Sacramento, CA – February 29, 2012 – The exercise of grading California’s public infrastructure can be a useful one, but as today’s 2012 infrastructure report card issued by our colleagues at ASCE clearly indicates, little has been achieved in the six years since the last report card. In fact, California’s grades have hardly improved since 2006.
With the estimated price tag for maintaining our infrastructure doubling in the last six years to $65 billion, the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC) of California believes that our state’s policy-makers need new ideas for solutions on how to improve the grades and better leverage our state’s extremely limited capital.
“We must invest more in our infrastructure, but it would be very foolish to simply throw money at our problems without thoughtful and sustainable programs in place. We need to make sure that we get the most bang for the buck,” says Paul Meyer, Executive Director of ACEC California.
ACEC California offers the following suggestions for producing higher grades in four key infrastructure areas by 2018:
Solid Waste (2012 Grade: B)
“Solid waste management is a public health issue, and we should be demanding the highest grade possible,” Meyer states. While the combination of public and private sector waste management programs attained the highest grade for any California infrastructure program in 2012, there was no improvement over the 2006 grade. To improve the grade, the state needs to push policies that incorporate recycled materials in purchasing specifications so that products diverted from landfill, stay out of landfills. We should also re-evaluate program priorities and consider factors such as air quality and wear and tear on our roads, so that mega-landfills are not the only low cost option for solid waste. Valued properly, solid waste programs can even provide the benefit of locally produced, cost effective energy.
Aviation (2012 Grade: C+)
“Airports are micro cities, with much of the same building, pavement and utility infrastructure, yet the cost of infrastructure within an airport is generally much more than what it costs to build in a city. If we can get that cost closer to a municipal cost, we can do more with less,” says Meyer. ACEC California suggests rethinking airport design. The basic concept of an airport requiring very large terminal facilities to support airport operations has been essentially unchanged for decades. Advancements in other market sectors, such as personal rapid transit systems, as well as the broader application of information technology (which can be used in micro energy grids), provide the opportunity to improve the efficiency and operational performance of the terminal, through cross-market integration.
Transportation (2012 Grade: C-)
“California can make a major steps towards a higher grade by creating a leaner, more efficient and modern state department of transportation,” Meyer says. Simple math suggests that Caltrans probably won’t need the 20,000-plus staff it has today to deliver a dramatically scaled-down $2.5 billion transportation program in 2015. It is time to reduce state staffing, assign more resources to actual improvements (rather than administrative costs), authorize municipalities and counties to take more responsibility for project delivery, and make greater use of innovative delivery techniques like public-private partnerships and design-build. These techniques are widely used by other states and nations to speed up project delivery, improve accountability and increase efficiency. ACEC California also recommends that the state reconsider and revamp how it pays for transportation improvements. The current system, which primarily relies on gas tax revenue, is becoming more and more archaic as the popularity of electric, hybrid and non-traditional vehicles rises.
Water (2012 Grade: C)
“With regard to water supply, California is literally living off of the past and the tremendous legacy of the first Governor Brown. However, that is no longer sufficient,” said Meyer. While taking care to protect the environment, California needs more and upgraded water storage and water transport facilities. Public-private partnerships are particularly useful tool for delivering new water supply projects. “Not only is most of our water infrastructure old, it is no longer adequate to meet the needs of our current and projected population. If we are going to provide job opportunities for our young people, if our farmers are going to maintain the productivity of their land, and if our families are going to have enough water to meet their needs, we simply need more water supply.”
Levees/Flood Control (2012 Grade: D)
Today engineers and construction contractors have much better tools and much more knowledge about levees, than we had when most of our levees were originally designed and constructed. Rather than wait for another life threatening disaster to happen, California needs to act now to dedicate an adequate revenue stream to get the job done. Not only is this essential for human safety, it will also be far, far cheaper to fix our levees in advance, than it will be to do major clean up and repair work after a disaster. “Most of California’s levees are old and have lost much of their original strength ability to hold back flood waters. The danger to California homes and businesses and human life is very real,” commented Meyer. “There is no excuse for failing to upgrade and strengthen our levees.”
Ports (2012 Grade: B-)
“California’s ports are a key element in our state’s global competitiveness, and efficient goods movement should be an economic priority for our state. To stay competitive we must have higher grades for our ports,” said Meyer. ACEC California believes we can get there by taking a more cohesive approach to our port structures and their connections with other modes of transportation. The idea is to view our ports as part of a complete transportation system and plan accordingly. We can also improve our ports by making sure that our Harbor Maintenance Tax funds are allocated and used for their intended purpose. Finally, California needs to stay firmly committed to achieving and maintaining in our ports the national infrastructure standard of “State of Good Repair” (SGR).
