I don't like it, but is it illegal? 6

[gtsurfbum]

Hello all,

I am a civil engineer with about 4 years of experience in road and civil/site design. I began work with a firm about 10 months ago, and there have been several times when things came up that bothered me. I won't go into great detail, but I can describe what has been going on here lately that I don't agree with.

Our client is an oil and gas company who wishes to widen a road and bridge, to make way for a drill rig. The client (from what my boss says) has been open about the fact that they have not been in contact with the land owners. Their approach is to build it, and then work out an agreement later with the land owners. I am fairly certain that the bridge is on private land. Also, apparently they do their own construction (but not their own design?).

Since working on the project, my designs have been what I consider BMP. These designs are basic, mostly extending the road surfaces to the edge of ROW. And then showing on plans how the vehicle could make it across by making a 3pt turn. My goal was to avoid the environmental issues that arise from doing construction in the creek.

The client is convinced that they are allowed to place box culverts in creeks (and then drive over them, regardless of weight limits) because they have done so in the past. Also, my boss (who is not a PE, but parters with a PE from another firm) agrees with anything the client suggests.

Now, from what I understand, any design is just intellectual property. And doing so is perfectly legal. However, I don't agree with the project or the client's suggestions for design. I get along great with my boss, I just don't agree with the way he handles business, and there isn't really any expertise available that I can rely on for design issues.

We are a small firm so if you're wondering about the organizational structure ...it goes --- Client - Boss - Me

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Thanks,
gtsurfbum

 

[Jboggs]

Your job is your responsibility. Your boss's job is his responsibiity. What your client chooses to do after you have provided them with all the pertinent information is their responsibility. Make sure your concerns (load limits, property lines, etc.) are clearly stated on a drawing or in writing to your boss (and make sure you keep a copy). Then move on to the next project. When the lawyers for the land-owners or the family of the truck driver whose rig overturned due to a collapsed culvert come a-calling, you want to make sure you have the old CYA file up to date.

 

[msquared48]

"The client (from what my boss says) has been open about the fact that they have not been in contact with the land owners. Their approach is to build it, and then work out an agreement later with the land owners."

There is a legal term for this and it is called "trespass". Unfortunately, your client has the money to buy himself out of just about any situation, including this one. Is it legal? Not just no. Hell no!

The question though is, does you firm, having prior knowledge of the situation and occurrence, and by not saying anything to the owner, becoming a co-conspirator to the illegality due to the knowledge, have enough insurance to pay for the joint suit? If the owner brings the matter to court, your firm as welll as your client will be sued jointly.

CYA in a big way here, and think about changing firms... REAL hard!

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

http://mmcengineering.tripod.com

 

[gtsurfbum]

Okay, I appreciate the feedback from both of you. Yeah, the whole "prior knowledge" thing definitely threw a flag at me.

In the past the issues I've had were mostly design related. Most of them have been to related to the actual values (for percent grade for roadways, earthwork quantities, etc.)and what we choose to state on the plans for these.

But this was the first time it seemed to be like "trespassing" as you said.

 

[zdas04]

This discussion needs some input from Oil & Gas. First, do you know that they don't have the ROW to widen the road? Oil companies tend to have a number of departments that don't often talk to each other, so a company construction guy could be assuming that the Land Department hasn't done something that they have in fact done. If you don't know that they are trespassing, you should assume that they are not. Period.

Second, if a box culvert is inadequate for required loads then designing a crossing for those loads with a box culvert is a violation of the law by you, not the oil company. They are paying you to design the most cost effective structure that can handle the task with an adequate safety margin. If you do the sums and find that the box culverts cannot safely carry the load then you have an obligation to point that out. If you have knowledge that putting a box culvert in the stream is in violation of county, state, or federal regulations then you are obligated to bring that to the client's knowledge.

In short don't assume that the Oil Company are a bunch sleaze bags raping and pillaging the countryside. The people in the company are your neighbors and friends. None of them want to go to jail and none of them want the bad publicity of trespass.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

"Belief" is the acceptance of an hypotheses in the absence of data.
"Prejudice" is having an opinion not supported by the preponderance of the data.
"Knowledge" is only found through the accumulation and analysis of data.

 

[gtsurfbum]

zdas04,

Yeah, I agree with you on that part. I have regretfully already worked on the design of using a culvert for a bridge crossing. Which is wrong, but I don't want to be around when this work is submitted.

