Upload
hadang
View
214
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
- MINUTES -
Liaison Committee KC District USACE of Engineers ACEC/MO ACEC/KS
September 20, 2012 Kansas City District Corps of Engineers
Kansas City, MO The meeting was convened at 10:00 a.m. In attendance: K.C. USACE ACEC/MO ACEC/KS Steve Iverson Terry Flanagan - HNTB Randy Gorton – Rhodes David Mathews Shawn Goetz - Hanson #Jim Waller – B&V Jim Turner Joe Marsh - Terracon #Rick Worrel – Affinis Eric Shumate Bob Goodwillie – HG Leon Staab – Brns & McD
John Benson #Bob Orr – Olsson Rich McCollum –HDR Jake Owen Ted Hartsig (for Orr) Leon Scheiber (for Waller) Lee Fuerst Bruce Wylie Jason Davis (for Worrel) Ann Zimmerman (Guest)
# Current ACEC/MO and ACEC/KS Committee members not in attendance:
1. Liaison Committee Objectives - Discussion by the group (Discussion handout is attached)
The committee reviewed, reassessed, and recommitted to our mutual goals for the liaison group including:
Sharing program, funding, new technology information, and getting word out on key issues. Sharing open and candid feedback. Continuing opportunity to develop and maintaining relationships between USACE and A/E
partners. Improving the contracting and performance evaluation process. Support a healthy USACE and a strong U.S. Engineering industry through engagement
with the public, legislature, and key stakeholders.
2. USACE Program Update - Briefing by Steve Iverson (Briefing handouts were provided and are attached)
Future funding for USACE KC District's mission in civil works, military construction, and environmental programs continue to be a challenge. Highlights of the programs include: Civil Works
The Civil Works Program for FY13 is projected to be approximately $108M with an anticipated decline to approximately $90M for FY14 and FY15.
Highlights discussed include: o Anticipated less funding available into the future due to discretionary spending cuts.
This may adversely impact the positive trend over past years in spending on levee safety.
o Additionally, while Missouri River aquatic ecosystem restoration has been a key focus, it could also get cuts in FY13.
2
o Sustainability is a priority of the Administration and could see funding for both MILCON and CW in the future.
o Dam safety, a national priority, will likely see minimal funding for the KC Distirct AOR, as area dams are in better shape than others.
o Focus in the future for new projects will be on more Dollars for fewer projects. USACE is adopting a 3x3x3x3 policy for studies, which provides guidance that studies are to be completed in < 3 years, cost < $3M, have a report , 3 inches thick, and have 3 levels of review – if this criteria is not met, projects will become ineligible.
o There is an anticipation that new starts could begin again (the last one was 4 years ago).
MILCON
Kansas City District’s anticipated MILCON Program for FY13 and FY14 will be lean at approximately $225M and $300M respectively. The Afghanistan Program (and additional $180M in FY13) will wrap up in FY13. The MILCON Program is anticipated to return to current levels in FY2015 at approximately $500M+.
Highlights discussed include: o A study of army program funding projects prepared on behalf of the Centers of
Standardizations (COS) and broken out by funding within Divisions was reviewed. The Northwest Division has the largest program in FY 14 and FY15 of all the Divisions. There are ongoing discussions on the role of the COS’s and the District Offices in delivering the MILCON program.
o Planned MILCON IDIQ Contracts include – 3 to 5 A/E IDIQ contracts in 3rd quarter 2013.
o Future District areas of focus includes: involvement with Ft Worth District supporting facilities assessments, a growing role with NORTHCOM (similar to Mobile Districts role with SOUTHCOM) supporting NORTHCOM’s programs, support to Lake City projects, and National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency projects.
Environmental
The HTRW Program continues to be fairly steady at $150M+ over the next 3 years with the EPA trying to push more Dollars to fewer projects.
Specific opportunities for each of the programs are included in the attached summary of FY12 opportunities
Additionally USACE reviewed USACE Engineering and Construction Bulletin (ECB) Directive No. 2012-23, dated 6 Aug 2012, recently provided clarifying guidance on the Source Selection Process and QBS for Design / Build. Highlights include:
One-step contracting only allowed for MILCON on select basis Not allowed if design is required as part of technical proposal Must be approved by HQ (Chief of Construction) Two-step process is "highly preferred" method for D/B projects
3. ACEC Report on Current Issues and Challenges and Areas for Focus / Support toward Common Goals – Discussion by the group.
