American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report

8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report

1/168

American Society

of Civil Engineers


2/168


3/168

American Societ o Civil Engineers

March 25, 2009

www.asce.org/reportcard


4/168

American Society of Civil Engineers

1801 Alexander Bell Drive

Reston, Virginia, 20191-4400

World Headquarters

101 Constitution Ave, NW

Suite 375 EastWashington, D.C., 20001

Washington Office

202-789-7850

ASCE and American Society of Civil Engineers

Registered in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Copyright 2009 by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

All Rights Reserved.

ISBN: 978-0-7844-1037-0

Manufactured in the United States of America.


5/168


Founded in 1852, the American Society

o Civil Engineers is the countrys oldest

national civil engineering organization.

It represents more than 146,000 civil

engineers in private practice, government,

industry, and academia who are dedicated

to advancing the science and proessiono civil engineering. ASCE is a 501(c)(3)

tax exempt educational and proessional

society.

D. Wane Klot, p.e., d.wre, f.asce

President, American Societyof Civil Engineers 20082009

Klot AssociatesHouston, Texas

Patrick J. Natale, p.e., f.asce, cae

Executive DirectorAmerican Societ o Civil EngineersReston, Virginia

The grades and recommendations o the

2009Report Card for Americas Infrastruc-

ture are determined by a committee made

up o 28 ASCE members, all experts in

their areas o practice. Biographies o each

member are available in the appendix.

2009 RepoRt CaRd foR ameRiCasinfRastRuCtuReadvisoRy CounCil

Andrew Herrmann, p.e., secb, f.asce

Advisory Council ChairmanHardest & Hanover, LLPNew York, New York

BridgesDonald L. Basham, p.e., m.asceStantec Consulting

Louisville, Kentucky

Inland Waterways, Levees

John Bennett, p.e., m.asce

AmtrakWashington, D.C.

Rail

Jeanette Brown, p.e., bcee, f.asce, d.wreStamord Water Pollution

Control Authorit

Stamord, ConnecticutDrinking Water, Wastewater

Charles C. Calhoun, jr., p.e., f.asceConsultant

Vicksburg, MississippiInland Waterways

J. Richard Capka, p.e, m.asce

Dawson & AssociatesWashington, D.C.

Bridges, Roads

Ton Dalrmple, ph.d., p.e., f.asce

Johns Hopkins UniversitBaltimore, Maryland

Inland Waterways

Michael DeVo, p.e., m.asceRW Armstrong

Indianapolis, IndianaAviation

Advisory Council

advisoRy CounCil


6/168 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard

David Gehr, m.asceParsons Brinckerho Inc.

Leesburg, Virginia

RoadsHenr J. Hatch, p.e., dist.m.asce

Oakton, VirginiaStrategic Plan

Brad Iarossi, p.e., m.asce

Association o State Dam Saet OfcialsUpper Marlboro, Maryland

Dams

Dale Jacobson, p.e., bcee, f.asce

Jacobson Satchell Consultants, Inc.Omaha, Nebraska

Drinking Water, Hazardous Waste,Wastewater

Leon Kempner, jr., ph.d., p.e., m.asce

Bonneville Power AdministrationPortland, Oregon

Energy

Otto J. Lnch, p.e., m.ascePower Line Sstems, Inc.

Nixa, MissouriEnergy

Roger M. Millar, jr., p.e., f.asce

Missoula Ofce o Planning and Grants

Missoula, MontanaRail, Transit

Paul F. Mlakar, ph.d., p.e., f.asceU.S. Arm Corps o Engineers

Vicksburg, MississippiDams, Inland Waterways,Levees, Resilience

James K. Murph, p.e., cfm, m.asce

URS CorporationHerndon, Virginia

Dams, Levees

Peter G. Nicholson, ph.d., p.e., f.asceUniversit o Hawaii

Honolulu, Hawaii

Dams, Levees

Robert E. Nickerson, p.e., m.asce

Consulting EngineerFort Worth, Texas

Energy

Thomas M. Rachord, ph.d., p.e, f.asceGannett Fleming, Inc.

Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania

Drinking Water, WastewaterDebra R. Reinhart, ph.d., p.e., bcee, f.asce

Universit o Central FloridaOrlando, Florida

Hazardous Waste, Solid Waste

Thomas S. Slater, p.e., m.asce

Renolds, Smith and Hills, Inc.

Raleigh, North CarolinaAviation

Paul C. Talor, p.e., m.asceOrange Count Transportation Authorit

Orange, Caliornia

Rail, Roads, Transit

Paulo Valerio, p.e., a.m.asce

Marland National Capital Parkand Planning Commission

Kensington, MarylandParks

C. Michael Walton, ph.d., p.e., dist.m.asce

Universit o Texas at AustinAustin, Texas

Roads, Transit

Thomas R. Warne, p.e., m.asce

Tom Warne and Associates, LLCSouth Jordan, UtahRoads

David L. Westerling, ph.d., p.e., f.asce

Merrimack CollegeNorth Andover, Massachusetts

Drinking Water, Inland Waterways

Kevin Womack, ph.d., p.e., m.asce

Utah State UniversitLogan, Utah

Bridges

Brian T. Pallasch, cae, aff.m.asceStaff Contact

American Societ o Civil EngineersWashington, D.C.


7/168

www.asce.org/reportcardPreace

pRefaCe

These challenges are great, but they

can be met. It will take government and

industry leadership, sound technology,

wise community planning, and involved

citizens to make real changes.

A healthy inrastructure will enable

us to remain a strong and prosperous

nation, but only i we move orward

with vision, leadership, and community

involvement and support. We must

work together to develop a path orward

and begin the rst crucial steps. With

perseverance and a common goal, we can

work together to rebuild our once great

inrastructure.

D. Wane Klot,p.e., d.wre, f.asce

President

American Societ o Civil Engineers

20082009

The2009 Report Card for Americas Infra-

structure nds not much has changed

since the last edition our years ago. Years

o delayed maintenance and lack o mod-

ernization have let Americans with an

outdated and ailing inrastructure that

cannot meet our needs.

Inrastructure has a direct impact on

our personal and economic health, and

the inrastructure crisis is endangering

our nations uture prosperity. For the

saety and security o our amilies, we can

no longer aord to ignore the congested

roads, aging dams, broken water mains,

and decient bridges we ace every day. As

a society, we must become better stewards

o the environment through the use o

sustainable inrastructure practices. The

quality o lie or this and uture genera-

tions depends on our willingness to rise to

the challenge.

Civil engineers are stewards o the nations inra-structure, charged with the design, construction,operation, and maintenance o our vital public works.

Inherent in that responsibility is the obligation toperiodically assess the state o the inrastructure,report on its condition and perormance, and adviseon the steps necessary or its improvement.


