USACE Civil Works Program: Challenges and Opportunities · This act launched what today is called...
45
BUILDING STRONG ® US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® USACE Civil Works Program: Challenges and Opportunities Pacific Northwest Waterways Association MG John Peabody, P.E. Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 11 March 2014
Transcript of USACE Civil Works Program: Challenges and Opportunities · This act launched what today is called...
BUILDING STRONG®
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Civil Works Program: Challenges and Opportunities
Pacific Northwest
Waterways Association
MG John Peabody, P.E. Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
11 March 2014
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Good afternoon and thanks your invitation. I’d like to spend my time today to give you a flavor of what’s happening at the HQ that enables us to deliver in the field! This growing Nation still faces significant water resource challenges and vulnerabilities and the existing infrastructure continues to age and decline in performance. The Corps is committed to… Reducing risks to loss of life and adverse impacts to the economy and jobs from river and coastal flooding; Reducing the costs of goods through our ports and inland systems, and improving jobs and the economy positioning the Nation for the growth of imports and exports over the next 30 years; Providing reliable hydroelectric and water supply opportunities from projects; and Restoring our degraded critical ecosystems.
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Priorities Support the Warfighter
Transform Civil Works
Prepare for Tomorrow
Respond to Disasters
Presenter
Presentation Notes
USACE Priorities Defend and Protect the Nation (Support to COCOMS): We are a global organization, on the ground or engaged with more than 130 countries. USACE builds low-cost, high-impact projects in support of the US National Security Plan and the Combatant Commanders’ missions. In April 2011 POD signed an agreement to construct $40 million of multipurpose cyclone shelters in Bangladesh, expanding a program already underway for PACOM. These multipurpose cyclone shelters can be used as shelter when the cyclone strikes at normal times, and can also e used as schools or community centers. The ground floor is used as a shelter for the livestock and the first floor for the community members Other examples…MG Walsh recently visited China where he shared lessons learned and best practices from the Mississippi River floods. KDA visit to Thailand. Transform Civil Works (Methods of Delivery): Several projects in the New Orleans Risk Reduction System, including the West Closure Complex, were delivered using Early Contractor Involvement – the first time USACE has ever used ECI for a civil works project. Prepare for Tomorrow (Enabling Technologies): Developed at ERDC, the Mobile Information Collection App (MICA) is a smartphone mobile info device that shoots photos, has GPS location, and allows user to add notes and electronically send to database. MICA was named the USACE 2012 Innovation of the Year, and was used originally for Mississippi River flood field data collection and transmission is now helping Detroit City, Mich., catalog vacant homes for demolition, allowing for a much quicker response time and eliminating hours of paperwork and data input. Also eliminated? The need to carry a backpack full of equipment. The software comes loaded on a smartphone and uses standard camera, GPS, compass, WiFi and computer processing capabilities. Respond to Disasters: Hurricane Isaac, Super Storm Sandy, Drought
BUILDING STRONG®
Global Agricultural Zones and the Basis for US Greatness
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The STRATFOR article is a summary reasoning for the compelling need to invest in this nation’s water resources infrastructure, particularly our inland waterway system, and our ports and harbors. This article summarizes the geographically-based reasons for the rise and dominance of the United States as “The Inevitable Empire”. Most notably, it highlights the primary reasons for that as the nation’s extensive navigable waterway system in its interior, and the associated plenitude of natural resources (from agriculture to coal) that this extensively drained interior facilitates for transportation and commerce. The article posits five main compelling “geographic imperatives” that the United States has (and must) follow to sustain its dominance over its interior and exterior influences: 1. Dominate the Greater Mississippi Basin; 2. Eliminate Land based Threats to the Greater Miss. Basin; 3. Control Ocean Approaches to North America; 4. Control the World’s Oceans; 5. Prevent Potential Challengers from Rising This view point strongly reinforces many of the Corps’ main themes in recent times. WE are a maritime nation, and the ability to leverage our extensive interior navigable waterway system – the most extensive such system in the entire world – is essential to our economic advantages and geopolitical dominance. Further, it is the entire Mississippi Basin watershed that forms the basis for America’s successful economic development and geopolitical global supremacy, which is then furthered via our exterior ports, harbors, and sea approaches.
