Protecting pipelines, protecting engineers

Regardless of the pipe material used, there are two main issues that the design engineer needs to be aware of: overall lifecycle costs and his or her own responsibility. Owners need to be made aware of the impact of regular pipe maintenance on product integrity and lifespan. Maintenance costs should always be factored in when comparing the different pipe materials available for a given application. 

All water, sewage and drainage pipes should be treated as other than “set it and bury it.” They need periodic observation and maintenance. This is true regardless of the pipe material, though the maintenance methods and frequency will vary from type to type. Some materials used for drainage, such as reinforced concrete pipe and high-density polyethylene/polypropylene, have different maintenance costs. The fact that polypropylene pipe isn’t a structure in its own right places greater importance on correct structural embedment and overall installation, which may increase future maintenance costs.

Each pipe material has its own unique characteristics and these govern the balance between purchase price, installation costs, operating costs and maintenance costs. For example, hydraulic performance may have significant effect on the number of pumps required in a particular pipeline design. The use of ferrous pipe may involve catalytic protection, adding to operating costs. Non-rigid pipes require careful embedment during installation, and concrete pipes can require larger plant machinery to manufacture. Each type of pipe material has its own set of pros and cons, and it’s the design engineer’s responsibility to factor ALL the costs involved — from the drawing board through the calculated life of the pipeline — when selecting, designing and specifying the right pipe for the right application.  

Maintenance is sometimes neglected

The expertise that a professional engineer brings to an infrastructure project is crucial. Their professional judgment is crucial when it comes to selecting the proper pipe material based on the project requirements and site conditions. The engineer’s responsibility is by no means over once the job is done. It’s also the engineer’s job to encourage good maintenance practices, to ensure that the lifespan of the pipeline is optimized. For the owner, good operating and regular maintenance will extend the working life of the pipe and reduce life-cycle costs. 

If things go awry, it’s easy to point fingers. When a pipe appears to have a shorter lifespan than expected, or doesn’t perform as designed, then blame can sometimes be attached to the pipe itself when, in reality, the real failure is the initial improper installation as well as the failure to maintain it properly. In cash-strapped times, it’s sometimes tempting to cut corners or thin out maintenance schedules. Obviously, maintenance isn’t free. But how many of us have an air-conditioning unit or a furnace at home and simply choose to wait for them to stop working before with think about routine maintenance? It takes quite a rich person to behave so recklessly. I’m sure that the majority of us take care to maintain these expensive home appliances. So why should it be any different with pipelines? 

There’s an expression that dates back to a time before the American Revolution: “penny wise and pound foolish.” This refers to the old English currency system in which there were 240 pennies in a pound. The phrase, which is still used today, means to be so stingy with small amounts that it ends up costing you a large amount. The reluctance to spend money on pipe maintenance means the pipe is less likely to perform as designed, thus making it necessary to spend more money replacing the non-performing pipe. In a worst-case scenario, the resulting property damage may even lead to lawsuits and significant financial losses. Penny wise and pound foolish, indeed. 

More serious consequences

The consequences of a compromised pipe can be dire, and may result in damage to property, to roadways, and even to rivers and groundwater tables. When the damage is extensive, there’s a risk of legal liability. So who is to blame? 

In North America, and particularly in the U.S., there’s an idea that we live in a litigious society. Lawyers abound and people sue at the drop of a hat. In fact, this is something of a myth. A reckoning of the top ten countries for litigation, counted by number of cases per capita, shows the U.S. coming in at a modest number five, behind countries such as Germany, Sweden, Israel and Austria. At the same time, the U.S. is top of the heap as the most expensive system for liability costs. 

In recent years, there have been a number of high-profile court cases involving environmental issues. Perhaps most notable of these is the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, where penalties amounted to almost $14 billion. Because of the widespread damage that can occur in the case of oil-rig failure or oil pipeline breach, there may potentially be huge damages incurred by the responsible party. 

Water utility companies have the job of delivering clean water, removing wastewater and cleaning sewage, all vital to the well-being of the community. When disaster strikes, for example in the case of a water main break, damage to property can be significant. So when can the water company be held liable for property damage? 

It’s the job of the water company to install and maintain the water mains, dams, reservoirs, pumps and pipes that serve the community. The utility company can generally be held accountable when there has been negligence resulting in:

• A mains burst leading to flooding
• Significant pipe leakage
• Damage to downstream residents following dam failure
• Failure to shut off water following a damaging leak
• Damage from a leaking outdoor water storage tank

This is by no means an exhaustive list. In addition, communities may be able to demonstrate negligence in cases where compromised pipes may have caused pollution of a watercourse or of groundwater. 

So who, in fact, is responsible when negligence can be proved? Is it the responsibility of the utility owner, or do other stakeholders share part of the liability? The fact is that contractors, suppliers and design engineers can all be held accountable where negligence can be demonstrated. In some cases, the design engineer can even be held individually liable.  