As for oil and gas companies, some do a very good job of doing things "by the book". I have worked one oil and gas company who is highly organized and keep their business very open and very honest. And I am sure there are other companies who do the same. This is not one of those companies. And come to think of it, I have seen a picture of their backhoe on the person's property that is in question.

I guess the difficult part is, how do I distinguish myself from this type of work without just up and quitting the company? Do I agree to continue to work other projects, but excluding this one. Also, about half of this issue has arose from hear-say, and the other half is from work done on the project.

I am considering asking my boss and the client through the same email to make sure I understand that they are doing, what I think they are doing. But at the same time... Do I spend the time to go back and collect full documented evidence, for the simple fact of leaving a company?

 

[moon161]

NOT a PE, Designer w/ EIT & steady exempt job, or not so many of your problems.

This seems like a lying down with dogs issue. I think fleas will make the leap, despite the distance you see to be looking for, and I wouldn't make a habit of it. If you need a independant way of eating so you can say 'no' maybe get to work on it.

In the past, in a grey area, exempt industry, I chose dinner. I approved wording changes that left me checkmated when I pointed out the lack of clothes on the empreror. Or at least that it worked, but apparently not by the advertised means. I may have bit my tongue and signed off on the deletion of that point. Rankles, now that I think of it.

 

[rowingengineer]

I agree with zdas, However I struggle to see why an appropriately design box culvert wouldn't work.

http://www.nceng.com.au/

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning."

 

[Ron]

Another fine example of a licensed engineer working for a non-licensed business person....rarely a good mix for the engineer. Completely different legal and ethical standards.

I agree with zdas04 that you should not necessarily assume trespass as there might be easements and other permissions that will allow this. I also agree with Mike that prior knowledge will become an issue if there's a problem.

You might be in a "no win" position, just CYA as necessary.

 

[Ron]

Another thought....you might consider putting a note on the drawings, something to the effect of:

"Construction of this structure might require permissions, permits or easements not relevant to the design. This firm assumes no obligation or responsibility for the determination or compliance with such permissions, permits or easements."

 

[gtsurfbum]

I appreciate all the comments and advice that I'm receiving.

To clarify the situation, there are two different road widening projects that have different issues.

The first project doesn't have the culvert issues, but it is the one with the property issues. Basically, we got the project suddenly when this gas company informed us that the mud trucks (about the size of a WB-50) weren't able to pass through on a way to a location. They kept scraping a cliffside, and one driver took out the mailbox.

They repaired the mailbox, and used their backhoe to remove rock from the cliffside. The cliffside is within the ROW, but not by much. I was told to keep the design on the cliffside, because the owner on the otherside of the road wasn't going to be cooperative. Still no major problems.

I happened to ask my boss why the other owner, (the one whose property is adjacent to the ROW and contains most of the cliff), why this guy was so cooperative. The response I received was that, "He's in Florida, he doesn't know yet".

I let it go at that moment and waited a few days and mentioned it again, but when I asked about it again, I was given a similar response. Granted, these are the responses of my supervisor - not directly from the gas company.

This project is about 9 days old. Apparently it will be "up for bid" Thursday (tomorrow), but I don't think there is really an open-style bid, because I've been under the impression that the gas company is going to carry out the construction themselves.

Also, I have been instructed to use a 1:1 slope, from the base of the new EOP to the top of the slope. No ditch, because they plan to put the ditch in after the rig has passed through (and hope there are no storm events during this timeframe). This brings the vertical height of the slope to about 30'

The rig is 110' long, and I've used some software (the "vehicle path tracking" in Carlson) to try and model how I think it will turn.

I agree that on the 2nd project, that a properly installed culvert could work. Although, there is NO COVER on it, and the box culvert (4' tall, 12' wide, 40' long) is 1 FT thick. We are proposing a similar culvert to be installed to make 80 of ROW, and then reposition the guardrails.

Personally, I've been in pump trucks (which are 22 wheel and 102,000 lbs) and have been across bridges that are much less legit and made me nervous. But I wasn't driving the truck or designing the bridge, I was just a frac hand then - so it really wasn't my problem.

I have a picture attached of the cliffside, if you'd like to take a look at it. I guess this is the tree and cliff that the truck whacked (surveyor took the photo). This project worries me more a bit more at this point because of the property issues and the slope.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

I see a lot oF lawyers in your future!!

 

[gtsurfbum]

More of a civil site issue on this first project, but here's a look at our proposed design.