8/168v 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard

ASCE Description and Advisory Council Roster i

Preface iii

Lists of Figures and Tables vi

Executive Summary 1

Introduction 9

5 Key Solutions 11

Category Factsheets

Water and Envronment

Dams 15

DrinkingWater 25

HazardousWaste 33

Levees 41

SolidWaste 49

Wastewater 57

Transportaton

Aviation 65

Bridges 75

InlandWaterways 83

Rail 91

Roads 99

Transit 107

table of Contents


9/168


Publc Facltes

ParksandRecreation 117

Schools 125

Energy

Energy 133

Appendices

PreviousReportCards 141

TakeActionNow 142

AdvisoryCouncilBios 143

Methodology 148

SourcesorEstimated5-YearInvestmentNeeds 150

PhotographyCredits 151

Acknowledgements 153

Table o Contents


10/168

FIGURE 1.1 NumberoHighHazardDamsintheUnitedStates 18

FIGURE 3.1 TaxRevenueromBrownfeldsRedevelopment

inBillionsoDollars 36

FIGURE 4.1 LikelihoodoLeveeFailure/Flooding

Overa30-YearResidentialMortgage 44

FIGURE 5.1 PercentoMunicipalSolidWastethatisRecycled:19602007 51

FIGURE 5.2 ComponentsoMunicipalSolidWaste

(254milliontonsgeneratedin2007) 52

FIGURE 7.1 CauseoNationalAviationSystemDelays 70

FIGURE 8.1 PercentoDefcientBridgesintheUnitedStates 78

FIGURE 9.1 CommoditiesShippedViaInlandWaterway(bytons) 86

FIGURE 10.1 NumberoAmtrakPassengers(inthousands):19952006 93

FIGURE 11.1 HighwayVehicleMilesTraveled:19952005 102

FIGURE 13.1 VisitstoNationalParks 121

FIGURE 14.1 SchoolConstructioninBillionsoDollars:19982007 127

FIGURE 15.1 ConstructionExpendituresorTransmission

inMillionso2006Dollars:19772006 136

v 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard

figuRes and tables


11/168

TABLE A 2009ReportCardforAmericasInfrastructure 2

TABLE B Estimated5-YearInvestmentNeedsinBillionsoDollars 7

TABLE 1.1 NumberoDefcientDamsinUnitedStatesbyRepairStatus 17

TABLE 2.1 DesignLieoDrinkingWaterSystems 28

TABLE 2.2 WaterUsage:1950and2000 28

TABLE 4.1 DamagesromFloodinginLevee-RelatedAreas 43

TABLE 6.1 DesignLieoWaterSystems 60

TABLE 7.1 Top10U.S.PassengerAirports,20062007 67

TABLE 7.2 Top10U.S.CargoAirports,20062007 69

TABLE 8.1 U.S.BridgeStatistics 77

TABLE 9.1 TheNationsBusiestInlandPorts 85

TABLE 11.1 Top10MostCongestedCitiesintheU.S. 101

TABLE 12.1 TrafcDelayReductionDuetoPublicTransportation 109

TABLE 12.2 RevenueSourcesorTransitFinancing

inMillionsoDollars:2004 110

TABLE 13.1 AcresoProtectedLand 119

www.asce.org/reportcard vFigures and Tables


12/168

ExEcutivE

Summary

The2009 Report Card for AmericasInfrastructure grades 15 categories o inra-structure, including a new category: levees.For the second time, Americas inrastruc-ture rates a cumulative grade o D. While not

all categories are as badly or are plagued bythe same problems, delayed maintenance andchronic underunding are contributors to thelow grades in nearly every category.


13/168

www.asce.org/reportcardExecutive Summary

exeCutive summaRytRends in the gRades

Grades ranged rom a high o C+ or solid

waste to a low o D- or drinking water,

inland waterways, levees, roads, and

wastewater. U.S. surace transportation

and aviation systems declined over thepast our years, with aviation and transit

dropping rom a D+ to D, and roads drop-

ping rom a D to a nearly ailing D-.

Showing no signicant improvement

since the last report, the nations bridges,

public parks and recreation, and rail

remained at a grade o C, while dams, haz-

ardous waste, and schools remained at a

grade o D, and drinking water and waste-

water remained at a grade o D-. Levees,

the newest category, debuted on the 2009

Report Card at a barely passing grade o D-.

Just one categoryenergyimproved

since 2005, raised its grade rom D to D+.

Wr erDAMS: As dams age and downstream

development increases, the number o

decient dams has risen to more than

4,000, including 1,819 high hazard dams.

Over the past six years, or every de-

cient, high hazard potential dam repaired,

nearly two more were declared decient.

There are more than 85,000 dams in the

U.S., and the average age is just over 51

years old. Because o the lack o progress

made in repairing and rehabilitating the

nations dams, this category again earned

a grade o D.

DRINKING WATER: Drinking water

again earned a D-. Americas drinking

water systems ace an annual shortall o

at least $11 billion to replace aging acili-ties that are near the end o their useul

lie and to comply with existing and uture

ederal water regulations. This does not

account or growth in the demand or

drinking water over the next 20 years.

Leaking pipes lose an estimated seven

billion gallons o clean drinking water a

day. Although Americans still enjoy some

o the best tap water in the world, the

costs o treating and delivering that water

where it is needed continue to outpace the

unds available to sustain the system.

HAzARDOUS WASTE: Hundreds o

thousands o contaminated sites exist

across the country, representing millions

o dollars o untapped economic potential.

Redevelopment o browneld sites over

the past ve years generated an estimated

191,338 new jobs and $408 million annu-

ally in extra revenues or localities. In

2008, however, there were 188 U.S.

cities with browneld sites awaiting

cleanup and redevelopment. Additionally,

ederal unding or Superund cleanup

o the nations worst toxic waste sites has

declined steadily, dropping to $1.08 billion



in 2008, its lowest level since 1986. Since

little has been done to clean up these sites

since the lastReport Card, hazardouswaste again earned a grade o D.

LEVEES: TheReport Card s new cate-

gory, levees, earned a D-. More than 85%

o the nations estimated 100,000 miles o

levees are locally owned and maintained.

The reliability o many o these levees is

unknown. Many are more than 50 years

old and were originally built to protect

crops rom fooding. With an increase indevelopment behind these levees, the risk

to public health and saety rom ailure

has increased. Rough estimates put the

cost at more than $100 billion to repair

and rehabilitate the nations levees.

SOLID WASTE: The category that has

consistently had the highest grade on the

Report Card for Americas Infrastructure

is solid waste, again earning the highest

grade o C+. In 2007, the U.S. produced

254 million tons o municipal solid waste.

More than a third was recycled or recov-

ered, representing a 7% increase since

2000. Per capita generation o waste has

remained relatively constant over the last

20 years. Despite those successes, the

increasing volume o electronic waste and

lack o uniorm regulations or its disposal

creates the potential or high levels o

hazardous materials and heavy metals in

the nations landlls, posing a signicant

threat to public saety.

WASTEWATER: Aging systems dis-

charge billions o gallons o untreated

wastewater into U.S. surace waters each

TABLE A 2009 Report Card forAmercas Infrastructure

Aviation D

Bridges C

Dams D

DrinkingWater D-

Energy D+

HazardousWaste D

InlandWaterways D-

Levees D-

PublicParksandRecreation C-

Rail C-

Roads D-

Schools D

SolidWaste C+

Transit D

Wastewater D-

notes Each category was evaluatedon the basis o capacity,condition, unding, uture need,operation and maintenance,public saety and resilience

D$2.2trillion

AMERICASINFRASTRUCTUREG.P.A.

ESTIMATED5YEARINVESTMENTNEED

A = Exceptional

B = Good

C = Mediocre

D = Poor

F = Failing


15/168

Executive Summary www.asce.org/reportcard

year. The U.S. Environmental Protec-

tion Agency estimates that the nation

must invest $390 billion over the next 20years to update or replace existing sys-

tems and build new ones to meet increas-

ing demand. Wastewater continues to be

among the lowest grades on theReport

Card, again earning a D- in 2009.

trrAVIATION: Despite surging oil prices,

volatile credit markets, and a laggingeconomy, the Federal Aviation Adminis-

tration projects a 3% annual growth in

air travel. Travelers will be aced with

increasing delays and inadequate condi-

tions as a result o the long overdue need

to modernize the outdated air trac con-

trol system and the ailure to enact a ed-

eral aviation program. The increasing

delays and the lack o new authorization

or ederal aviation programs have caused

aviations grade to slip to a D in 2009.

BRIDGES: More than 26%more than

one in ouro the nations bridges are

either structurally decient or unction-

ally obsolete. While some progress has

been made in recent years to reduce the

number o decient and obsolete bridges

in rural areas, the number in urban areas

is rising. A $17 billion annual investment

is needed to substantially improve current

bridge conditions. Currently, only $10.5

billion is spent annually on the construc-

tion and maintenance o bridges. There

have been no substantial improvements

in bridge condition since the lastReport

Card, keeping the grade at a C or 2009.

INLAND WATERWAyS: The nations

waterways oer an ecient and envi-

ronmentally riendly way to move goodsacross the country. The average tow barge

can carry the equivalent o 870 trac-

tor trailer loads. O the 257 locks still in

use on the nations inland waterways, 30

were built in the 1800s and another 92 are

more than 60 years old. The average age

o all ederally owned or operated locks

is nearly 60 years, well past their planned

design lie o 50 years. The cost to replace

the present system o locks is estimated atmore than $125 billion. Despite the eco-

nomic savings waterways can oer, little

has been done to improve their condition

since 2005, leaving this category at a grade

o D-.

RAIL: A reight train is three times as uel

ecient as a truck, and traveling by pas-

senger rail uses 20% less energy per mile

than traveling by car. However, growth

and changes in demand create bottlenecks

that constrain trac in critical areas.

Freight and passenger rail generally share

the same network, and a signicant poten-

tial increase in passenger rail demand will

add to the reight railroad capacity chal-

lenges. More than $200 billion is needed

through 2035 to accommodate anticipated

growth. Similar to the nations inland

waterways, rail oers enormous economic

and environmental potential, but ew

improvements have been made since 2005.

This category again rates at a C-.

