ST9502-CS 960418 (2)MEMORANDUM
To:
Prom:
RE:
Date:
Jim Witt, City Manager
Kenneth M. Griffin, P.E., ACM/City Engineer
Town Center Blvd. ST 95-02 (Fiber Optics)
April 18, 1996
This memo is wriUen as a follow-up to Steve Goram's memo to you dated April 4th, 1996. I
was not copied on the memo by Steve and only recently became fully aware of the problem once
I received a copy of the memo from you.
Several items on this project need to be pointed out. First and foremost, yes the contractor did
cut the fiber optics. The plans state the contractor should locate the utilities prior to
construction. However, our contractor did request the location of the utilities prior to
construction. Bob Miller walked the area pointing out the location of the utility. The contractor
also did three point digs of the utility prior to installing his 48" storm drain pipe. Attached to
this memo is a sketch showing the three locations where the fiber optics were uncovered. You
will note that those three locations are in an approximate straight line and a prudent person
would assume that the cable itself was install in a straight line. Even though the cable was
originally installed by the City of Coppell, I was not involved in that installation as it was
installed by the Public Works Department prior to reorganization. Therefore, I cannot answer
why the cable installation itself leaves a straight line and veers out to the south. It is very
possible that there was some obstruction in the way that would have prevented the cable from
being laid in a straight line. However, that jut in the cable was not flagged and noted when it
was located for the contractor. As with any project, if the contractor chooses not to request
location markers on any utilities and then in turn damages that utility we do hold that contractor
responsible. However, if the contractor does request location of the utilities and the utility
company in turn locates the utilities, and the contractor in turn makes several point digs to verify
location of utilities, we do not hold the contractor responsible for damage to the utilities. That
ends up being a liability to the utility owner, if in fact they inaccurately or not completely
marked and located their utility.
It is my opinion that in this case the contractor has gone above and beyond his duty in locating
the utility and as such should not be held responsible for any damage to the fiber optics.
If you should have any questions concerning this memo I would be happy to discuss them with
you at your convenience.
Date:
From:
To:
Subject:
MEMORANDUM
Thursday, 4 April 1996
Steven G. Goram, Director Information
Jim Witt, City Manager
~ustomer
/
Fiber Optic cable cut
Support
On Wednesday, April 3, 1996 at approximately 11:30 AM, the fiber optic and copper telephone
cables which run from Town Center to the Library through underground conduit were cut. Not
only were the cables cut, but, they were pulled and stretched causing severe damage to the fiber
optic.
An inspection of the damage renders a complete replacement of the fiber cable from point to
point. The copper can be salvaged but most probably should be replaced as well. An initial
cost estimate was done by FOT Datacom is set at $14,300.00. I have been informed by our
Purchasing department that we have to have three written quotes, so, I am in the process of
obtaining those now.
The phone service has been restored to the Library on a temporary basis. We do not have any
data or video transmissions until the fiber is replaced. The phone cable is exposed and on the
fence across the back of the school yard. The situation does need to be rectified, however, if
we can wait just through the weekend, the contractors will be finished with their digging and we
shouldn't have to worry about another cutting.
We are investigating to find out what, if any, responsibility for the cutting of the cable lies with
the contractor based on the construction plans.