Travis County Commissioners Court
October 25, 2005
Item 10
Number 10 is to consider and take appropriate action regarding the following property and liability claim recommendations, a, facilities management to settle and b is Austin energy/city of Austin fire department to deny is the recommendation. Mr. Mansour.
>> morning, judge, Commissioners. Item a is a boiler and machinery claim involving an air conditioning unit in the computer room where the servers are located. When the air conditioning unit was being set up and was going to be tested, there was a high pressure free online that rupture, causing oil and freon to spray over the equipment in the computer room. It also set off the interjen testimony, the fire suppression system. And we have repaired that system and recharged it, and the cost of that is $19,292. This is a machinery claim with a 5,000-dollar deductible, so we will be recovering the difference from our insurance carrier, but we would like to transfer funds to facilities for the cost of these repairs.
>> okay. Any questions on a? I thought a was pretty straightforward. B is more complicated.
>> yes. One other point for a, there may be some hidden damage to servers that its is exploring and it may be two or three months before it's a fact. If so, we'll bring that back before the court.
>> the court doesn't really close the door on what we're doing here this morning as far as it's concerned. The door will still be left on open for the damages that may be assessed.
>> for the hidden damages, that's right.
>> item b is a claim filed by Austin energy against Travis County, and the incident occurred September 13th, 2004 when a tnr vehicle was being brought into the airport boulevard office r. Office complex to begin repair to -- to begin paving the driveway. The vehicle came from satellite 2, which is out by mansfield dam, and it managed to manipulate the roadway all the way to airport and 53rd street. When the vehicle turned on to 53rd street, it snagged a cable which we identified belonging to a fiber-optic cable belonging to southwestern bell. The claim filed by Austin energy -- and I知 not sure if an Austin energy representative is here today. Okay. We have recommended denial of this claim since the cable was hanging lower than is the standard, which according to sbc construction, it's a minimum of 15 feet over driveways and 18 feet over roadways. We did measure our equipment before leaving the yard, and again at the scene, and the measurement of the equipment was 13 feet, six impltionz, which is well below where the cable should have been. So we feel the negligence is not on the part of the Travis County and we're recommending denial of this claim.
>> did we get with Austin energy and try to compromise the claim yet?
>> no. We're recommending denial at this point from Travis County. We don't see any negligence on the part of tnr and Travis County on this, no, sir, we have not attempted a compromise.
>> ma'am, would you give us your name please and your response.
>> good morning. I知 chris edwards, assistant city attorney and I知 here on behalf of Austin energy with my client and we're asking that the county reimburse us for almost $19,000 in damages that were incurred in September of '04. The county does not deny that their driver tore down two telephone poles when he impacted that line. We've asked for some evidence, any evidence that it was a low hanging line, and we've been told by mr. Mansour that they have nothing to provide to us. I have a copy of the apd report and the police officer at the time attributed the accident to the fact that while your vehicle may have been of appropriate height, it was also hauling a front-end loader, and that front-end loader was being hauled on the top of a trailer, and the added height is what made it strike the low hanging line, which is the sbc sign, Austin energy having the highest hanging line. So I understand what mr. Mansour is is saying about the height of your vehicle, but the additional elevation by putting a front end loader on the top of a trailer, this accident occurred at airport and 53rd and a half. You can probably at least envision that general area. And so there's any number of construction trucks driving that route with no problem. This was the only incident, and we believe it occurred because of the additional height from the equipment that was being hauled. That's what's reported in the police department. We've been provided with nothing to the contrary, and we're just asking that we be reimbursed for $19,000. We did produce the invoice which shows it's all hard costs. That was the cost of replacing the poles and the line and the contractors that we had to retain in order to do so.
>> do we have a measurement that includes the front-end loader being on our equipment?
>> yes, ma'am. That measurement was 13, 6. And additionally I was on site within five minutes after this accident. And filed the report. Also talking with a.p.d. Officers and the comments from the a.p.d. Officers was we were not in the wrong, and there were numb russ other lines, if you go down third and a half street and you see numb russ other low hanging lines, and he expressed to me that this was just an accident waiting to happen. And he didn't see any fault. This came directly from the a.p.d. Officer while I was on the scene.
>> but in terms of the direct question that was asked of did we make the measurement to include the front-end loader, do we have evidence of that?
>> yes, ma'am. The employee took the measurement on site before we left and then also on site after the accident, after it was cleared.
>> and can we provide that to the city of Austin?
>> I知 not sure we took photographs of us taking --
>> yes, ma'am, we can. The employee that did that we can have a statement given to that effect.
>> so did the employees who made the repairs, what did they take a measurement with?
>> no. The accident would have been cleared by then, Commissioner, so that wasn't possible. But I will say that what we have is the official a.p.d. Report. It says exactly what I have quoted to you. It does not say anything that was just repeated to you. And we have not been provided with any a.p.d. Information to the contrary of what I致e given you.
>> but do you have any idea of the exact height of those lines? In other words, if I知 hearing 13-foot, six inches up, that is, according to what I知 hearing staff saying is below standard. I guess the question is what is standard? Is the state standard 18 feet?
