0.00
TxDOT did not inform utililty they needed to relocate
facilities until
construction was nearly ready to begin
125
$0.00
TxDOT did not inform utililty they needed to relocate
facilities until
construction was nearly ready to begin
125
$0.00
Oncor
48
FM 2786
AT&T
Atmos
N/A
CITY OF PLANO
Comments
N/A
$150,000.00
N/A
48
$0.00
N/A
48
$0.00
Description
Utility Owner
CoServ Gas
FM 2786
Grande Communication
FM 2786
Grayson Collin EC
Time Warner
District
Highway
FM 2786
FM 2786
FM 663
FM 663
FM 455
N/A
48
Oncor
48
$0.00
264
$0.00
22
$0.00
462
$367,000.00
66
$0.00
22
$0.00
$100,000.00
14
$0.00
90
$0.00
90
$0.00
$56,000.00
$24,000.00
AT&T
CS
AT&T
FM 1171
AT&T
N/A
N/A
TxDOT contractor delayed by untimely AT&T relocations.
N/A
N/A
N/A
SH 289
AT&T
SH 289
Oncor Energy
FM 1387
$0.00
N/A
AT&T
Oncor
FM 1387
$0.00
N/A
48
CR
$0.00
N/A
48
CS
Comments
Additional Costs
AT&T
AT&T
N/A
N/A
N/A
TxDOT contractor delayed by untimely AT&T and Oncor
relocations.
N/A
Description
Utility Owner
AT&T
SL 12
Intersection Improvements
AT&T
FM 1378
City of Lucas
FM 1378
Suddenlink Communications
District
Highway
FM 423
FM 1378
FM 740
FM 981
FM 544
AT&T
Frognot WSC
Atmos
$6,415,000.00
$198,000.00
125
$0.00
125
$0.00
125
$0.00
$244,000.00
62
$0.00
10
$0.00
EL PASO
SS 1966
Construction Of Spur
AT&T
SS 1966
Construction Of Spur
Texas Gas
Comments
Additional Costs
$110,779.00
$70,732.00
N/A
N/A
TxDOT did not inform utililty they needed to relocate
facilities until
construction was nearly ready to begin
TxDOT did not inform utililty they needed to relocate
facilities until
construction was nearly ready to begin
N/A
N/A
Conflict discovered Ph I. Relocation Complete Ph II.
Cost associated with shoring of utility in place and FOC
was relocated concurrent with construction. No time
impacts
Cost associated with shoring of utility in place. No time
impacts
District
Highway
US 62
US 62
Horizon Blvd
Horizon Blvd
FORT WORTH
CS
Utility Owner
AT&T
El Paso Electric
Urban Reconstruction
Urban Reconstruction
Reconstruct From 4 Lanes To
4 Lane Divided With Raised
Median -Phase 2
CS
Reconstruct Bridge To
Accommodate The Upgrade
Of Dirks/Alta Mesa To A 6
Lane Divided Roadway
Chater
CS
Reconstruct Bridge To
Accommodate The Upgrade
Of Dirks/Alta Mesa To A 6
Lane Divided Roadway
AT&T
SL 12
Intersection Improvement
Oncor
IH 35W
AT&T
Unknown
N/A
3
357
28
$1,000.00
$566,560.00
$0.00
N/A
N/A
N/A
90
Oncor
SH 146
$173,512.00
Oncor (Electric)
Reconstruct Bridge To
Accommodate The Upgrade
Of Dirks/Alta Mesa To A 6
Lane Divided Roadway
IH 35W
Comments
Additional Costs
AT&T
El Paso Electric
Atmos
CS
40
Reconstruct Bridge To
Accommodate The Upgrade
Of Dirks/Alta Mesa To A 6
Lane Divided Roadway
CS
HOUSTON
Description
The total delay claim is for 146 days and $420,000 for all
four utilities. The cost and time is equally divided between
four utilities
37
$105,000.00
The total delay claim is for 146 days and $420,000 for all
four utilities. The cost and time is equally divided between
four utilities
37
$105,000.00
The total delay claim is for 146 days and $420,000 for all
four utilities. The cost and time is equally divided between
four utilities
36
$105,000.00
The total delay claim is for 146 days and $420,000 for all
four utilities. The cost and time is equally divided between
four utilities
36
$105,000.00
20
$20,093.00
$40,900.00
$2,443.23
256
$60,000.00
AT&T
10
N/A
District
Highway
US 290
Description
Utility Owner
Phonoscope
N/A
88
US 290
US 290
US 290
Unknown Utilities
Unknown Utilities
Qwest
N/A
US 290
US 290
US 290
$166,923.24
The contractor left a gap in the proposed storm sewer at
multiple locations until the utility could be relocated.
$53,869.80
The contractor left a gap in the proposed storm sewer at
multiple locations until the utility could be relocated.