ROADS: Congestion on the nations roads

is increasing and the cost to improve is

ever rising, causing the roads grade to



decrease to a D- in 2009. Americans spend

4.2 billion hours a year stuck in trac at

a cost to the economy o $78.2 billion, or$710 per motorist. Poor conditions cost

motorists $67 billion a year in repairs and

operating costs. One-third o Americas

major roads are in poor or mediocre condi-

tion and 45% o major urban highways are

congested. Current spending o $70.3 bil-

lion per year or highway capital improve-

ments is well below the estimated $186

billion needed annually to substantially

improve conditions.

TRANSIT: Transit use increased 25%

between 1995 and 2005, aster than any

other mode o transportation. However,

nearly hal o American households do not

have access to bus or rail transit, and only

25% have what they consider to be a good

alternative. The Federal Transit Admin-

istration estimates that $15.8 billion is

needed annually to maintain conditions

and $21.6 billion is needed to improve to

good conditions. In 2008, ederal capital

outlays or transit were only $9.8 billion.

Since investment in transit has not kept

pace with its growing needs, the 2009

grade has dropped to a D.

pc fcPUBLIC PARKS AND RECREATION:

Parks, beaches, and other recreational

acilities contribute $730 billion per year

to the U.S. economy, support nearly 6.5

million jobs, and contribute to cleaner air

and water and higher property values.

Despite record spending on parks at the

state and local level, the acreage o park-

land per resident in urban areas is declin-

ing. While signicant investments are

being made in the National Park Serviceor its 2016 centennial, the agencys acili-

ties still ace a $7-billion maintenance

backlog. Even though some progress has

been made since 2005 to improve the

nations parkland, lagging public invest-

ment means that public parks and recre-

ation still earns a grade o C- in 2009.

SCHOOLS: Spending on the nations

schools grew rom $17 billion in 1998 to apeak o $29 billion in 2004. However, by

2007 spending ell to $20.28 billion. No

comprehensive, authoritative nationwide

data on the condition o Americas school

buildings have been collected in a decade.

The National Education Associations best

estimate to bring the nations schools into

good repair is $322 billion. Without up-

to-date data, the true extent o the prob-

lems acing the nations schools cannot be

known, and thereore schools once again

receive a grade o D.

erENERGy: Progress has been made in grid

reinorcement since 2005, and substantial

investment in generation, transmission,

and distribution is expected over the next

two decades. Demand or electricity has

grown by 25% since 1990. Public and gov-

ernment opposition and diculty in the

permitting processes are restricting much

needed modernization. Projected electric

utility investment needs could be as much

as $1.5 trillion by 2030. The increase to a

grade o D+ is largely due to anticipated


17/168


investments in improvements over the

next two decades, which began in 2005.

Raising the gRades: solutions

The nations inrastructure aces some

very real problems that threaten our way

o lie i they are not addressed. These

problems are solvable i we have the

needed vision and leadership. Raising the

grades on our inrastructure will require

that we seek and adopt a wide rangeo structural and non-structural solu-

tions in every category, including tech-

nical advances, unding and regulatory

changes, and changes in public behavior

and support.

ASCE has developed ve key solutions

to begin raising the grades. They are:

INCREASE ederal leadership in inra-

structure to address the crisis;

PROMOTE sustainability and resil-

ience in inrastructure to protect the

natural environment and withstand

natural and man-made hazards;

DEVELOP national, state, and regional

inrastructure plans that complement

a national vision and ocus on system-

wide results;

ADDRESS lie-cycle costs and ongoing

maintenance to meet the needs o cur-

rent and uture users;

INCREASE and improve inrastruc-

ture investment rom all stakeholders.

Raising the gRades: Case st udies

While the conditions listed in theReportCard mean low grades or all categories,

there are positive examples rom across

the country that demonstrate some prog-

ress is being made. Throughout the report,

case studies o how public and private

organizations have addressed specic

problems are included to demonstrate how

these innovative solutions can be applied

on a larger scale. The case studies or each

category may not contribute to an overallimprovement o the grade, but they illus-

trate that the problems acing the nations

inrastructure are solvable with some

creativity and determination.

histoRy

The concept or a report card to grade the

nations inrastructure originated in 1988

with a congressionally chartered commis-

sion, the National Council on Public

Works Improvement. TitledFragile Foun-

dations: A Report on Americas Public Works,

the councils report issued recommenda-

tions on how to improve the nations inra-

structure. As a way to guide the study, the

authors used the report card concept to

establish a baseline evaluation o the inra-

structure. This rst report card included

eight categories o inrastructure and

assigned letter grades on the basis o peror-

mance and capacity o existing public works.

In 1988, when the report was released,

the nations inrastructure earned a C,

representing an average grade. Among the

problems identied withinFragile Foun-

dations were increasing congestion and



included capacity, condition, operations

and maintenance, current and uture

unding, public saety, and resilience. Thegrade determination was based on both

publicly available data and the subjective

judgments o the engineers serving on the

advisory council.

The 2005Report Card eatured a cat-

egory called Security that sought to rate

the ability o inrastructure to meet man-

made threats. In the our years since that

report, engineers have begun to look at

security in the context o inrastructuresoverall resilienceor the ability to with-

stand and recover rom both natural and

man-made hazards. Since the likelihood o

natural disaster is sometimes much higher

than that o a man-made threat, and resil-

ience must be determined on a system by

system basis, the 2009Report Card now

incorporates resilience as a grading actor

in each category.

the need foR investment

In 2009, ASCE estimates that $2.2 trillion

needs to be invested over ve years to

bring the condition o the nations inra-

structure up to a good conditionan

increase o more than hal a trillion dol-

lars since the 2005Report Cards estimate

o $1.6 trillion. This number, adjusted or

a 3% rate o infation, represents capital

spending at all levels o government and

includes what is already being spent.

Current spending amounts to only about

hal o the needed investment, which

means the U.S. must invest an additional

$1.1 billion over the next ve years.

deerred maintenance and age o the system;

the authors o the report worried that scal

investment was inadequate to meet the

current operations costs and uture

demands on the system. Since 1998 ASCE

has released ourReport Cards and ound

each time that these same problems persist.

methodology

TheReport Card advisory council com-

prises 28 engineers with expertise in the

disciplines represented in the report. For

nearly a year the council worked to ana-

lyze current data and conditions within

the 15 categories, consult with additional

technical and industry experts, and assess

and assign grades.

In assigning grades, the council consid-

ered several undamental criteria. These

above: Crews work to

rescue stranded drivers

ater a major water main

broke in Montgomery

County, Maryland on

December 23, 2008.

Photo courtesy of The

Gazette / Gazette.Net.


19/168


TABLE B Estmated 5-Year Investment Needs n Bllons of Dollars

EstimatEd amEricanrEcovEry FivE-yEar

5-yEarnEEd actual andrEinvEstmEnt invEstmEnt

catEgory (billions) spEnding* act(p.l.111-005) shortFall

Aviation 87 45 1.3 (40.7)

Dams 12.5 5 0.05 (7.45)

DrinkingWater

andWastewater 255 140 6.4 (108.6)

Energy 75 34.5 11 (29.5)

HazardousWaste

andSolidWaste 77 32.5 1.1 (43.4)

InlandWaterways 50 25 4.475 (20.5)

Levees 50 1.13 0 (1.13)

PublicParks

andRecreation 85 36 0.835 (48.17)

Rail 63 42 9.3 (11.7)

RoadsandBridges 930 351.5 27.5 (549.5)

Discretionarygrantsorsuracetransportation 1.5

Schools 160 125 0** (35)

Transit 265 66.5 8.4 (190.1)

2.122 trllon*** 903 bllon 71.76 bllon (1.176 trllon)

Total Need**** $2.2 trillion

* 5 year spending estimate based on the most recent availablespending at all levels o government and not indexed or infation

** The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act included $53.6 billionor a State Fiscal Stabilization Fund or education, as o press time,

it was not known how much would be spent on school inrastructure.*** Not adjusted or infation**** Assumes 3% annual infation

souRCes For source inormation see page 150.


20/168

intRoduCtion

The American Society o Civil Engineers andits members are committed to protectingthe health, saety, and welare o the public,and as such, are equally committed toimproving the nations public inrastructure.

To achieve that goal, theReport Card depictsthe condition and perormance o the nationsinrastructure in the amiliar orm o a schoolreport cardassigning letter grades that arebased on physical condition and needed scalinvestments or improvement.