BUILDING STRONG®
U.S. Ports and Inland Waterways: Vital to our National Economy
•N
Long Beach
Anacortes
Million Tons
Over 100
50 - 100
25 - 50 10 - 25 Houston
Corpus Christi S. Louisiana New Orleans
Baton Rouge
Texas City
Lake Charles
Plaquemines Tampa
New York/NJ
Valdez Beaumont
Lower Delaware River (9 harbors)
Duluth/Superior
Los Angeles
Port Arthur
St. Louis
Portland
Seattle
Freeport
Huntington
Richmond Oakland
Tacoma
Boston
Hampton Roads
Port Everglades
Jacksonville
Memphis
Detroit
Cleveland
Savannah Charleston
Indiana Hbr
Cincinnati
Portland
Two Harbors
Honolulu
Chicago Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Pascagoula
Toledo
Mobile
Matagorda
Kalama
Barbers Pt
2 Billion Tons of domestic and import/export
cargo annually
4
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Much of the Corps’ Civil Works program centers around WATER – navigation, water supply, ecosystem restoration, flood risk management, regulatory, recreation. Need to work together to tell the story of the value of our Ports and Inland Waterways… China exports $1.9 trillion annually and imports $1.7 annually. U.S. Waterways (Source: AAPA): U.S. ports and waterways handle more than 2 billion tons of domestic and import/export cargo annually. By 2020, the total volume of cargo shipped by water is expected to be double that of 2001 volumes. $3.8 billion worth of goods moving in and out of U.S. seaports each day Over 300 million cubic yards of dredged material are removed from navigation channels each year. Another 100 million cubic yards are dredged from berths and private terminals. The total, 400 million cubic yards of dredged material, equals a four-lane highway, 20 feet deep, stretching from New York City to Los Angeles. Seaports support the employment of more than 13 million people in the U.S. Inland Waterways (Source: WCI) Nearly 12,000 miles of navigable channels 196 lock sites / 241 chambers 624 million tons of cargo annually at a value of nearly $70 billion 14% of the nation’s domestic freight 60% of nation’s grain exports, 20% of coal, 22% of domestic petroleum and petroleum products
BUILDING STRONG®
The 20th Century “Golden Age” of Infrastructure Construction
Presenter
Presentation Notes
A Watershed Approach is nothing new…Neglected waterways, demands for hydropower throughout the country, and calls for irrigation projects in the West drew attention to the nation's water resources at the beginning of the 20th century. Multipurpose partisans advocated the application of scientific management to insure efficient water use. This meant a program of basinwide development that would address all potential applications of the resource. Following Mississippi River Floods in 1912, 1913, 1916 and 1927, it was clear that levees weren’t the answer…the chief of engineers, Major General Edgar Jadwin drew up a new plan requiring that the water be dispersed through controlled outlets and floodways as well as confined between levees. After lengthy debate, Congress approved this plan in the 1928 Flood Control Act and placed its implementation under the control of the Corps of Engineers. This act launched what today is called the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project. The project has prevented over $100 billion worth of damages since 1928. President Franklin Roosevelt favored the development of federal hydropower projects to provide consumers with low-cost energy. During the New Deal, the Corps participated in three major hydroelectric power projects: Passamaquoddy Tidal Power Project in Maine, Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River, and Fort Peck Dam on the Missouri River. The 1944 Flood Control Act signaled the victory of the multipurpose approach and authorized the gigantic multipurpose civil works project for the Missouri Basin commonly called the Pick-Sloan Plan, including several multipurpose dams on the mainstem that provided flood control, irrigation, navigation, water supply, hydropower, and recreation.��Following World II, federal multipurpose projects expanded considerably. Congress authorized major systems involving hydroelectric power on the Columbia and Snake rivers in the Pacific Northwest, and the Missouri and the Arkansas rivers. The Eisenhower administration challenged some of these ambitious projects as costly federal burdens. However, overall federal power development continued to increase. By 1975, Corps projects the largest on the Columbia and Snake rivers were producing 27 percent of the total U.S. hydropower and 4.4 percent of all electrical energy output. The majority of U.S infrastructure was built between the 1920s and 1980s, and has already reached or exceeded its planned design life. Water resources infrastructure kept pace with population growth until the mid-1980s when investment was insufficient to keep the infrastructure in good working order.
BUILDING STRONG®
$0
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12 19
28
1930
19
32
1934
19
36
1938
19
40
1942
19
44
1946
19
48
1950
19
52
1954
19
56
1958
19
60
1962
19
64
1966
19
68
1970
19
72
1974
19
76
1978
19
80
1982
19
84
1986
19
88
1990
19
92
1994
19
96
1998
20
00
2002
20
04
2006
20
08
2010
Bill
ions
of F
Y 20
11 D
olla
rs
Year
Historical Investments by USACE Functional Category 1928 to 2011
Navigation Flood Multipurpose MR&T Dredging
7
~$18.00 per person in the US!
~$56.00 per person in the US!
~$70.00 per person in the US!
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Investments in USACE Capital Stock (top of Slide 1) have not kept pace based on the assumptions of service life, deterioration and retirements. Also, there has been a shift from massive, multipurpose projects to smaller, single purpose projects. Back in the 1930s, the per capita expense of Corps-facilitated investments in infrastructure was ~$70/person… the investment in our nation’s future was deemed to be worth it. Back in the 1960s, the per capita expense of Corps-facilitated investments in infrastructure was ~$56/person… the investment in our nation’s future was deemed to be worth it. You know what we’ve been spending over the past two decades?… ~$18/person… or less!