I think it's a little ambitious, given the brittle appearance of the shale on this cliff. That, and I think the brush is probably holding it (the cliff) together. I also think there should be channel up above the cut slopes to divert water towards the stream, to prevent erosion on the new slopes.

But adding a channel would push the LOD across the fence line, and which I have been told (by both boss and the one time I actually met the client) would "complicate the project." That is why the slope is 0.8:1, or 53 degrees.

 

[IRstuff]

It's incumbent on the owner to defend his turf. If he's absent, then it's on him. There is a tradition of ad hoc ROWs becoming codified because the owners didn't prevent people from using their property; eventually, when the owner does attempt to retrieve their property, after many years, they tend to lose in court.

TTFN
faq731-376

 

[SNORGY]

I like Ron's suggestion.

You could provide a professionally-endorsed "Issued For Design" set of drawings with a "NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" red stamp somewhere in the white (or blue) space. Done that before.

Nothing needs to hold up design.

That said, where I am from, legally nobody can so much as start scooping topsoil with a Coleman camping shovel if it is intended to be part of a road or bridge modification without all notifications and approvals in place. Meanwhile, you are at liberty to draw pretty much whatever you want on paper.

 

[McLJ]

"That said, where I am from, legally nobody can so much as start scooping topsoil with a Coleman camping shovel if it is intended to be part of a road or bridge modification without all notifications and approvals in place. Meanwhile, you are at liberty to draw pretty much whatever you want on paper." ~ Snorgy

The same applies where i am, BUT in rural parts of country, despite what the rules say, much gets done without permit or permission.

Where I was raised in Wyoming, a property owner with a large parcel may not realized unauthorized work is being done and may not discover the work for weeks or even months later.

I'm know I am covering the same ground as previous posters, but I think it's important to stress:
1. Trespass is never legal.
2. If the client is truly considering what you have described, the client is planning to trespass and the intent is premeditated and no accident.
3. If the client has legal issues with this behavior down the road, and it is found you/your firm was aware of the trespass intent, you/your firm will be a party to any legal action - trust me on this - I was once married to a lawyer.
4. Inform your boss in writing that you do not approve of this approach, ensure a copy is included in the project file and keep a copy for your records.
5. What your boss does with this information becomes his problem - I hope.

It's far better to respect your boss than to like him. I think perhaps it's time to find a new job.

 

[TomDOT]

IRstuff: That may be legal, but I still consider it theft.

 

[beej67]

I was highly confused by this thread until I saw the words "West Virginia" on the drawings.



Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com

 

[gtsurfbum]

Thanks again to everyone for the input.

Just for a quick update, I went with Ron's suggestion on the culvert project. I was going out of town last week and needed to make a last-minute decision, and I wasn't able to contact our engineer.

I was submitting a layout (not a set of plans), but it was to the client. The note I put on the sheet said:

"Construction of this project may require permissions, permits, and easmements not displayed on this design"

Since then, I've heard that they have been meeting with the state highway department for this project, so they are starting to go about things in a more professional manner.


As for the road widening project (w/ cliff and property issues), I've heard that it's been completed. Apparently the rig was able to pass through, so I'm guessing they just chipped enough material away until it was able to pass.

I use a software to model how the drill rig would turn (since I've never seen the thing and I just have a few rough dimensions). I can't say whether or not they took any property for ROW, but they definitely finished this job in a hurry. Since it would've required the removal of around 2000 CY of rock, I'm guessing the drill rig was able to turn much sharper than I modeled. Also, since there was some "wiggle room" in there, I'm guessing they might have been able to get by within the existing ROW. Although, I haven't been out there or seen any pictures so I can't say for sure. However, I think it's clear that this was the "shadier" of the two projects...

** On a side note, I am actively seeking a new position in civil/transportation/environmental engineering and would be interested in any suggestions. You can see my resume below. I graduated from GA Tech in 2009 with a Master's in Transportation, and I'm looking to sit for the PE in March 2013. Preferably, I would like to work in GA or FL, but I would be open to other options as well. And yes, I can easily relocate away from WV with no trouble!

 

[MiketheEngineer]

One thing I see in young engineers - they want ALL the answers RIGHT now... and often (40 years in) I do also. BUT I have learned as maybe you just did - ask a few GOOD questions and other people will often pick the right and righteous solution.

In other words - be patient - you are not the Man of Lamoncha - but can and will guide things in your own way when you must.