$43,076.63
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
$166,923.24
Centerpoint gas
0
US 290
Comments
Additional Costs
$12,746.20
CenterPoint
0
$163,941.00
AT&T
0
$117,110.51
CenterPoint
0
11
$91,845.54
District
Highway
Description
US 290
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
US 290
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Utility Owner
Enterprise Pipelines
US 290
Enterprise Pipelines
US 290
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
AT&T
US 290
US 290
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
$66,646.89
AT&T
Widen To 8 Mainlanes,
Auxillary Lanes & 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Additional Costs
$40,463.53
$32,033.70
$30,362.00
Comments
The contractor left a gap in the proposed storm sewer
until gas line could be relocated. A siphon was installed
and removed due to the opening of the US 290 Eastbound
Frontage Road and the storm sewer system becoming
active prior to the relocation of the gas line. Since this was
a temporary condition, asphalt pavement was installed in
this area and subsequently removed and replaced with
12" fast track paving.
Revise storm sewer to eliminate conflict with utility duct
bank.
The contractor left a gap in the proposed storm sewer
until the gas line could be relocated. A siphon was
installed and removed to allow proper storm water
drainage.
Revise storm sewer to eliminate conflict with 24" steel
casing.
CenterPoint
$19,747.50
CenterPoint
0
12
$5,189.39
District
Highway
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
Description
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Utility Owner
Additional Costs
CenterPoint Energy
0
$70,255.05
Kinder Morgan
0
$56,502.75
AT&T
0
$50,914.93
CenterPoint Gas
0
$50,914.93
$50,914.93
Houston Pipeline
0
$50,914.93
$50,914.93
$43,514.55
AT&T
0
$33,336.37
$33,336.37
CenterPoint Electric
CenterPoint Gas
0
$33,336.37
Comcast
0
$33,336.37
Kinder Morgan
0
$33,336.37
Phonoscope
0
$33,336.37
CenterPoint Energy
0
13
$28,283.07
Comments
Temporarily relocate a portion of the 8" gas line for
installation of proposed storm sewer.
Contractor placed asphalt over 175' gap in the proposed 7'
x 5' RCB strom sewer until the 4 gas lines can be relocated
in 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Contractor to install and later remove temporary asphalt
concrete pavement and 6" concrete dowel curb until
relocation in spring 2015.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Revise storm sewer system to avoid utilities that will not
be relocated until 2016.
Temporarily relocate a portion of the 2" IP plastic gas line
for installation of proposed storm sewer.
District
Highway
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
US 290
Description
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes And 2-Lane
Frontage Roads
Utility Owner
Unknown Utility
CenterPoint Energy
$18,834.25
$4,624.12
$4,169.07
$2,121.00
$297.74
Unknown Utility
AT&T
US 290
CenterPoint
FM 2920
Widening
US 290
Unknown Utility
AT&T
US 290
CenterPoint Energy
US 290
Additional Costs
Gulf South
Comments
Contractor placed asphalt over 175' gap in the proposed 7'
x 5' RCB strom sewer until the 4 gas lines can be relocated
in 2016.
Contractor left a gap in the proposed strom sewer until
the pipe line could be relocated. After pipe line was
relocted contractor pour a concrete collar to close the
system.
Contractor to leave out a section of the 4'x4' RCB and
install a 24'x7'x1' concrete collar with a 2' overlap on each
side of the 4'x4' RCB due to an existing 2" gas line not
being previously relocated.
Contractor has to de-energize power line that had not
been relocated to continue to work.
Locate & relocate unidentified existing 3" gas line to avoid
conflict with 36" RCP jack and bore.
$8,468.85
AT&T
0
132
$5,261.14
$20,000.00
$6,875.30
N/A
Revise storm sewer lateral to bypass existing utility.
14
$2,422.82
District
Highway
IH 610
IH 45
US 290
Description
Utility Owner
AT&T
AT&T
CenterPoint Gas
Additional Costs
$165,000.00
N/A
N/A
156
CR
US 290
$30,000.00
CS
Comments
$24,005.61
AT&T
N/A
CenterPointElectric
Williams Pipeline
66
$15,000.00
$15,618.91
N/A
N/A
15
$163,941.00
District
Highway
US 290
Description
Utility Owner
N/A
US 290
US 290
N/A
US 290
N/A
US 290
$146,226.53
N/A
Kinder Morgan
$188,799.60
CenterPoint Gas
$98,680.59
Sprint
Comments
Additional Costs
$76,850.90
AT&T
N/A
16
$43,519.34
District
Description
Utility Owner
CenterPoint Electric
Highway
US 290
N/A
US 290
US 290
US 290
FALSE
N/A
$33,336.36
Phonoscope
N/A
0
$33,336.36
US 290
$35,457.36
Comcast
0
Reconstruct And Widen To 8
Main Lanes With 3 Reversible
Managed Lanes And Two 2Lane Frontage Roads
Comments
Additional Costs
$19,630.25
N/A
17
$10,182.98
District
Highway
US 290
Description
Utility Owner
Enterprise Products
(Seminole PL)
N/A
US 290
US 290
N/A
US 290
$10,182.98
N/A
CenterPoint Gas
US 290
$10,182.98
ExxonMobil
Zayo Group
Comcast
Comments
Additional Costs
$119,688.93
N/A
0
$119,688.93
N/A
18
$119,203.54
District
Highway
US 290
Description
Utility Owner
Phonoscope
N/A
US 290
N/A
IH 45
LUBBOCK
FM 1730
Widen Non-Freeway
$119,203.54
N/A
0
$119,203.54
Wavevision
CS
$3,936.06
N/A
AT&T
AT&T
260
$60,000.00
240
$375,000.00
LUFKIN
US 287
Reconstruct Pavement
US 59
Comments
Additional Costs
Centerpoint
AT&T
19
23
$0.00
19
$0.00
N/A
Centerpoint worked from early January 2016 to March 4,
2016 relocating gas lines. They were given over a years
advance notice and knew the lines were in conflict.