The engineer’s responsibility

The law defines professional negligence as the failure to perform responsibilities to the expected standard. Professionals have a duty of care, and negligence can be defined as the failure to perform this obligation. A design engineer, for example, may be considered liable if he or she:

• Provides an incorrect design
• Provides a report with incorrect advice
• Provides incorrect calculations
• Fails to follow industry standards
• Fails to inspect the work onsite

Again, this is not an exhaustive list. Generally speaking, the responsible design engineer on a pipe installation project can be reasonably expected to specify the right pipe or product for the job, deliver designs appropriate to the required application, supervise the installation of the pipe or product in question, and conduct an inspection after installation to ensure that everything was done correctly and that the pipe or product performs to industry specifications and other requirements.  

The responsibility of the design engineer can extend years into the future. Following the deadly I-35W bridge collapse in Minnesota in 2007, an extended legal battle ensued. The bridge was originally designed by a company that had been acquired by the Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. This engineering company was deemed responsible for flaws in the original design. Jacobs appealed, citing a 10-year limit on liability. The appeal went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which turned Jacobs’ appeal down. Thus, the design flaws that took place when the bridge was constructed in 1962 were found to be at fault, and the engineering company that later acquired the original design engineering firm was found liable to the tune of $8.9 million, to be paid into the state’s general I-35W Survivor Compensation Fund. 

There are now at least 8.9 million reasons to believe in the design engineer’s responsibility. In extreme cases, this can apparently extend several decades into the future. 

Tort, contract or criminal liability

Of course, I’ve been talking up to now primarily about tort liability. This is simply where one person injures another, and the injured party sues for damages. When negligence is proven, the injured party can be awarded compensation as decided on by a court. 

Where the broader public interest is involved, for example in the case of groundwater pollution, then there may be liability under criminal law. Such cases are generally brought by the state against an individual or individuals. Criminal liability and tort liability can often run in parallel, so in a dire case, an individual may be deemed liable both under criminal and tort law. In fact, like O.J., the defendant may win in one court and lose in the other. An engineer may also be found liable under contract law, such as when a design engineer is working under contract to another body.  

The company I work for specializes in the manufacture and correct installation of water pipe, sanitary pipe, drainage pipe and related products. We have engineers located all across North America whose job it is to help and support design engineers from the drawing board to the construction site and beyond. Like 99.9% of design engineers, we understand that we have a duty of care to our customers and to the communities they serve. For this reason, we provide everything from design help to post-installation inspection. 

We understand that our products aren’t the only choice in the market, and our CEO, Ken Thompson, is adamant that we support our customers’ needs above any commercial considerations. In other words, if we don’t make the best pipe for the application, then we make this clear. It’s more important that the right product be selected for the right application than it is to make a shortsighted sale. 

Once the design is in place and the right product has been specified, our engineers are always available to provide field support and service. Our goal is to help you ensure that the job is done right — the right design, the right pipe, the right installation, the right testing and inspection. 

Good documentation 

Good records and careful documentation are fundamental to good engineering. In addition to providing proof that every step has been carefully followed, diligent documentation will help everyone involved, on the current job and in the future. In the case of litigation, a court may order a documentation hold, at which time you’re forbidden to destroy existing documents. All documents may be requested during the discovery phase of any legal proceeding. Courts are strict about this, and it’s in every engineer’s interests to preserve information and documentation to demonstrate a lack of negligence in the event of a lawsuit. 

Careful documentation can also protect you as an engineer by creating a true record of the scope of work you’re contracted to perform. In some cases, a design engineer’s brief may exclude certain remedies, however much needed. These caveats must be carefully recorded as future protection from liability. 

Don’t rely on incorporation

There’s a common misunderstanding that incorporation takes away personal liability. The fact is, licensed professionals are often judged to have a duty of care over and above any contractual relationship. The professional is still personally liable for negligent behavior or wrongful acts, even when the service was performed on behalf of the corporate body. There have been a number of court cases where individual engineers were not protected from liability, even though they were working on behalf of a corporation. This liability can even extend to personal economic compensation. 

Professional liability insurance can be a very good idea. There are excellent insurance plans specifically designed to provide the kind of professional liability coverage you need as an engineer, including compensation for lost earnings and coverage for prior acts. Your professional organization should have insurance company affiliates that can provide discounted policies. 

Partners you can trust

Clearly, the fundamentals of good maintenance and liability protection include documentation and diligence. Engineers must follow accepted specifications and good maintenance practices as well as document their work. It’s a good idea to develop relationships with business partners you can rely on to work to the same high professional standards as you. Our Pipeline Services team offers help every step of the way, including documentation search, field support and more. 

While maintenance practices could definitely improve in many cases, litigation aimed at individual design engineers is still fairly rare. However, when the worst happens, the potential damages awarded could be large enough to be devastating to the unprotected individual engineer. Even a relatively small case could lead to personal bankruptcy.

To end on a positive note, there are, as we’ve seen, several elementary things the engineer can do to ensure protection. In addition to the steps I mentioned above, you can surround yourself with folks that apply the same professional standards as you, who run their businesses with the same attention to detail.

It’s common sense, really. As engineers, we know better than anyone that you need a firm foundation to make certain that a structure will stand the test of time. Diligence, careful documentation, doing the job right and periodic maintenance will always do wonders when it comes to prolonging the lifespan of the pipe and also protecting the design engineer.  

Branimir Kovac,VP, Thompson Pipe Group