ACEC California
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Friday, January 20, 2012
Reaction to Governor's State of the State
The American Council of Engineering Companies of California commends Governor Brown for articulating in his State of the State speech the importance to our economy of dramatically improving California’s infrastructure. Governor Brown recognizes that major improvements to our water delivery system are vital to California's future, that the high speed rail project with substantial reforms will give our state a much needed economic boost, and that permit streamlining is critical if California is going to meet its ambitious renewable energy goals. ACEC California looks forward to continuing to assist Governor Brown and his administration with achieving its infrastructure goals.
Paul Meyer
Executive Director
ACEC California
Paul Meyer
Executive Director
ACEC California
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Problems at Caltrans Show Need for State to Reform the Agency
The recent public revelation that a Caltrans employee submitted fabricated safety test results and destroyed testing data for the $6.3 billion Bay Bridge project is deeply troubling.
First and foremost, everyone is rightly concerned about the safety of the new bridge. Fortunately, that employee can no longer engage in such appalling conduct. After The Bee broke the story – following an exhaustive investigation – Caltrans announced it had fired the offending employee and his supervisor. Furthermore, independent experts are now reviewing the integrity of the foundations for the Bay Bridge project.
However, The Bee's findings also raise serious questions about Caltrans itself. The Bee found evidence that Caltrans discovered the employee had falsified reports on other projects after he had tested the foundations of the Bay Bridge project, yet took little action against that employee. Regardless of which official knew what and when, by any standard, such a performance by an organization is unacceptable. At a minimum, such findings demonstrate that at Caltrans there is not nearly enough basic accountability.
In contrast, if a private engineering firm falsified test reports and destroyed data, that firm would almost immediately cease to exist. It would be legally liable for tremendous damages. Its invoices would not be paid. Its reputation would be destroyed. No one would hire the firm.
Today, Caltrans – with 22,000 employees – is so large that it is difficult to properly manage. Indeed, Caltrans is far larger than any other state department of transportation in the nation, including transportation departments with project workloads similar to Caltrans. Whereas Caltrans relies on state employees to do 90 percent of its workload, other state transportation departments use fully accountable engineering firms for an average of 50 percent to 60 percent of their workloads.
Many studies have documented Caltrans' internal problems. For example, the California state auditor found that Caltrans regularly experiences employee cost overruns on projects and fails to keep accurate employee time records, and the state Legislative Analyst's Office conservatively concluded that Caltrans is overstaffed by at least 1,500 employees.
Adopting the LAO's recommendation would free up at least $200 million a year for the hard construction of new transportation projects. It would create thousands of new and badly needed construction jobs.
Freeing up this money for actual construction projects is particularly important, because other sources of funding for transportation are rapidly diminishing. Proposition 1B, the $19 billion bond fund passed in 2006, is running out. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act federal stimulus funds are winding down. Traditional federal transportation funding is diminishing. And between inflation and an increasing number of people shifting to high-mileage vehicles, the gas tax is losing its ability to generate revenue.
There is no question of the need to dramatically reform and downsize Caltrans. A particularly effective way of accomplishing that – entirely consistent with Gov. Jerry Brown's realignment proposals – is transferring a substantial portion of the state's current transportation funds and authority from Caltrans to local transportation agencies.
Since the mid-1980s, county transportation agencies – often referred to as the "Self-Help Counties" or SHCs – have made many major improvements to our highway and transit systems. Today, more than half of the transportation projects that drivers and transit riders see when they travel actually are sponsored by "Self-Help Counties", not by Caltrans.
The Self-Help Counties have developed a well-earned reputation for speedy, cost-effective delivery of transportation projects and are fully accountable to local voters. The SHCs' revenue comes from local sales tax measures – typically1/2 cent – dedicated to transportation. Those sales tax measures must be approved by two-thirds of the local voters. If the SHCs do not deliver on their promised projects within a reasonable time, the voters will not renew the sales tax measures. It is as simple as that.
Extending the governor's realignment proposal to transportation will greatly improve accountability and efficient project delivery. There is no reason to wait. With our economy hurting, our roads and transit systems in terrible shape, and the public rightly expecting safe transportation facilities, now is the time for realignment.
Eddie Kho, PE
ACEC California President
First and foremost, everyone is rightly concerned about the safety of the new bridge. Fortunately, that employee can no longer engage in such appalling conduct. After The Bee broke the story – following an exhaustive investigation – Caltrans announced it had fired the offending employee and his supervisor. Furthermore, independent experts are now reviewing the integrity of the foundations for the Bay Bridge project.
