While I guess it might be somehow possible to burrow this lightweight piping back down into the earth, at least if one were to assume neither it nor its joints have been damaged in the flotation incident (e.g. with some sort of discontinuous concrete weighting, or even full concrete encasement, assuming the pipe could be suitable tied down to accomplish this safely?), it may also be necessary to assess what stress/off-set effects and or abrasion etc. there might be due to the concrete(edges) to the soft pipe and/or its joints in service during/after this is done.
While it is true that all pipes can float (the first incident I ever heard of was to a (I think 66") diameter concrete waterline now a quarter century or more ago, that I think made quite a mess of joints etc.!), I think it is also true that per Archimedes you are more likely to get a flotation problem if the "bulk density" of what you're dealing with is very markedly less than the bulk density of a fluid surround plus any effective (submerged etc.) earthload bearing down on same . It would perhaps also help if the pipe has at least a little out(side) surface texture, that one would think would help minimize any tendency toward vertical movement relative at least to the soil surround?
Unfortunately, I think the specific gravity or bulk density of the particular pipe you are dealing with may well be, even if assumed to be full of water, near or less than that of even pure water, let alone a greater density of soil that might become liquified, or fluid concrete if this is chosen as a weighting medium?
Unfortunately also, it appears a perception promulgated by some that "lightweight" and "cheap" are good can sometimes collide with Engineering reality (or "Acts of God" not necessarily foreseen by Archimedes a couple thousand years ago?) just a few years after original installation??