21/168


intRoduCtionSince 1998, ASCE has issued three inra-

structure report cards and numerous

status updates that depict the current

state o the inrastructure and provide

potential solutions or improvement. The

Report Card has been cited in numerous

articles and academic studies, and thenations political leaders rely on theReport

Card to provide them with clear inorma-

tion which they can use as a guide or

policy decisions.

To develop the quadrennialReport Card

for Americas Infrastructure, ASCE assem-

bles an advisory panel o the nations lead-

ing civil engineers to determine the scope

o the inquiry and establish a methodology

or assigning grades. They then analyze

hundreds o studies, reports, and other

sources, and ASCE surveys thousands o

engineers to determine what is happening

in the eld.

The concept or a report card to grade

the nations inrastructure originated in

1988 with a congressionally chartered

commission, the National Council on Pub-

lic Works Improvement. TitledFragile

Foundations: A Report on Americas Pub-

lic Works, the councils report issued rec-

ommendations on how to improve the

nations inrastructure. As a way to guide

the study, the authors used the report card

concept to establish a baseline evaluation

o the inrastructure. This rst report card

included eight categories o inrastructure

and assigned letter grades based on

perormance and capacity o existing

public works.

When the report was released in 1988,

the nations inrastructure earned a C,

representing an average grade. Among the

problems identied withinFragile Foun-dations were increasing congestion and

deerred maintenance and age o the sys-

tem; the authors o the report worried that

scal investment was inadequate to meet

the current operations costs and uture

demands on the system.

In 1998, ASCE ound that in the decade

since theFragile Foundations report was

released, the overall grade had dropped a

whole letter grade to a D. Moreover, a ail-

ing grade was assigned to the nations pub-

lic school inrastructure, with near ailing

grades in such crucial areas as drinking

water, roads, and dams. The grades sur-

prised even the authors and generated

widespread public attention.

TheReport Card issued in 2001 showed

a slight upturn to a D+ in the overall

grade, but by 2005 it sank back to a D.

What is most telling, however, is the act

that the concerns in the 1988 report are

the same concerns ound subsequently,

such as inadequate capacity and deerred

maintenance.

The grades or the previous report

cards can be ound in Appendix A o

this report.

Introduction


22/168

ASCEsReport Card for Americas Infrastruc-ture seeks to inorm the public and policymakers about the condition o the nationsinrastructure and how best to improve it.Americans owe their economic prosperity,

public saety, and high quality o lie to theinrastructure that serves them every day.

Five Key

SolutionS

raising the grades


23/168

www.asce.org/reportcardFive Key Solutions

five Key solutionsWhile theReport Card points out seri-

ous deciencies in the nations inrastruc-

ture as well as the need or ocused and

visionary leadership and adequate und-

ing, these can be addressed. The key solu-

tions oered by ASCE are ambitious and

will not be implemented overnight, butAmericans are capable o real and positive

change. ASCE urges all o those who want

to continue our tradition o a strong and

prosperous nation to begin by maintain-

ing and improving the inrastructure that

makes us great.

The ve key solutions are:

INCREASE ederal leadership in

inrastructure;

PROMOTE sustainability and

resilience;

DEVELOP ederal, regional, and state

inrastructure plans;

ADDRESS lie cycle costs and ongoing

maintenance;

INCREASE and improve inrastruc-

ture investment rom all stakeholders.

inCRease fedeRalleadeRship in1.infRastRuCtuRe

Americas inrastructure needs bold lead-

ership and a compelling national vision.

During the 20th century, the ederalgovernment led the way in building our

nations greatest inrastructure systems

by means ranging rom the New Deal

programs to the interstate highway sys-

tem and the Clean Water Act. Since that

time, ederal leadership has diminished

and the condition o the nations inra-

structure has suered. Currently most

inrastructure investment decisions are

made without the benet o a national

vision. That strong national vision must

originate with strong ederal leadership

and be shared by all levels o government

and the private sector. Without a strong

national vision, inrastructure will con-

tinue to deteriorate.

pRomote sustainability

2.and ResilienCe

Americas inrastructure must meet

ongoing needs or natural resources,

industrial products, energy, ood, trans-

portation, shelter, and eective waste

raising the grades



management, and at the same time pro-

tect and improve environmental quality.

Sustainability and resiliency must be anintegral part o improving the nations

inrastructure. Todays transporta-

tion systems, water treatment systems,

and food control systems must be able

to withstand both current and uture

challenges. Both structural and non-

structural methods must be applied to

meet challenges. Inrastructure systems

must be designed to protect the natural

environment and withstand both natu-ral and man-made hazards, using sus-

tainable practices, to ensure that uture

generations can use and enjoy what we

build today, as we have benetted rom

past generations. Additionally, research

and development should be unded at

the ederal level to develop new, more

ecient methods and materials or

building and maintaining the nations

inrastructure. Sustainable development

will not only preserve our high quality

o lie and environment we enjoy today,

but improve conditions in the uture.

develop fedeRal,Regional, and s tate3.infRastRuCtuRe plans

Inrastructure investment at all lev-

els must be prioritized and executed

according to well conceived plans that

both complement the national vision

and ocus on systemwide outputs. Goals

o the plan should center on reight

and passenger mobility, intermodality,

water use, environmental stewardship,

and encouraging resiliency and sustain-

ability. The plans must refect a betterdened set o ederal, state, local, and

private sector roles and responsibilities

and instill better discipline or setting

priorities and ocusing unding to solve

the most pressing problems. The plans

should also complement our broad

national goals o economic growth

and leadership, resource conservation,

energy independence, and environmen-

tal stewardship. Inrastructure plansshould be synchronized with regional

land use planning and related regulation

and incentives to promote nonstructural

as well as structural solutions to miti-

gate the growing demand or increased

inrastructure capacity.

addRess lifeCyCle Costs and

4.ongoing maintenanCe

As inrastructure is built or rehabili-

tated, lie cycle cost analysis should be

perormed or all inrastructure sys-

tems to account or initial construction,

operation, maintenance, environmental,

saety and other costs reasonably antici-

pated during the lie o the project, such

as recovery ater disruption rom natu-

ral or manmade hazards. Additionally,

owners o the inrastructure should be

required to perorm ongoing evaluations

and maintenance to keep the system

unctioning at a sae and satisactory

level. Lie cycle cost analysis, ongoing


25/168

Five Key Solutions 1www.asce.org/reportcard

maintenance, and planned renewal will

result in more sustainable and resilient

inrastructure systems and ensure theycan meet the needs o uture users.

inCRease and impRoveinfRastRuCtuRe investment5.fRom all staKeholdeRs

All levels o government, owners, and

users must renew their commitment to

inrastructure investments in all catego-

ries. All available nancing options mustbe explored and debated. While great

strides can be made with sustainable

development and ongoing maintenance,

i we are to make the necessary long-term

improvements, signicant unds must be

invested. The longer critical investments

to improve the operability, saety, and

resilience o the nations inrastructure

are withheld, the greater the uture cost

and risk o ailure. We must develop and

authorize innovative nancing programs

that not only make resources readily

available, but also encourage the most

eective and ecient use o those

resources. Federal investment must be

used to complement, encourage, and

leverage investment rom the state and

local government levels as well as rom

the private sector. In addition, users o

inrastructure must be willing to pay the

appropriate price or their use.

These ve key solutions are holisticrecommendations to improve theplanning, building, and maintenanceo the nations inrastructure, butthey must be applied in a way thatmeets the unique needs o eachcategory. Along with detailedconditions descriptions, the individual

chapters o this book contain specicsolutions or raising the grade in eachinrastructure category.


26/168

DAMS

As dams age and downstream developmentincreases, the number o decient dams hasrisen to more than 4,000, including 1,819high hazard potential dams. Over the pastsix years, or every decient, high hazard

potential dam repaired, nearly two morewere declared decient. There are more than85,000 dams in the U.S., and the average ageis just over 51 years old.

Water and environment


27/168



1

A = ExceptionalB = GoodC = Mediocre

D = Poor

F = Failing


1

EncouragE or require eectivestate dam saety programs that provideadequate unding, sta, and statutoryauthorities;

DEvElop emergency action plansor every high hazard dam by 2011;

Establish a national undingprogram and parallel state programsto repair nonederally owned dams;

incluDE dam ailure inundationmapping as part o the National FloodInsurance Program;

EDucatE the public about damsaety risks;

EncouragE individuals to educatethemselves on the location and conditiono dams in their area.