>> your folks have quoted, and I don't --
>> I was asking you, though. What's standard?
>> well, our line is really not the issue, Commissioner, because we have the highest line, which is never struck. It's the lowest line, which brings the poles down and everything with it, but I don't dispute what they're saying that the standard is is 15 feet. If that's what they're quoting involve a problem with it. And there's no way once the line was struck for us to -- for any party to measure what the actual height was. All we can do is determine from the police report that he said that once the front-end loader is on top of the trailer the combined height exceeded the line.
>> the measurements taken before the -- before the vehicle left the yard included the front-end loader loaded on the trailer. Again, at the time they were taken and at the same time they were both 13 feet, six inches. I think by that you can deduce that the sbc cable was below that height.
>> it had to be less than that.
>> and again, we're not saying that Austin energy doesn't have a claim, it's symptomly not against Travis County -- it's simply not against Travis County.
>> I don't see anything in the police report that states that our measurement was incorrect or anything disputing what we say happened here. There's nothing here in this police report that says that we ought to make any assumption that that line was anything other than lower than what our vehicle measured. And we've got things coming and going, and there's nothing in this police report other than saying they were low utility lines. They don't have anything that backs up any claims that the city of Austin is making here. Nothing here.
>> apparently we did our report shortly after the incident. Why don't we try to touch base with the responding police officer and see if he remembers taking the statement?
>> we would be in agreement with that. And also if they could provide to us -- they said they had other a.p.d. Information, we have never received that. We would be happy to take a look at that.
>> why don't we share our backup with the assistant city manager and request that if you would touch base with the police officer and see if he recalls seeing what we attribute to him.
>> thank you.
>> that may help us progress. My other recommendation would be if you could put your heads together between now and when this is back on the agenda. Do we need two weeks?
>> we'd like three weeks to be able to get all the information together that we need.
>> yeah. We may as well know where everybody stands and what everybody says today.
>> we can repost. > you can repost it when it's ready?
>> yeah.
>> we've got policies and procedures in tnr related to vehicles going out on to the road. If you could also provide them what our policies and procedures are and how this was in -- we did what -- we measured before we left. We measured on the scene. So I don't think the measurement is -- but we need to make sure that they have that documentation and knowing what our usual policies and procedures are in terms of putting something out to the road.
>> that's no problem. We can provide that.
>> that would be great.
>> chris, would you all feel differently if you find that when we go out and measure the heights and you all can verify that we were within the allotted distance there or height, do you all think that you would go to sbc? I mean, I知 sympathetic with where Austin energy is. Hey, our poles got pulled down, so we need to be reimbursed. But it really sounds like if we -- if everybody can agree that, do you know what, the sbc line was too low. And somebody needs to take care of that and the people who need to take care of it is sbc, would you all be more inclined to say we need to go to sbc because they're really the ones that caused it, not Travis County? I mean, I壇 be very sympathetic to pay this claim from Travis County if we find that we are in the wrong. But obviously when you just read the backup that we have, if you're convinced after looking at a.p.d. Reports that yeah, the line was below 13-foot six and the culprit here really is sbc, would the city then feel like that sbc is where they need to go?
>> well, we would certainly consider that, but there is a theory called last clear chance. And last clear chance was the driver to have noticed there was a low hanging line. And I believe what he says in the police department is that perhaps he was not paying attention because he was watching a car in front of him that was backing up and he was trying to make sure that he cleared that car. So we've also not been provided with anything to reflect that sbc acknowledges that that line was low hanging. Frankly, we just haven't been able to obtain any information from the county at this point.
>> your due diligence is with sbc. We're not talking about a couple of inches here. If our truck was 13, 6 and their sbc standards for a roadway are 18 feet, that's like me standing up on top of the truck in terms of the differential here. This was not a small distance, this was a big deal. And I think you all have due diligence you need to do with sbc and we've already got our due diligence and the numbers do not help you.
>> I would add that the vehicle again left -- came out of satellite 2, which is out by mansfield dam and transverse add number of roadways to get where it was at when this accident occurred. So I think we're confident that the measurements taken by the yard and again at the scene are accurate.
>> well, I guess in cooperation between entities of government, if this information is already in the possession of the county, I think it would be more expeditious if they just provided it to us. If they were in the wrong, I would think they would have been pursued by sbc by now as well, get reimbursed for their costs, which would exceed ours. So if they have it, if they could provide it, we would appreciate that.
>> and it's my understanding sbc has not made a claim, is that correct?
>> that's correct. And we have been in touch with sbc.
>> and they're normally really good about --
>> give her all the backup. Let's see if we can locate the police officer who was out that day. If he said this have been an accident wait to go happen, these lines have been too low, he ought to remember it. That may help us get down the road. Three weeks.
>> very good. Good to see you ma'am.
>> [inaudible - no mic]. Move postponement of item 10-a.
>> discussion? All in favor? That passes by unanimous vote.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Tuesday, October 25, 2005 4:18 PM