However, The Bee's findings also raise serious questions about Caltrans itself. The Bee found evidence that Caltrans discovered the employee had falsified reports on other projects after he had tested the foundations of the Bay Bridge project, yet took little action against that employee. Regardless of which official knew what and when, by any standard, such a performance by an organization is unacceptable. At a minimum, such findings demonstrate that at Caltrans there is not nearly enough basic accountability.
In contrast, if a private engineering firm falsified test reports and destroyed data, that firm would almost immediately cease to exist. It would be legally liable for tremendous damages. Its invoices would not be paid. Its reputation would be destroyed. No one would hire the firm.
Today, Caltrans – with 22,000 employees – is so large that it is difficult to properly manage. Indeed, Caltrans is far larger than any other state department of transportation in the nation, including transportation departments with project workloads similar to Caltrans. Whereas Caltrans relies on state employees to do 90 percent of its workload, other state transportation departments use fully accountable engineering firms for an average of 50 percent to 60 percent of their workloads.
Many studies have documented Caltrans' internal problems. For example, the California state auditor found that Caltrans regularly experiences employee cost overruns on projects and fails to keep accurate employee time records, and the state Legislative Analyst's Office conservatively concluded that Caltrans is overstaffed by at least 1,500 employees.
Adopting the LAO's recommendation would free up at least $200 million a year for the hard construction of new transportation projects. It would create thousands of new and badly needed construction jobs.
Freeing up this money for actual construction projects is particularly important, because other sources of funding for transportation are rapidly diminishing. Proposition 1B, the $19 billion bond fund passed in 2006, is running out. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act federal stimulus funds are winding down. Traditional federal transportation funding is diminishing. And between inflation and an increasing number of people shifting to high-mileage vehicles, the gas tax is losing its ability to generate revenue.
There is no question of the need to dramatically reform and downsize Caltrans. A particularly effective way of accomplishing that – entirely consistent with Gov. Jerry Brown's realignment proposals – is transferring a substantial portion of the state's current transportation funds and authority from Caltrans to local transportation agencies.
Since the mid-1980s, county transportation agencies – often referred to as the "Self-Help Counties" or SHCs – have made many major improvements to our highway and transit systems. Today, more than half of the transportation projects that drivers and transit riders see when they travel actually are sponsored by "Self-Help Counties", not by Caltrans.
The Self-Help Counties have developed a well-earned reputation for speedy, cost-effective delivery of transportation projects and are fully accountable to local voters. The SHCs' revenue comes from local sales tax measures – typically1/2 cent – dedicated to transportation. Those sales tax measures must be approved by two-thirds of the local voters. If the SHCs do not deliver on their promised projects within a reasonable time, the voters will not renew the sales tax measures. It is as simple as that.
Extending the governor's realignment proposal to transportation will greatly improve accountability and efficient project delivery. There is no reason to wait. With our economy hurting, our roads and transit systems in terrible shape, and the public rightly expecting safe transportation facilities, now is the time for realignment.
Eddie Kho, PE
ACEC California President
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
EEA Update: Project Design Consultants Wins 2011 Engineering Excellence Merit Award
Project Design Consultants (PDC) received an Engineering Excellence Award (Merit) for the San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Project. PDC was contracted by Southern California Edison (SCE), as the prime consultant to provide project management, final grading/dredging plans, flood control coordination, survey/mapping, and permit processing for the restoration of 150 acres of wetlands as part of a 440-acre nature preserve. The preserve is accessible by viewing platforms, a visitor’s center and trail system that is linked from the ocean along the San Dieguito River. The project was an outstanding success by all measure. Southern California Edison (SCE) and other stakeholders are very pleased.
About San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Project (YouTube Video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1dTzms5Sck
About San Dieguito Wetlands Restoration Project (YouTube Video): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1dTzms5Sck
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
We Need More American-trained Engineers to Design America's Future
Just before Labor Day, a coalition of 45 companies companies, including Facebook, Intel, Bayer, McKesson, JP Morgan and other big names from the private sector, announced a program to double the number of internships they offer engineering students in 2012.
ACEC California applauds the move, which has a goal of creating 6,500 internships and was announced by the White House as part of the Obama Administration’s goal of increasing the number of engineering students who graduate from U.S. colleges and universities by 10,000 each year. That, in turn, is tied to the Administration’s plans for creating jobs, part of which is to promote engineering disciplines, including infrastructure development which is at the core of what our members – chiefly consulting engineers and land surveyors – are involved in.
It’s a great start, but it’s hardly enough.