Facts About DAMS www.asce.org/reportcard

DDAMS

ESTIMATED 5-YEAR FUNDINGREQUIREMENTS FORDams

Total investment needs$12.5billion

Estimated spending$5.05 billion

Projected shortall$7.45 billion



ConDition

Dams provide essential benets, includ-ing drinking water, power generation,

food protection, irrigation, and recre-

ation. They may be publicly owned and

operated by ederal agencies, states, cities

and municipalities or privately owned and

operated by businesses and corporations.

Typically earth embankments or concrete

structures, dams can reach heights o up

to 770 eet and store billions o gallons o

water. A dams hazard potential is clas-sied on the basis o the anticipated con-

sequences o ailure, not the condition o

the dam. The classications include high

hazard potential (anticipated loss o lie

in the case o ailure), signicant hazard

potential (anticipated damage to build-

ings and important inrastructure), and

low hazard potential (anticipated loss o

the dam or damage to the foodplain, but

no expected loss o lie).The National Inventory o Dams (NID),

which is maintained by the U.S. Army

Corps o Engineers (USACE), shows

that the number o dams in the U.S. has

increased to more than 85,000, but the

ederal government owns or regulates

only 11% o those dams.3,5 Responsibility

or ensuring the saety o the rest o the

nations dams alls to state dam saety pro-

grams. Many state dam saety programs

do not have sucient resources, und-

ing, or sta to conduct dam saety inspec-

tions, to take appropriate enorcement

actions, or to ensure proper construction

by reviewing plans and perorming con-

struction inspections. For example, Texas

has only 7 engineers and an annual bud-

get o $435,000 to regulate more than

7,400 dams.3 That means each inspector

is responsible or more than 1,050 dams.Worse still, Alabama does not have a dam

saety program despite the act that there

are more than 2,000 dams in the state.

And in some states many dams are speci-

cally exempted rom inspection by state

law. In Missouri there are 740 high hazard

potential dams that are exempted because

they are less than 35 eet in height. The

task or the states is an enormous chal-

lenge. (See Table 1.1)While the total number o dams is

increasing, the number o high hazard

potential dams is also increasing at an

alarming rate, now totaling 15,237.3 That

represents an increase o more than 3,300

new high hazard potential dams since

2007. This increase is a result o new

development below dams, which is dra-

matically increasing the consequences o

ailure and resulting in the reclassica-tion o dams. This change in classication

requires that signicantly greater saety

standards be met given the greater conse-

quences o dam ailure.

The number o dams determined to be

unsae or decient has risen rom 3,500

in 2005 to 4,095 in 2007.3 O that num-

ber, high hazard potential dams that

are also classied as decient has risen

rom 1,367 in 2005 to 1,819 in 2007.3 The

greatest indicator o the condition o the

nations dams can be seen in Table 1.1 that

demonstrates the increase in the num-

ber o high hazard dams that need to be

repaired compared to the number o com-

pleted repairs to high hazard dams, which

remains fat.3 The rate o dam repairs is


29/168

Facts About DAMS www.asce.org/reportcard

not keeping pace with the increase in the

number o high hazard dams that need

rehabilitation. The gap between damsneeding repair and those actually repaired

is growing signicantly.

Many dams are determined to be de-

cient as a result o aging, deterioration,

and a lack o maintenance. Oten dams

are deemed unsae or decient as a result

o increased scientic and engineering

knowledge about large food events and

earthquakes, and the ability to predict a

dams structural response to such extreme

events, which pose a signicant saety

threat. Many dams were constructed 30

or 40 years ago using the best science and

engineering at the time. But as a result

o the additional 40 years o historical

records and greater abilities to predict

increases in loads on dams and the dams

Many state dam saety programsdo not have sucient resources,unding, or sta to conductdam saety inspections, to takeappropriate enorcement actions,or to ensure proper constructionby reviewing plans and perormingconstruction inspections.

TABLE 1.1 Number Defient Dams in United States b Repair Status

#of #ofHigHHazard #ofHigHHazard #ofHigHHazard

year deficientdams deficientdams repaireddams damsneedingrepair

2001 1,348 488 124 364

2002 1,536 646 163 483

2003 2,004 648 120 528

2004 3,000 979 100 879

2005 3,271 1,367 138 1,229

2006 3,346 1,308 139 1,169

2007 4,095 1,826 83 1,743

SoURCE Association o State Dam Saety Ocials



o a ailure to identiy and notiy people

residing below a dam, and to coordinate

their evacuationhas also increased.

9

However, the number o high hazard

potential dams nationwide that have EAPs

remains at a lackluster 50%. Even worse is

the act that many high hazard potential

dams are unregulated and uninspected.

Approximately 30% o the high hazard

potential dams have not been inspected

within the last ve years (see Figure 1.1).

Federal agencies own or regulate a very

small percentage o the 85,000 dams in

the U.S. but they ace signicant chal-

lenges in terms o oversight.8 As the coun-

trys dams age, downstream development

increases, and better engineering methods

are developed, more signicant rehabilita-

tion will be needed. Examples include the

responses to those events, more dams are

being identied as unsae or decient.

The National Dam Saety Program(NDSP), which was established by the

Water Resource Development Act o 1996,

created a national dam saety program

administered by the Federal Emergency

Management Agency that is designed to

provide incentive grants to states and

training to encourage research.12 While

there have been successes and improve-

ments as a result o the NDSP and stronger

state programs, the saety and condition

o the nations dams have not improved

overall. Successes have included modest

increases in stang, budgets, and dam

saety inspections in some state programs.

The number o Emergency Action Plans

(EAPs)essential plans used in the event

FIGURE 1.1 Number High Hazard Dams in the United States

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

SoURCE Association o State Dam Saety Ocials


31/168

The U.S. Department o Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Ser-

vice (NRCS) has provided technical and unding assistance to local water-

shed sponsors to construct 11,000 project dams (primary purposes being

food control, water supply, and grade stabilization) since 1948most o

these dams were installed under the Watershed Protection and Flood

Prevention Act (PL 83-566).13 While these watershed project dams

provide signicant annual benets, thousands o these dams need to be

rehabilitated: 1,065 watershed dams have already exceeded their design

lie and by 2015 an additional 4,300 dams will have exceeded their design

lie; 1,000 dams need to be rehabilitated due to stricter dam saety standards

as a result o downstream development greatly increasing the consequences

o a dam ailure.

The NRCS has implemented a very successul program to provide assess-

ments, planning, designs, and construction unding to begin the enormous

task o repairing watershed dams throughout the U.S. The success o the

program has been a result o partnerships between the NRCS, local spon-

sors, and state dam saety ocialsleadership and unding provided

by Congress. The design and construction unding is cost-shared65% is

provided by the NRCS and 35% is provided through local participation. To

date, 77 dams have been rehabilitated, an additional 55 have been autho-rized or construction, and another 31 are in the planning phase.

Congress has continued its leadership role by providing $100 million in

the 2008 Farm Bill (mandatory unding) and has authorized $85 million to

be appropriated or scal years 2008 through 2012 (discretionary unding)

to support the Watershed Rehabilitation Program. Over the next our years

(FY 20092012), the NRCS anticipates perorming 400 dam assessments,

processing 250 local sponsor requests or assistance, developing 200 rehabili-

tation plans, completing 170 designs, and rehabilitating 120 watershed dams.

Facts About DAMS 1www.asce.org/reportcard

U.S. NATURAL RESoURcES coNSERvATIoN SERvIcE Watershed Rehabilitatin Prgram



$317 million rehabilitation o Wol Creek

Dam, which is owned by the USACE, and

the major improvements to Folsom Dam,which were jointly undertaken by the

USACE and the U.S. Bureau o Reclama-

tion at an estimated cost o $1.5 billion

through 2019.

In 2009, the Association o State Dam

Saety Ocials (ASDSO) estimated that

the total cost to repair the nations dams

totaled $50 billion and the needed invest-

ment to repair high hazard potential dams

totaled $16 billion. These estimates haveincreased signicantly since ASDSOs

2003 report, when the needed invest-

ment or all dams was $36 billion and the

needed investment or high hazard poten-

tial dams was $10.1 billion.4

The 2009 report noted an additional

investment o $12 billion over 10 years will

be needed to eliminate the existing back-

log o 4,095 decient dams. That means

the number o high hazard potential damsrepaired must be increased by 270 dams

per year above the number now being

repaired, at an additional annual cost

o $850 million a year. To address the

additional 2,276 decientbut not high

hazarddams, an additional $335 million

per year is required, totaling $3.4 billion

over the next 10 years.4

While much progress in identiying

the condition o the nations dams has

been made since the implementation o

the NID, the 2008 ailure o a dam retain-

ing coal ash rom a power plant in Ten-

nessee points out signicant gaps in the

regulation o dams associated with the

power and mining industry at both the

ederal and state levels. Many states do

not have the authority to regulate min-

ing dams, other states only regulate min-

ing dams ater the mining operation hasstopped, and some states regulate mining

dams through departments other than

those that administer the dam saety pro-

gram. At the ederal level there are signi-

cant dierences in regulatory standards

between the coal mining industry and

the metal/nonmetal industries regarding

standards or design, inspection, and the

requirements to provide EAPs or high

hazard dams.

