Kent
> Yes, if I'm ever so foolish as to subcontract with TxDOT to do work for them, I'll keep that in mind.
My understanding is that the MUTCD rules apply to anyone working in the right-of-way of a highway that receives federal funds, not just to workers employed on a federal highway project.
In my home county, the highway designation includes many -- if not all -- county roads, since federal funds are often used to supplement local funds for repair and maintenance projects. What I don't know is whether the requirement persists after the project is complete and federal funding ends, though I expect that there's some rule on the county's books that requires compliance with the MUTCD.
So far I haven't been busted for having a non-compliant vest, but I figure it's coming.
Kent
> My understanding is that the MUTCD rules apply to anyone working in the right-of-way of a highway that receives federal funds, not just to workers employed on a federal highway project.
Okay, but doesn't enforcement of that presuppose that some constable or deputy sheriff will have a clue as to which State highways receive federal funding? More importantly, if the federal funding is limited to just the maintenance of the pavement, where is the authority to extend the rule to the entire right-of-way? In Texas, many State highways run in easements only. The strips of land were not acquired in fee simple. So, the desire to limit what a landowner or his land surveyors may do within land that he still owns is an extra-constitutional taking of some right not granted by the original conveyance.
> So far I haven't been busted for having a non-compliant vest, but I figure it's coming.
Actually, I had one TxDOT guy give me some static about not having the "INCREASE SPEED FOR SURVEYORS IN R-O-W AHEAD" signs out, but I told him that I'd contacted the District Office (which I did) and was informed by one of the engineers (which I was) that if you weren't a TxDOT contractor, you were under no obligation to put the signs up so that motorists would know to speed up and give you a run for your money.
> The back pocket is for a folding garden saw, extra water and sometimes my sandwich (lunch).
I would never carry your lunch in the back pocket of my Filson. As for extra water, that's what canteens are for. If you need more water than your canteen holds, it's time to buy a larger canteen.
Kent
Whenever I see a SURVEY CREW sign I think, "Oh how nice, they are doing a survey of the motorist's highway experience today."
Typically even the inmate weed eater crew has more safety equipment than the survey crew.
Kent
> Typically even the inmate weed eater crew has more safety equipment than the survey crew.
I can see that if a survey were being made along the pavement or shoulders of a highway, that it probably would be impossible to have too much safety equipment. However, virtually all land survey operations I engage in along highways are in the vicinity of the right-of-way line and so far off the pavement that it would be quite a challenge for a motorist to follow in a vehicle.
Kent
Even the Caltrans Survey Crew has one SURVEY CREW sign about 6 miles before the Surveyor usually set up on the shoulder with no much in the way of other warning devices.
Sometimes on rural routes the sign is actually almost in the vicinity of the crew.
Kent
> Sometimes on rural routes the sign is actually almost in the vicinity of the crew.
My rule of thumb on county roads is 0.2 mile from sign to site. I figure that gives the drivers enough time to see the crew (usually just me), but not so much that they lose focus. It also keeps the sign-shuttle time down to a reasonable amount. And it's also more-or-less compliant with the MUTCD.
Kent
I have noticed on some higher speed highways they have started to add signs.
Say one at the MUTCD distance and sometimes 2 or 3 more as you get closer.
I wonder why Surveyors are the only people working in the R/W with a task specific sign. Everyone else uses either ROAD WORK AHEAD or SHOULDER WORK AHEAD.
Kent,
It sure looks like you need some flo-orange in your world. At first glimpse that photo appears to be something straight out of a Tony Hillerman novel. It almost needs a caption like "About the author".
Something to consider would be the durability of the vest. I can't count how many shirts and jeans i've lost to fences and thorns.
Kent
> I have noticed on some higher speed highways they have started to add signs.
>
> Say one at the MUTCD distance and sometimes 2 or 3 more as you get closer.
>
> I wonder why Surveyors are the only people working in the R/W with a task specific sign. Everyone else uses either ROAD WORK AHEAD or SHOULDER WORK AHEAD.
