As with many newer technologies, there seems to be two camps of thought when it comes to using trenchless pipe rehabilitation. Some recognize the possibilities and jump right in with both feet. Then there are “wait-and-see” cautious types who can’t help noticing the risk of investment in tools, equipment, materials and training.
They’re not yet ready to make the commitment until they see a rise in demand that will help them recoup their cash outlay quickly. Better yet, they’re waiting for a drop in price they hope will come as more suppliers enter the market and compete.
Either way, there’s no argument that the ability to repair or replace damaged lines without heavy digging equipment is a boon to the industry. These contractors tell why they would – or wouldn’t – choose the trenchless approach to upcoming jobs.
“The obvious decision to opt for trenchless on any job is its lack of physical disruption,” observes Clay Barks, owner of Clay’s Septic & Jetting Inc. in Nipomo, Calif.
“When the customer’s concerned about that, that’s probably why you’ll make the decision 99 percent of the time.
“But there are other reasons, such as utilities located near the work site. I suppose to some extent that’s disruption, but for us it’s more of a liability issue. With trenchless, we’re able to get underneath the utilities and not have to deal with multiple potholes and all that. It just makes the job so much simpler to get done.”
Another instance where trenchless has the upper hand is in projects that affect historical or cultural locations. “We’ve done some rehab work at a bakery in a very old building and another at a Spanish mission in San Luis Obispo,” Barks says. “There were concerns about disturbing very old historic grounds and buildings, as well as the aesthetics of those places.” Barks used trenchless for these jobs.
“We had to replace a pipe at a hotel that was sitting on Indian burial grounds,” he recalls. “Because we used trenchless, we only had to have the tribal monitor there for the original pothole and the finish work. If we had done open-trench work, he’d have had to be there that whole time. The possibility of the job getting shut down would have been tremendous. Trenchless was definitely the way to go on that one.”
In the future, Barks believes trenchless will become the common choice where open trenching would clearly be too difficult, unsafe or unwieldy. But in many cases, he says, “Open trenching is just far too cheap to compete with. If you’ve got the space, you just bring in an excavator and dig across an open field.” Still, he concedes, trenchless is “looking better and better every day.”
“I’m not promoting either trenchless or excavation-type work,” says Barry Hinish, superintendent with Musser Sewer & Septic Inc., a small cleaning, grouting and pipe rehabilitation firm in Petersburg, Pa. “There’s a time and place for both approaches.”
Just entering its second year in the business, Musser burst on the scene in western Pennsylvania as a champion of trenchless technology. The firm is using trenchless to establish a niche in that market.
Nevertheless, says Hinish, “We’re out to meet the needs of the customer and give them what’s most compatible with their particular job concerning layout, utilities, traffic and whatever other considerations there may be.” He believes in fully explaining the options and letting customers decide what will work best for them, as long as they understand the pros and cons of both approaches.
Avoiding surface disruption is always the first objective when the City of Eugene, Ore., chooses trenchless pipe rehabilitation, according to James La Casse, technical specialist I. Running a close second is the reality that “we can install a liner with two people in two to four hours, which is about half the time it would take us to do traditional excavation,” he says. “It’s also just physically a lot less demanding on our people to put a liner in the ground.
“If the pipe is very badly fractured, you don’t want to inflate a bladder in it, because it would continue to crush the pipe. In that kind of condition, we would opt for traditional excavation. We’d also use traditional methods if the repair were right next to a tap or a house connection. Then we’d need to go ahead and dig and replace.”
La Casse says Eugene uses trenchless when environmental issues are a concern, even though traditional excavation would do the job. “Eugene is known as a Tree City USA,” he says. “We’re always very concerned with protecting above-ground vegetation, especially trees, so it’s a good option for us.”
