8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
1/168
American Society
of Civil Engineers
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
2/168
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
3/168
American Societ o Civil Engineers
March 25, 2009
www.asce.org/reportcard
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
5/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
9/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
14/1682 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
16/1684 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
17/168
Executive Summary www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
18/1686 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
19/168
Executive Summary www.asce.org/reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
21/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
24/16812 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
27/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
Water and environment
1
A = ExceptionalB = GoodC = Mediocre
D = Poor
F = Failing
AMERICASINFRASTRUCTUREG.P.A.
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
28/16816 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
30/16818 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
32/16820 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
$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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
33/168
Facts About DAMS 2www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
34/16822 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
35/168
Facts About DAMS 2www.asce.org/reportcard
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)
2 Association o State Dam Saety Ocials.
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)
4 Association o State Dam Saety Ocials.
The Cost o Rehabilitating Our Nations Dams: A
Methodology, Estimate and Funding Mechanisms
(2002; rev. ed., 2008)
5 Association o State Dam Saety Ocials.
News Archives. 21 October 2008
www.damsaety.org
6 Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Availability o Dam Insurance, A Report to Con-
gress (1999)
7 Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Federal Guidelines or Dam Saety (2004)
8 Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Drat Report: Dam Saety in the United States,
Progress Report on the National Dam SaetyProgram Fiscal Year 2006 and 2007(2008)
9 Federal Emergency Management Agency.
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
11 Federal Emergency Management Agency.
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)
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
Water and environment
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
37/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
Water and environment
2
A = ExceptionalB = GoodC = Mediocre
D = Poor
F = Failing
AMERICASINFRASTRUCTUREG.P.A.
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
Estimated spending$146.4 billion
Projected shortall$108.6 billion
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
38/16826 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
40/16828 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
41/168
Facts About DRINKING WATER 2www.asce.org/reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
42/16830 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
43/168
Facts About DRINKING WATER 3www.asce.org/reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
Water and environment
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
45/168
www.asce.org/reportcard
Water and environment
3
A = ExceptionalB = GoodC = Mediocre
D = Poor
F = Failing
AMERICASINFRASTRUCTUREG.P.A.
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
Estimated spending$33.6 billion
Projected shortall$43.4 billion
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
46/16834 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
49/168
Facts About HAzARDouS WASTE 3www.asce.org/reportcard
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
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
50/16838 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
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.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
51/168
Facts About HAzARDouS WASTE 3www.asce.org/reportcard
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.
6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Superund National Accomplishments Summary,
2008: www.epa.gov/superund/accomp/
numbers08.htm.
7 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Clean-up Success Story Pages: www.epa.gov/
brownelds/success/success_cleanupss.htm.
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
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.
Water and environment
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
53/168
8/8/2019 American In Fa Structure 2008 Full Report
54/16842 2009 Report Card or Americas Inrastructure www.asce.org/ reportcard
ConDition
The state o the nations levees has a sig-nicant impact on public saety. Levees
are man-made barriers (embankment,
foodwall, s