RESiliEnCE

Dams are generally not very resilient

because ew have redundant structures,

many have regional impacts, and only 50%

o high hazard dams have EAPs.

The U.S. Department o Homeland

Security, through the Oce o Inrastruc-

ture Protection, has started addressingthis important issue in collaboration with

the dam saety and dam security com-

munities, ederal and state agencies, and

the entire spectrum o owners and opera-

tors. Given the large number o dams

and their broad range o resiliency levels,

eorts are being made to develop a ratio-

nal prioritization approach or coordinat-

ing protection programs and resiliency

enhancements. Important physical and

unctional characteristics o damssuch

as the consequence o ailure and loss o

critical benetsare considered the basis

or identiying which dams would have

the most severe and long lasting impact i

service was lost (drinking water, hydro-

power, food damage reduction, inland


33/168


When it was constructed in 1964, the

Martinez Creek Dam was designed

to protect agricultural lands. Since

that time, development in the area

has increased and the lake ormed by

the dam is an integral part o the city

o Live Oaks park system. County

ocials applied to the NRCS Small

Watershed Rehabilitation Program or

grants to rehabilitate the dam since its

hazard level had increased rom low

to high. Since the dam was raised and

the spillway upgraded, engineers now

expect the dam to last another 100

years.Photo courtesy o the San Antonio

River Authority.

BExAR coUNTy, Tx Martinez creek Dam N. 5

Following several devastating food events that resulted in

more than 35 dam ailures, the state o New Jersey developedunding programs or the rehabilitation o dams. Two state

bond acts have provided the New Jersey Department o Envi-

ronmental Protection, Bureau o Dam Saety and Flood Con-

trol, with $110 million to administer low interest loans or dam

rehabilitation projects. Twenty-our dams, including 19 high

hazard dams, have been completed so ar; 29 more, including

10 high hazard dams, are under construction; and 45, includ-

ing 11 high hazard dams, are in some stage o planning and

design. Owners o the Skyline Lake Dam applied to this state

program and received $900,000 to reconstruct the concretespillway and stabilize the earth embankment to allow or over-

topping during a storm. Overall, approximately $32.8 million

has been disbursed rom the program to date.Photo courtesy o

New Jersey Department o Environmental Protection, Ofce o

Engineering and Construction.

RINGWooD, NJ Skline Lake Dam



Just outside o Albuquerque, New Mexico, the Piedra Liza Dam today protects

seven times as many people as when it was built in the early 1950s. Analyses in

the early 2000s showed deciencies within the dam and should it ail, as many

as 1,700 residents in the area and 43,000 commuters on Interstate 25 could be

adversely aected. Sandoval County applied to the NRCS Small Watershed

Rehabilitation Program or assistance in 2005 and by 2007 repairs had been

completed.Photo courtesy o the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service.

SANDovAL coUNTy, NM NRcS Rehabilitated Dam


35/168


navigation, etc.). By considering the

impact on all sectorspublic saety, local

commerce, service suppliers, etc.in therisk evaluation process, strategies that

target increased resilience and improved

security can be eectively identied.

ConClUSion

Despite some successes, the overall

condition o the nations dams has not

improved in recent years. This is evi-

denced by the rising numbers o damsespecially high hazard damsthat are

decient and in need o repair as well as by

the limited number o dams that are actu-

ally repaired each year. In order to make

signicant improvements in the nations

damsa matter o critical importance

to public health, saety and welare

Congress, the administration, state dam

saety programs, and dam owners will

have to develop an eective inspection,enorcement and unding strategy to

reverse the trend o increasingly deterio-

rating dam inrastructure.

SoURCES

1 Association o State Dam Saety Ocials.

National Dam Saety Program Successes and Chal-

lenges (2003)


State and Federal Oversight o Dam Saety Must

Be Improved (2007)

3 Association o State Dam Saety Ocials. Sta-

tistics on Dams and State Saety Regulation (2007)


The Cost o Rehabilitating Our Nations Dams: A

Methodology, Estimate and Funding Mechanisms

(2002; rev. ed., 2008)


News Archives. 21 October 2008

www.damsaety.org

6 Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Availability o Dam Insurance, A Report to Con-

gress (1999)


Federal Guidelines or Dam Saety (2004)


Drat Report: Dam Saety in the United States,

Progress Report on the National Dam SaetyProgram Fiscal Year 2006 and 2007(2008)


Emergency Action Planning or State Regulated

High-Hazard Dams; Findings, Recommendations

and Strategies (2007)

10Federal Emergency Management Agency.

Dam Saety and Security in the United States:

A Progress Report on the National Dam Saety

Program Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005


Interagency Committee on Dam Saety Agency

Report on the Implementation o the FederalGuidelines or Dam Saety

12Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The National Dam Saety Program: 25 Years o

Excellence (2005)

13United States Department o Agriculture,

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)

Watershed Rehabilitation Program www.nrcs.

usda.gov/programs/WSRehab/

other Resures:

National Research Council o the National

Academies, Washington, D.C.,Assessment o the

Bureau o Reclamations Security program, (2008)

U.S. Army Corps o Engineers.National Inven-

tory o Dams Overview (2007)


36/168

DRINKING WATER

Americas drinking water systems ace anannual shortall o at least $11 billion toreplace aging acilities that are near theend o their useul lives and to comply withexisting and uture ederal water regula-

tions. This does not account or growth inthe demand or drinking water over the next20 years. Leaking pipes lose an estimated 7billion gallons o clean drinking water a day.



37/168



2


D = Poor

F = Failing


2

incrEasE unding or waterinrastructure system improvementsand associated operations through acomprehensive ederal program;

crEatE a Water Inrastructure TrustFund to nance the national shortallin unding o inrastructure systemsunder the Clean Water Act and the SaeDrinking Water Act, including storm-water management and other projectsdesigned to improve the nations waterquality;

Employ a range o nancing

mechanisms, such as appropriationsrom general treasury unds, issuance orevenue bonds and tax exempt nancingat state and local levels, public-privatepartnerships, state inrastructure banks,and user ees on certain consumerproducts as well as innovative nancingmechanisms, including broad-basedenvironmental restoration taxes toaddress problems associated with waterpollution, wastewater management andtreatment, and storm-water management.

Facts About DRINKING WATER www.asce.org/reportcard

D-

DRinKinG WAtER

ESTIMATED 5-YEAR FUNDINGREQUIREMENTS FORDrinking water anD

wastewater

Total investment needs$255billion





ConDitionS

The nations drinking-water systems acestaggering public investment needs over

the next 20 years. Although America

spends billions on inrastructure each

year, drinking water systems ace an

annual shortall o at least $11 billion in

unding needed to replace aging acilities

that are near the end o their useul lie

and to comply with existing and uture

ederal water regulations. The shortall

does not account or any growth in thedemand or drinking water over the next

20 years.2

O the nearly 53,000 community water

systems, approximately 83% serve 3,300

or ewer people. These systems provide

water to just 9% o the total U.S. popula-

tion served by all community systems. In

contrast, 8% o community water systems

serve more than 10,000 people and pro-

vide water to 81% o the population served.Eighty-ve percent (16,348) o nontran-

sient, noncommunity water systems and

97% (83,351) o transient noncommunity

water systems serve 500 or ewer people.

These smaller systems ace huge nancial,

technological, and managerial challenges

in meeting a growing number o ederal

drinking-water regulations.

In 2002, the U.S. Environmental Pro-

tection Agency (EPA) issued The Clean

Water and Drinking Water Inrastructure

Gap Analysis, which identied potential

unding gaps between projected needs

and spending rom 2000 through 2019.

This analysis estimated a potential 20-

year unding gap or drinking water capi-

tal expenditures as well as operations and

maintenance, ranging rom $45 billion to

$263 billion, depending on spending levels.

Capital needs alone were pegged at $161billion.2

The Congressional Budget Oce (CBO)

concluded in 2003 that current unding

rom all levels o government and cur-

rent revenues generated rom ratepayers

will not be sucient to meet the nations

uture demand or water inrastructure.

