Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title XIV Chapter 82
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 82, § 40C (2026)

Excavator's responsibility to maintain designation markings; damage caused by excavator

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 40C. After a company has designated the location of its facilities at the location in accordance with section 40B, the excavator shall be responsible for maintaining the designation markings at such locations, unless such excavator requests remarking at the location due to the obliteration, destruction or other removal of such markings. The company shall then remark such location within 24 hours following receipt of such request.

When excavating in close proximity to the underground facilities of any company when such facilities are to be exposed, non-mechanical means shall be employed, as necessary, to avoid damage in locating such facility and any further excavation shall be performed employing reasonable precautions to avoid damage to any underground facilities including, but not limited to, any substantial weakening of structural or lateral support of such facilities, penetration or destruction of any pipe, main, wire or conduit or the protective coating thereof, or damage to any pipe, main, wire or conduit.

If any damage to such pipe, main, wire or conduit or its protective coating occurs, the company shall be notified immediately by the excavator responsible for causing such damage.

The making of an excavation without providing the notice required by section 40A with respect to any proposed excavation which results in any damage to a pipe, main, wire or conduit, or its protective coating, shall be prima facie evidence in any legal or administrative proceeding that such damage was caused by the negligence of such person.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2013–2018 · leading case: DeFelice Corp. v. Dep't of Pub. Utils., 38 N.E.3d 1040 (Mass. App. Ct. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
DeFelice Corp. v. Dep't of Pub. Utils., 38 N.E.3d 1040 (Mass. App. Ct. 2015). · cites it 9× “In addition, the department found that, at both sites, DeFelice had failed to use “reasonable precautions” while performing work in “close proximity” to existing underground utility facilities, as required by G. L. c. 82, § 40C. Before us is DeFelice’s appeal, pursuant to G.”
Burns v. Defelice Corp., 103 N.E.3d 770 (Mass. App. Ct. 2018). · cites it 3× “82, § 40A ; 4 and (2) failed to take reasonable precautions to avoid damage to underground gas lines during excavation, G. L. c. 82, § 40C. These conclusions were based on subsidiary factual findings that (1) the defendants failed to sufficiently identify the area to be…”
Verizon New England, Inc. v. Albanese D&S, Inc., 2013 Mass. App. Div. 13 (Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div. 2013). · cites it 2× “Specifically, the findings mistyped M.G.L.c. 82, §40C as “M.G.Lc. 82 §40A.” We find that the technical error in Verizon’s Request for Findings of Fact, included in the trial judge’s adoption of Verizon’s findings, did not affect the judge’s correct understanding and application…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.