The group reviewed the status of legislation for WRDA. While there is a strong need, there have only been initial discussions for introducing a bill. A key area for ACEC and members is for continued advocacy for comprehensive legislation.
3
The group reviewed ACEC’s yearly Engineering Excellence Awards, including the Grand Conceptor, Grand, and Honor awards - several of which were USACE projects.
4. Infrastructure Sustainability- Briefing by Terry Flanagan / discussion by the group (Discussion handouts are attached) Terry provided background on infrastructure rating systems. He reviewed one that has
gained considerable attention and acceptance from several key organizations, including ACEC, APWA, and ASCE. The rating system is “envision” developed in collaboration between the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (made up of ACEC, APWA, and ASCE) and the Zofnas Program and Harvard.
5. Source Selection Process and QBS (Qualifications Based Selection) - Briefing by Jim
Turner / discussion by the group Jim Turner shared background on the District’s source selection process, walking
though the groups involved in selection and the rigor and oversight that is put into each selection.
6. USACE / ACEC Student Outreach – Briefing by Ann Zimmerman / Discussion by the group
The group reviewed the history and status of outreach that has included ACEC and USACE volunteer’s visiting schools to make presentations on engineering.
The Committee heard a presentation from Ann Zimmerman, with the KC STEM Alliance, about ways we could support student engineering outreach through various academic enrichment programs such as FIRST LEGO League, FIRST Tech Challenge, FIRST Robotics, and Project Lead the Way.
7. USACE’s new Levee Safety Action Classification (LSAC) system (Corps) and Partnering
Agreement (NWK / ACEC) Based on time constraints, a briefing on USACE's new Levee Safety Action Classification
(LSAC) system and finalization of the USACE / ACEC Partnering Agreement were deferred until next meeting
8. Other Items – no other items were identified
9. Next Meeting: The next meeting is set for January 23, 2013 at the offices of BHC Rhodes.
envision™ Sustainability Rating System Envision™ is the product of a joint collaboration between the Zofnass Program for Sustainable Infrastructure at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design and the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure (ISI). ISI was founded by the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC), the American Public Works Association (APWA), and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).
Introduction Envision™ provides a holistic framework for evaluating and rating the community, environmental, and economic benefits of all types and sizes of infrastructure projects. The Envision™ Rating System evaluates, grades, and gives recognition to infrastructure projects that use transformational, collaborative approaches to assess the sustainability indicators over the course of the project's life cycle.
Who Can Use Envision™ Envision™ can be used by infrastructure owners, design teams, community groups, environmental organizations, constructors, regulators, and policy makers.
Meet sustainability goals. Be publicly recognized for high levels of achievement in sustainability. Help communities and project teams to collaborate and discuss, "Are we doing the right project?" and, "Are we doing the project right". Make decisions about the investment of scarce resources. Include community priorities in civil infrastructure projects.
The Envision™ tools help the design team: Assess costs and benefits over the project lifecycle. Evaluate environmental benefits. Use outcome-based objectives. Reach higher levels of sustainability achievement.
Projects Envision™ Can Be Used On Envision™ has assessment tools that can be used for infrastructure projects of all types, sizes, complexities, and locations.
The Assessment Tools Stage 1 — Self-assessment checklist.
o A self-assessment checklist and educational tool that helps familiarize people involved in infrastructure projects with the sustainability aspects of the project. o Available Spring 2012.
Stage 2 — Third-party, objective rating verification. Public recognition. o Allows the owner or project team to submit the project for recognition. o Includes a guidance manual and scoring system. o Requires someone trained in the use of the Envision™ rating system to be an integral part of the project team to document sustainability achievements. o An independent, third-party Verifier will validate the project team's assessment. o Stage 2, preconstruction, available January 2012. Construction and Operations and Maintenance phases available in mid-2012.
Stage 3 — Tool for complex or multi-stage projects. Available after 2012. Stage 4 — Optimization support tool. Available after 2012.