The CBO estimated the nations needs or

drinking water investments at between

$10 billion and $20 billion over the next 20years.3

In 1996, Congress enacted the drinking-

water state revolving loan und (SRF) pro-

gram. The program authorizes the EPA

to award annual capitalization grants to

states. States then use their grants (plus

a 20% state match) to provide loans and

other assistance to public water systems.

Communities repay loans into the und,

thus replenishing the und and makingresources available or projects in other

communities. Eligible projects include

installation and replacement o treat-

ment acilities, distribution systems, and

some storage acilities. Projects to replace

aging inrastructure are eligible i they are

needed to maintain compliance or to ur-

ther public health protection goals.

Federal assistance has not kept pace

with demand, however. Between FY 1997

and FY 2008, Congress appropriated

approximately $9.5 billion or the SRF.

This 11-year total is only slightly more

than the annual capital investment gap or

each o those years as calculated by the

EPA in 2002.


39/168

Facts About DRINKING WATER 2www.asce.org/reportcard

The Caliornia Department o Water Resources predicts that by 2020, the entire

state will experience water shortages equal to the needs o 4 to 12 million ami-

lies o our or one year. To meet growing demand and reduce reliance on water

imported rom northern Caliornia and the Colorado River, the Orange County

Water District developed the Groundwater Replenishment (GWR) System that

takes highly treated sewer water and puries it to levels that meet state and ederal

drinking water standards. GWR System water will be between 35% to 75% cheaper

than water produced by seawater desalination and the purication process will

consume about hal the energy.Photos courtesy o Orange County Water District.

oRANGE coUNTy, cAGrundwater Replenishment Sstem



TABLE 2.1Design Lie Drinking Water Sstems

components yearsofdesignlife

Reservoirs and Dams 5080

Treatment PlantsConcrete Structures 6070

Treatment PlantsMechanical and Electrical 1525

Trunk Mains 6595

Pumping StationsConcrete Structures 6070

Pumping StationsMechanical and Electrical 25

Distribution 6095

SoURCE US EPA Clean Water and Drinking Water Inrastructure GapAnalysis Report, September 2002

TABLE 2.2Water Usage: 1950 and 2000

percent

1950 2000 cHange

Population (Millions) 93.4 242 159%

Usage (Billions o Gallons per Day) 14 43 207%

Per Capita Usage (Gallons per Person per Day) 149 179 20%

SoURCE US EPA Clean Water and Drinking Water Inrastructure GapAnalysis Report, September 2002


41/168


RESiliEnCE

Drinking water systems provide a criticalpublic health unction and are essential to

lie, economic development, and growth.

Disruptions in service can hinder disaster

response and recovery eorts, expose the

public to water-borne contaminants, and

cause damage to roadways, structures,

and other inrastructure, endangering

lives and resulting in billions o dollars

in losses.

The nations drinking-water systemsare not highly resilient; present capa-

bilities to prevent ailure and properly

maintain or reconstitute services are inad-

equate. Additionally, the lack o invest-

ment and the interdependence on the

energy sector contribute to the lack o

overall system resilience. These short-

comings are currently being addressed

through the construction o dedicated

emergency power generation at key drink-ing water utility acilities, increased

connections with adjacent utilities or

emergency supply, and the develop-

ment o security and criticality crite-

ria. Investment prioritization must take

into consideration system vulnerabilities,

interdependencies, improved eciencies

in water usage via market incentives, sys-

tem robustness, redundancy, ailure con-

sequences, and ease and cost o recovery.

The question is not whetherthe ederal government shouldtake more responsibility ordrinking water improvementsbut how it should take moreresponsibility.



The Louisville Water Company has proposed $11 million in projects that

could be unded as part o the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

(P.L. 111-005). The projects would rehabilitate 75 miles o water main to extend

the useul lie o the system and reduce water main breaks. In addition, 9.5 miles

o water main would be replaced to improve water quality, re hydrant fow and

reduce maintenance. Together, the projects would support 101 jobs.

LoUISvILLE, Ky Amerian Reer and ReinestmentAt Funding

PoRT ANGELES,WA

Dwntwn Water Main Prjet

In 2008, the City o Port Angeles com-

pleted a project to replace the water

mains and sidewalks in the downtown

area. The replacement water mains

bring the citys downtown area to a

service level that meets current re

fow standards, reduces seismic risks

and helps prevent water main ail-

ures due to age. The original watermains were installed in 1914. In con-

junction with the water main replace-

ment, many sidewalks were replaced

with pavers that enhance the down-

town appearance. Also, new conduit

and wiring was installed or street and

pedestrian lighting.Photos courtesy o

the City o Port Angeles.


43/168


ConClUSion

New solutions are needed or whatamounts to nearly $1 trillion in critical

drinking water and wastewater invest-

ments over the next two decades. Not

meeting the investment needs o the next

20 years risks reversing public health,

environmental, and economic gains o the

past three decades.

Without a signicantly enhanced

ederal role in providing assistance to

drinking water inrastructure, criticalinvestments will not occur. Possible solu-

tions include grants, trust unds, loans

and incentives or private investment. The

question is not whether the ederal gov-

ernment should take more responsibility

or drinking water improvements but how

it should take more responsibility.

The case or ederal investment is

compelling. Needs are large and unprec-

edented; in many locations, local sourcescannot be expected to meet this challenge

alone, and because waters are shared

across local and state boundaries, the

benets o ederal help will accrue to the

entire nation. Clean and sae water is no

less a national priority than are national

deense, an adequate system o interstate

highways, and a sae and ecient aviation

system. These latter inrastructure

programs enjoy sustainable, long-term

ederal grant programs; under current

policy, water and wastewater inrastruc-

ture do not.

SoURCES

1 Congressional Research Service, Sae Drink-ing Water Act: Selected Regulatory and Legislative

Issues, April 2008.

2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The

Clean Water and Drinking Water Inrastructure

Gap Analysis, September 2002.

3 U.S. Congressional Budget Oce,Future

Investment in Drinking Water and Wastewater

Inrastructure, May 2002.

4 G. Tracy Mehan, Testimony beore the

Subcommittee on Water Resources and

Environment, U.S. House Transportation and

Inrastructure Committee, February 2009.http://transportation.house.gov/hearings/

hearing.aspx.


44/168

Hazardous Waste

Redevelopment o brownelds sites over thepast ve years generated an estimated 191,338new jobs and $408 million annually in extrarevenues or localities. In 2008, however,there were 188 U.S. cities with brownelds

sites awaiting cleanup and redevelopment.Additionally, ederal unding or Superundcleanup o the nations worst toxic waste siteshas declined steadily, dropping to $1.08 billionin 2008, its lowest level since 1986.



45/168



3


D = Poor

F = Failing


3

rEauthorizE ederal Superundtaxes on chemicals, petroleum, andcorporations or create another ederalunding mechanism to revive theHazardous Substance Superund cleanup

program and remove the cost o cleanuprom the general und;

implEmEnt legislationincentiveprograms, or examplethat considersenvironmental costs and encouragesthe reduction o hazardous waste at thesource and the design o reuse programs;

Enact the Brownelds Revitalization

and Environmental Restoration Act tohelp localities redevelop browneld sites;

continuE to und existing ederalprograms to nance the revitalization oAmericas brownelds;

crEatE a Brownelds RedevelopmentAction Grant program within theEnvironmental Protection Agency toprovide investment unds or localgovernments that would allow privateinvestments to be leveraged in order tohelp preserve armland and open spaces.

Facts About HAzARDouS WASTE www.asce.org/reportcard

DHAzARDoUS WAStE

ESTIMATED 5-YEAR FUNDINGREQUIREMENTS FORHazarDous waste

anD soliD waste

Total investment needs$77billion





ConDitionS

SuperfudSince Congress enacted the Compre-

hensive Environmental Response, Com-

pensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or

Superund) in December 1980, correc-

tive action has been taken at thousands

o contaminated sites across the country.

However, nearly 30 years o ederal atten-

tion to cleaning up contaminated sites has

done little to reduce the problem. As oNovember 2008, 1,255 sites were listed on

the National Priorities List (NPL), down

only slightly rom 1,273 sites in 2004, and

another 9,957 sites were awaiting evalua-

tion or possible listing.3

While the number o sites remains

relatively constant, ederal unding dur-

ing the last 20 years has systematically

decreased. When it was enacted, CERCLA

established the Superund Trust Fund,which was unded by a corporate envi-

ronmental income tax and excise taxes

on petroleum and specied chemicals.