Just look at the situation here in California: it has been estimated that each year our higher education system produces 10,000 – or about one sixth -- of the engineers in the U.S. Seventy percent of those graduates hold BS degrees while 20 percent hold a Master’s and the remainder are PhD candidates. Of the 1,000 or so PhD candidates, about 70 percent are foreigners, many of whom return home upon completion of their degree requirement.
Meanwhile, India produces 600,000 engineers per year and China, a staggering one million engineers through its education system. Here in California, we need to at least double the number of engineers we produce here each year to 20,000 just to keep pace and that goes for the U.S. as a whole also.
The U.S. is not alone in being slow to recognize the importance of a strong engineering sector. Earlier this summer, Sir John Parker, head of Britain’s Royal Academy of Engineering, cautioned that the U.K. needs to double its output of qualified engineers if the Cameron government’s goal of “rebalancing the economy” by boosting manufacturing output and jobs was to become reality. Here in the U.S., our manufacturing sector has long been on the wane and part of the reason is a lack of qualified engineers. As Sir John correctly pointed out in his interview with the Financial Times: “If you look at what lies behind the products and services of many companies, from pharmaceuticals to railways, you will find that their creative focus is invariably centred on the art and science of engineering.”
In our industry, we look to engineers to solve huge problems from how to create a safe bridge span, to how high to build a dam and where to establish a wastewater treatment plant. Some solutions are routine, some extraordinary. We honor many projects each year through our Engineering Excellence Awards. Last year’s national winner was a project to design a facility for Southern California onion producer Gills Onions allowing the company to turn onion byproducts into energy to help power a local onion processing plant. Member firm HDR provided that solution.
We also do our bit to promote the sector to students at high schools and colleges throughout the state. Our website has links to resources for students and ACEC California, its local chapters and member firms regularly take outreach to high schools up and down the state. And, in addition to internships and scholarships provided by our national organization, local chapters and member firms, our state Scholarship Foundation provides annual scholarships to engineering students in California.
But we can, and will do more. The Business Council, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, American Chemistry Council and the White House have led the way in shining a light on this issue and we hope to intensify the attention on this critical issue.
ACEC California applauds the move, which has a goal of creating 6,500 internships and was announced by the White House as part of the Obama Administration’s goal of increasing the number of engineering students who graduate from U.S. colleges and universities by 10,000 each year. That, in turn, is tied to the Administration’s plans for creating jobs, part of which is to promote engineering disciplines, including infrastructure development which is at the core of what our members – chiefly consulting engineers and land surveyors – are involved in.
It’s a great start, but it’s hardly enough.
Just look at the situation here in California: it has been estimated that each year our higher education system produces 10,000 – or about one sixth -- of the engineers in the U.S. Seventy percent of those graduates hold BS degrees while 20 percent hold a Master’s and the remainder are PhD candidates. Of the 1,000 or so PhD candidates, about 70 percent are foreigners, many of whom return home upon completion of their degree requirement.
Meanwhile, India produces 600,000 engineers per year and China, a staggering one million engineers through its education system. Here in California, we need to at least double the number of engineers we produce here each year to 20,000 just to keep pace and that goes for the U.S. as a whole also.
The U.S. is not alone in being slow to recognize the importance of a strong engineering sector. Earlier this summer, Sir John Parker, head of Britain’s Royal Academy of Engineering, cautioned that the U.K. needs to double its output of qualified engineers if the Cameron government’s goal of “rebalancing the economy” by boosting manufacturing output and jobs was to become reality. Here in the U.S., our manufacturing sector has long been on the wane and part of the reason is a lack of qualified engineers. As Sir John correctly pointed out in his interview with the Financial Times: “If you look at what lies behind the products and services of many companies, from pharmaceuticals to railways, you will find that their creative focus is invariably centred on the art and science of engineering.”
In our industry, we look to engineers to solve huge problems from how to create a safe bridge span, to how high to build a dam and where to establish a wastewater treatment plant. Some solutions are routine, some extraordinary. We honor many projects each year through our Engineering Excellence Awards. Last year’s national winner was a project to design a facility for Southern California onion producer Gills Onions allowing the company to turn onion byproducts into energy to help power a local onion processing plant. Member firm HDR provided that solution.
We also do our bit to promote the sector to students at high schools and colleges throughout the state. Our website has links to resources for students and ACEC California, its local chapters and member firms regularly take outreach to high schools up and down the state. And, in addition to internships and scholarships provided by our national organization, local chapters and member firms, our state Scholarship Foundation provides annual scholarships to engineering students in California.
But we can, and will do more. The Business Council, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, American Chemistry Council and the White House have led the way in shining a light on this issue and we hope to intensify the attention on this critical issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