According to Centerpoint, turnover in personnel caused
them to drop "the ball". No claims anticipated due to
other construction difficulties occuring at the same time.
Contractor says potential 19 day delay claim.
District
Highway
SH 7
US 59
Description
Reconstruct And Add Passing
Lanes
Utility Owner
Consolidated
Communications
Additional Costs
25
$0.00
AT&T
20
$1,500,000.00
Comments
Project was delayed from November 13, 2014 to January
2, 2015
The project was let July 2013. TxDOT completed ROW
purchasing in June 2014. AT&T agreement was approved
December 2014. AT&T had 90 days to relocate upon
completion of Prep ROW per the plans. 90 days ended
February 4, 2015. AT&T is scheduled to start work
8/24/15. Entergy began relocating 8/1/2015. At this time
we do not know the cost of the damages. AT&T
completed tie in Nov 12, 2015.
District
PARIS
PHARR
Highway
SL 224
SL 224
Description
Construct Curb Ramps
Construct Curb Ramps
SH 24
US 82
Oncor Transmission
BUS. 83
BUS. 83
CITY OF MERCEDES
Utility Owner
AT&T
Atmos Energy
SH 364
AEP
SH 364
AUGA SUD
SH 364
SWSC
SH 364
City of Mission
AT&T
TGS
SH 364
SH 364
US 83
CS
CS
CS
Additional Costs
$19,000.00
$0.00
15
$0.00
$260,000.00
54
$114,729.00
AT&T
Magic Valley Electric Co-op
21
12
$25,495.00
64
$10,958.00
64
$10,958.00
64
$10,958.00
64
$10,958.00
64
$10,958.00
64
$10,958.00
WIND STREAM
COMMUNICATIONS
AEP
Comments
N/A
N/A
161
$305,077.29
$3,420.00
37
$25,308.00
$3,420.00
District
Highway
Description
Utility Owner
FM 681
AT&T
US 83
Interchange Improvements
AT&T
US 83
US 83
CS
SAN ANTONIO
FM 78
FM 1101
Interchange Improvements
Interchange Improvements
600
$1,122,742.00
357
$1,200,000.00
281
$0.00
236
$0.00
AEP
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
N/A
70
$46,685.00
180
$0.00
180
IH 10
Comments
Construct Sidewalks,
Redesign Crosswalks, & Install
Bike Racks
Additional Costs
$0.00
AT&T
180
22
$0.00
District
Highway
FM 306
Description
Expand 2 To 4 Lanes With
Continuous Left Turn Lane,
Bike Lanes And Sidewalks
Utility Owner
AT&T
N/A
180
$0.00
TYLER
SH 64
Widen 2 Ln Roadway To
Super-2 (3 Lane) Criteria
FM 2311
AT&T
AT&T
Windstream
WACO
SH 317
FM 933
FM 933
FM 933
AT&T
60
$0.00
130
$13,018.18
83
$50,225.28
N/A
$45,000.00
This is an estimated delay cost. The contractor has not
submitted an actual claim.
45
$45,000.00
FM 933
Comments
Additional Costs
$20,000.00
City of Whitney
Contract canceled
0
23
$4,138.16
District
Highway
IH 35
IH 35
IH 35
IH 35
IH 35
FM 1637
FM 1637
FM 2837
SH 6
IH 35
Description
Utility Owner
Atmos Gas
Grande Communications
Fiber Optics
Windstream
50
$150,000.00
30
$60,000.00
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
60
$50,000.00
60
$87,500.00
24
Comments
Additional Costs
60
$87,500.00
153
$10,506.25
108
$0.00
125
$500,000.00
District
Highway
IH 35
Description
Reconstruct And Widen From
Four To Eight Lanes
Utility Owner
Time Warner
Additional Costs
50
$200,000.00
Comments
This is an estimated delay cost. The contractor has not
submitted an actual claim.
WICHITA FALLS
SH 240
CR
YOAKUM
FM 108
FM 155
CR
US 59
AT&T
AT&T
AT&T
Fayette Electric Coop., Inc.
San Bernard Electric CO-OP
AT&T
25
100
TBD
12
$0.00
$0.00
13
$0.00
$0.00
159
10,432
$529,847.89
$21,900,639.34