The trust und received approximately

$1.5 billion per year beore the legisla-

tive authority authorized to collect the

taxes expired on December 31, 1995. While

there has been some interest in reinstat-

ing the taxes, there has been little legisla-

tive action. Superund cleanup is currently

unded through the ongoing appropria-

tions process.4

Between scal years 1981 and 2005

Congress appropriated $29.3 billion to aid

in the cleanup o hazardous waste sites

under Superund. Billions more were

appropriated to clean up leaking under-

ground storage tanks and brownelds

sites. The states have also contributed bil-lions to hazardous-waste cleanups. Even

as the need has grown, annual congres-

sional appropriations or Superund have

steadily declined in recent years ater

topping $2 billion in scal year 1998.

The appropriation or both scal years

2007 and 2008 was $1.08 billion, the low-

est level since scal year 1986.2 Higher

unding levels have been proposed in the

last two years but have not been enactedbecause o incomplete congressional

appropriations processes, which result in

the same level o unding being carried on

rom the previous year.

The Environmental Protection Agen-

cys (EPA) 2004 report Cleaning up the

Nations Wastes Sites estimated that as

many as 350,000 contaminated sites

will require cleanup during the next 25

years. Assuming that current regulationsand practices remain the same, it could

cost as much as $250 billion to clean up

those sites.5 No updated data have been

released, but current cleanup costs could

be much higher when infation is taken

into account.

Meanwhile, the pace o cleanups

is slowing. For much o the 1990s the

EPA averaged more than 70 construction-

complete sites per year. However, since

2000 the number o newly completed sites

has decreased dramatically. In scal year

2003 there were just 40 NPL sites deemed

to be complete, and in 2007 and 2008 the

EPA reported that only 24 and 30 sites

were completed, respectively.6


47/168

Facts About HAzARDouS WASTE 3www.asce.org/reportcard

AUSTIN, Tx Gre Landfll

In 2004, the Rhizome Collective received a $200,000 Brownelds Cleanup

Grant rom the EPA to remediate and restore the 9.8-acre Grove Landll site.

The site included a ormer landll, which was open rom 1967 to 1970 and then

subjected to illegal dumping or approximately 15 years ollowing its closure.

Subsequent tests revealed the presence o harmul chemicals and other materi-

als. O Austins 656,562 residents at the time, 39,105 lived in the area surrounding

the Grove Landll site. The collective implemented a green remediation strategy

or the cleanup, which included salvaging wood scraps and concrete to be used

or erosion control, chipping wood to create mulch or recreational trails, recy-

cling 31.6 tons o metal, salvaging concrete to be used as ll or building inra-

structure, and powering equipment with biouel generators and photovoltaic

panels. Following the cleanup, the site was turned into an environmental educa-

tion park that promotes sustainable concepts.

BrwfedsAcross the country, hundreds o thou-

sands o ormer industrial and commer-cial sites potentially containing hazardous

waste sit idle awaiting remediation. Most

o these abandoned or underutilized acili-

ties are in urban areas. Shits in resources,

industries, technical expertise, and wealth

are the primary cause or environmental

degradation and loss o economic viability.

Remediated browneld sites, however,

can provide improvements in health and

public saety, environmental benets, and

economic development.

According to a survey by the U.S. Con-

erence o Mayors, there were 24,896

browneld sites awaiting redevelopment

in 2008 in 188 cities nationwide. In addi-

tion, more than 150 cities had successully

redeveloped 1,578 browneld sites, return-

More than 150 cities had successullyredeveloped 1,578 browneld sites,returning more than 10,000 acresto economic productivity in 2007.These actions resulted in $408million in new municipal revenues in62 cities and more than 191,338 jobs

a dramatic increase rom $90 millionand 83,000 jobs in 2004.


48/168

FIGURE 3.1 Ta Reenue rm Brwnfelds Redeelpmentin Billins Dllars

SoURCE US Conerence o Mayors, Recycling Americas Land: 2008 Brownelds Redevelopment Report

2007

2006

2005

nActual revenue nConservative estimate nOptimistic estimate

The nations mayors estimate that with additional unding or brownelds

redevelopment, ar more tax revenues could be realized.

36 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard

ing more than 10,000 acres to economic

productivity. These actions resulted in

$408 million in new municipal revenuesin 62 cities and more than 191,338 jobsa

dramatic increase rom $90 million and

83,000 jobs in 2004.1

O the 188 cities with idle brownelds,

148 reported that a total o 576,373 new jobs

and as much as $1.9 billion annually could

be generated i the sites were redeveloped.1

The countrys mayors identied insu-

cient unding, environmental assessment,

lack o money or demolition and liabilityconcerns as the leading obstacles to rede-

velopment. Currently, 3,282 sites in 150

cities have been mothballeddesignated

by developers or owners as having no

chance o redevelopment.1

The pace o cleanups is slowing.For much o the 1990s theEPA averaged more than 70construction-complete sitesper year. However, since 2000

the number o newly completedsites has decreased dramatically.


49/168


Ater a century o sitting at the hub o the areas timber industry, the Sequim

Bay Estuary in northwest Washington State suered rom sediment pollu-

tion and habitat degradation. Ater receiving a Brownelds Cleanup Grant

rom the EPA and partnering with state, local, and private stakeholders, the

Jamestown SKlallam Tribe began restoring the estuarys natural eatures

as part o its plan to clean up the entire Sequim Bay. The project removed 99

creosote pilings that were used to store timber waiting to be shipped out to

sea as well as contaminated soil and solid waste, restoring an 82-acre area

to its natural ecosystem. Since the cleanups completion in 2005, the area is

experiencing increased economic benets rom tourism and shing.7

Photo courtesy o the Jamestown SKlallam Tribe.

SEqUIM BAy, WA Seuim Ba Estuar Restratin



RESiliEnCE

In order to be resilient, browneld sites

must be sustainable, ensuring that needs

o both current and uture generations

are met. Future investments must address

innovative technologies, security, and lie-

cycle maintenance o the sites. A resilience

strategy that addresses both disposal and

cleanup o existing sites can help improve

public perception in accepting the cre-

ation and location o new waste disposal

acilities.

Decades o industrial activity in a

downtown area o Providence contam-

inated a seven-acre site with lead, arse-

nic, and other hazardous substances.

In 2006, the nonprot educational

corporation Meeting Street secured

a $200,000 Brownelds Cleanup

Grant rom the EPA, which paid or

site remediation. The group also

secured unding rom government

and private sources to build a new

educational acility. The center, built

to Leadership in Energy and Envi-

ronmental Design (LEED) standards,

includes an elementary school and a

middle school as well as special ser-

vices or disabled and low-income stu-

dents and other amenities available or

community use.7Photo courtesy o the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

PRovIDENcE, RI Brwnfeld cleanup

ConClUSion

Hazardous waste sites across the coun-

try hold enormous potential or economic

growth and community redevelopment.

However, we risk losing access to those

benets i unding is not increased and the

pace o remediation is not accelerated. To

restore these sites to a sae and usable con-

dition, both public and private organiza-

tions must work together.


51/168


SoURCES

1 U.S. Conerence o Mayors,Recycling Ameri-cas Land: A National Report on Brownfelds

Redevelopment Volume VII, January 2008.

2 Budget o the United States Government,

Government Printing Oce Access:

www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/browse.html.

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

National Priorities List, U.S.: www.epa.gov/

superund/sites/npl/index.htm.

4 U.S. Congressional Research Service,

Superund Taxes or General Revenues: Future

Funding Issues or the Superund Program,

February, 2008.5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Cleaning up the Nations Waste Sites, 2004:

www.clu-in.org/download/market/

2004market.pd.


Superund National Accomplishments Summary,

2008: www.epa.gov/superund/accomp/

numbers08.htm.


Clean-up Success Story Pages: www.epa.gov/

brownelds/success/success_cleanupss.htm.


52/168

LEVEES

More than 85% o the nations estimated100,000 miles o levees are locally owned andmaintained. The reliability o many o theselevees is unknown. Many are more than 50years old and were originally built to protect

crops rom fooding. With an increase indevelopment behind these levees, the riskto public health and saety rom ailure hasincreased. Rough estimates put the cost atmore than $100 billion to repair and rehabili-tate the nations levees.



53/168



ConDition

The state o the nations levees has a sig-nicant impact on public saety. Levees

are man-made barriers (embankment,

foodwall, s

Documents

American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report