I remember Florida DOT required at least 3 sets of signs for every direction of traffic. So you needed a minimum of 6 signs for the roadway and 12 for a four-way intersection. And I think that the 1st sign had to have flags and the signs were placed 500 feet apart from each other. They were starting to get picky about what kind of sign stands we used as well. They had to be crash tested. About that time, I left the DOT world.
> Something to consider would be the durability of the vest. I can't count how many shirts and jeans i've lost to fences and thorns.
Yes, that is the strong point of the Filson cotton tin cloth Cruiser vests. They don't rip very easily at all, so if you're wearing one, you're unlikely to tear a shirt when you step through a barbed wire fence.
Kent
> I remember Florida DOT required at least 3 sets of signs for every direction of traffic. So you needed a minimum of 6 signs for the roadway and 12 for a four-way intersection. And I think that the 1st sign had to have flags and the signs were placed 500 feet apart from each other....
It might be ironic; but I would say that is OverKill.....:snarky:
These pants are surprisingly durable and rip free:
http://bdu.com/mens-genuine-gear-lightweight-tactical-pants/black#/15787/657,693/1
My old boss would wear a Filson vest like that. He used to do quite a bit of work in Alaska which I think is where he started wearing them. In Florida, it looks like it would be to hot for me. When he would work in the summer with it, he would often not wear a shirt. I have never been to Texas. Does it get as hot and humid as it does in Florida?
> My old boss would wear a Filson vest like that. [...] In Florida, it looks like it would be to hot for me. [...] I have never been to Texas. Does it get as hot and humid as it does in Florida?
I'm under the impression that it doesn't get all that hot in Florida. "Hot" by Texas standards means over 105degF. Below that, it's "warm". As for humid, I doubt that where I like to work in Central and West Texas that it gets humid by Florida standards. Houston and East Texas would be another story.
Kent
It has nothing to do if you subcontract to them, but if you are simply conducting business within their R.O.W. It's a federal law.
Kent
> > My understanding is that the MUTCD rules apply to anyone working in the right-of-way of a highway that receives federal funds, not just to workers employed on a federal highway project.
>
> Okay, but doesn't enforcement of that presuppose that some constable or deputy sheriff will have a clue as to which State highways receive federal funding? More importantly, if the federal funding is limited to just the maintenance of the pavement, where is the authority to extend the rule to the entire right-of-way? In Texas, many State highways run in easements only. The strips of land were not acquired in fee simple. So, the desire to limit what a landowner or his land surveyors may do within land that he still owns is an extra-constitutional taking of some right not granted by the original conveyance.
>
> > So far I haven't been busted for having a non-compliant vest, but I figure it's coming.
>
> Actually, I had one TxDOT guy give me some static about not having the "INCREASE SPEED FOR SURVEYORS IN R-O-W AHEAD" signs out, but I told him that I'd contacted the District Office (which I did) and was informed by one of the engineers (which I was) that if you weren't a TxDOT contractor, you were under no obligation to put the signs up so that motorists would know to speed up and give you a run for your money.
First, at least in our small county, all deputies understand it as they too are required to wear Class II gear in the ROW and they got the same memo. Second, it extends to the entire ROW since federal funding also is used in maintaining the ROW (i.e. mowing).
Kent
> First, at least in our small county, all deputies understand it as they too are required to wear Class II gear in the ROW and they got the same memo.
Yeah, the emergency responders like fire fighters and law enforcement officers who are working along the pavement and in among traffic obviously need the additional visibility. That only makes sense. Common sense also says that someone who is somewhere in the right-of-way that a car can't get to is in a different category.
Self-employed subject to OSHA rules?
> It has nothing to do if you subcontract to them, but if you are simply conducting business within their R.O.W. It's a federal law.
Can you cite a reference for this "law"? The only requirements I've found so far are those of this federal rule:
"All workers within the right-of-way of a Federal-aid highway who are exposed either to traffic (vehicles using the highway for purposes of travel) or to construction equipment within the work area shall wear high-visibility safety apparel."
That does not cover the surveying operations that I do since I am neither exposed to traffic nor construction equipment.
More fundamentally, as a self-employed person, I don't believe that I'm subject to the same OSHA rules that any employees I had would be.
Kent.... to paraphrase James Carville
It's the Humidity Stupid
that gives you the heat index..