The People ISI Sustainability Professional
o Someone who is trained in the use of the Envision™ rating system and is credentialed by ISI. o An integral part of a project team who guides the team in achieving higher levels of sustainability, documents project sustainability accomplishments, and submits the
project for recognition. Verifier
o An independent, third-party that works with the ISI SP to validate their assessment of a project. Envision™ Credits and Scoring Module
The Envision™ Stage 2 Rating Tool is made up of 60 credits divided into five sections: Quality of Life, Leadership, Resource Allocation, Natural World, and Climate and Risk. Each Envision™ credit is described in a 2-page write-up that includes the intent, metric, levels of achievement, description, an explanation of how to advance to a higher achievement level, evaluation criteria and documentation, sources, and related credits.
A Few Ways to Get Involved Education and Professional Credentialing
o Take the ISI SP course to learn how to use the rating system and apply for project recognition. o Apply to become an ISI Sustainability Professional and help guide project teams through the Envision™ Stage 2 rating tool.
ISI Membership o Join as a Charter or Sustaining Member for in-depth involvement in ISI. o Other memberships available for trade and professional associations, public sector agencies, and academics. o Members pricing on ISI training materials, meetings, certification application fees, publications, and other products and services.
CREDIT LIST
NATURAL WORLD15 Credits
1 SITINGNW1.1 Preserve Prime Habitat
NW1.2 Protect Wetlands & Surface Water
NW1.3 Preserve Prime Farmland
NW1.4 Avoid Adverse Geology
NW1.5 Preserve Floodplain Functions
NW1.6 Avoid Unsuitable Development on Steep Slopes
NW1.7 Preserve Greenfields
2 LAND+WATERNW2.1 Manage Stormwater
NW2.2 Reduce Pesticide & Fertilizer Impacts
NW2.3 Prevent Surface & Groundwater Contamination
3 BIODIVERSITYNW3.1 Preserve Species Biodiversity
NW3.2 Control Invasive Species
NW3.3 Restore Disturbed Soils
NW3.4 Maintain Wetland & Surface Water Functions
NW0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements
RESOURCE ALLOCATION14 Credits
1 MATERIALSRA1.1 Reduce Net Embodied Energy
RA1.2 Support Sustainable Procurement Practices
RA1.3 Use Recycled Materials
RA1.4 Use Regional Materials
RA1.5 Divert Waste From Landfills
RA1.6 Reduce Excavated Materials Taken Off Site
RA1.7 Provide For Deconstruction & Recycling
2 ENERGYRA2.1 Reduce Energy Consumption
RA2.2 Use Renewable Energy
RA2.3 Commission & Monitor Energy Systems
3 WATERRA3.1 Protect Fresh Water Availability
RA3.2 Reduce Potable Water Consumption
RA3.3 Monitor Water Systems
RA0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements
CLIMATE AND RISK8 Credits
1 EMISSIONSCR1.1 Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
CR1.2 Reduce Air Pollutant Emissions
2 RESILIENCECR2.1 Assess Climate Threat
CR2.2 Avoid Traps & Vulnerabilities
CR2.3 Prepare For Long-Term Adaptability
CR2.4 Prepare For Short-Term Hazards
CR2.5 Manage Heat Island Effects
CR0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements
QUALITY OF LIFE13 Credits
1 PURPOSEQL1.1 Improve Community Quality of Life
QL1.2 Stimulate Sustainable Growth & Development
QL1.3 Develop Local Skills & Capabilities
2 WELLBEINGQL2.1 Enhance Public Health & Safety
QL2.2 Minimize Noise and Vibration
QL2.3 Minimize Light Pollution
QL2.4 Improve Community Mobility & Access
QL2.5 Encourage Alternative Modes of Transportation
QL2.6 Improve Accessibility, Safety, & Wayfinding
3 COMMUNITYQL3.1 Preserve Historic & Cultural Resources
QL3.2 Preserve Views & Local Character
QL3.3 Enhance Public Space
QL0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements
LEADERSHIP
10 Credits
1 COLLABORATIONLD1.1 Provide Effective Leadership & Commitment
LD1.2 Establish A Sustainability Management System
LD1.3 Foster Collaboration & Teamwork
LD1.4 Provide for Stakeholder Involvement
2 MANAGEMENTLD2.1 Pursue By-Product Synergy Opportunities
LD2.2 Improve Infrastructure Integration
3 PLANNINGLD3.1 Plan For Long-Term Monitoring & Maintenance
LD3.2 Address Conflicting Regulations & Policies
LD3.3 Extend Useful Life
LD0.0 Innovate or Exceed Credit Requirements