BUILDING STRONG®
Long Term Civil Works Funding Trends
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
1962
19
64
1966
19
68
1970
19
72
1974
19
76
1978
19
80
1982
19
84
1986
19
88
1990
19
92
1994
19
96
1998
20
00
2002
20
04
2006
20
08
2010
20
12
O&M Constr Invest
Appropriation ($Million in 2012 $)
8
BUILDING STRONG®
The USACE Program
10.4 10.7 14.9
17.8 21.5 23.8 22.4
27.0 29.0 29.9 23.8
27.7
18.4 18.2 16.3 14.2
8.3 8.2
8.1 8.1
9.2
19.1
9.7
20.7 17.2
8.3
7.8
9.6
7 6.6 6.6
6.6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
'01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Military
18.7 18.9
23.0 25.9
30.7
42.9
32.1
47.7 46.2
38.2
31.6
37.3
25.4 24.8 22.9 20.8
( $ Billions )
Fiscal Year 9
BUILDING STRONG®
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020
Net
Cap
ital S
tock
Bi
llion
s of 2
009
dolla
rs
Net Capital Stock Estimates of Civil Works Projects,1928-2009 (in 2009 $)
Flood Navigation Multipurpose MRT Total
1983 Peak ~ $250B 2009 ~ $165B
10
Benign Neglect
Crisis Vision & Construction
BUILDING STRONG® 11
Inland Waterway Trust Fund Trends
-150-100
-500
50100150200250300350400450
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
2008
2011
2013
$ M
illio
n
Annual Surplus / Deficit Trust Fund Balance
Presenter
Presentation Notes
IWTF – beginning in 2000, efficient appropriations quickly drained the IWTF
BUILDING STRONG®
Our Nation’s Infrastructure GPA: Roads
Runways
Railways
Rivers
D+
12
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Roads Railways Runways Rivers and Harbors (includes Dams, Levees and Ports) In 2009, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave America's Infrastructure an overall GPA of D. In 2001, it was a D+.� TODAY, China spends 7 percent of its Gross Domestic Product on its infrastructure. India spends 5 percent. The United States spends less than 2 percent.
BUILDING STRONG®
Aging Water Resources Infrastructure
• Half of Locks 50+ Years Old
• Average Age 62 Years Old
Crumbling lock wall, Lower Monongahela L&D 3, opened 1907
Concrete deterioration at Chickamauga Lock and Dam Project, Tenn.
Leaking Miter Gates, Upper Miss
Lock 19
Presenter
Presentation Notes
What’s at risk: Our water resources infrastructure – particularly our navigation locks and dams – is an aging investment. Re-investment in civil works infrastructure has declined over time and the value of our capital stock is falling, because age and deterioration are outpacing reinvestment. Our aging inland waterways infrastructure is experiencing more frequent closures (both scheduled and emergency) for repairs, resulting in reduced performance, costly delays to customers.
BUILDING STRONG® Lockport Canal, Illinois River
Failure point
Lock and Dam 27, Chain of Rocks Canal, Mississippi River
14
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Lockport Canal Wall Failure from Oct. 2011 Lock and Dam 27 – one of the busiest on the upper Miss -- currently closed for emergency repair operations, following a failure in the lower protection cell.
BUILDING STRONG®
Lockport video
BUILDING STRONG®
Deteriorating Infrastructure
Presenter
Presentation Notes
23 of the 29 locks on the Mississippi River are over 70 years old and all of the Illinois locks over 50 years old with 5 celebrating their 80th birthday next year! Our maintenance backlog in MVD is probably over ½ Billion and may be approaching 1 Billion. (MVD Unfunded maintenance /Capability in FY 13 Budget is $1.2B)
BUILDING STRONG®
Critical Reliability Programs Accelerating O&M Pressure
Emsworth Dam
Greenup
17
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Needed investments to achieve reliability have outpaced our ability to maintain this 294 million ton system, the highest inland system in the nation. Rapidly escalating major maintenance requirements on our navigation locks and dams, currently projected at $613M in 5 years. Lock outages --- failures --- are increasing. In FY12 within historical allocation, maintenance needed will increase failure risks 88% of lock maintenance needed for reliability won’t be performed 90% Dam gates maintenance needed for reliability won’t be performed
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Civil Works Construction Backlog
$2 billion
$60 billion
$0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70
Construction Funds
(annual)
USACE Backlog
Billions
Backlog of Congressionally Authorized Projects by Business Line
Environmental Infrastructure,
5%
Environmental 20%
Navigation - Ports, 20%
Navigation - Inland, 5%
Flood Damage Reduction, 35%
Shore Protection,
10%
Presenter
Presentation Notes
USACE has a construction backlog* of $60 billion, while receiving roughly $2 billion a year in construction funding. The CW backlog is the “balance to complete” amount for all authorized projects we are currently working on, and all Planning, Engineering and Design (PED) projects. $1 B additional backlog for inactive and deferred projects. Backlog projects by Business Line Environmental Infrastructure5% Environmental 20% Navigation - Ports20% Navigation - Inland Waterway5% Hydropower0% Flood Damage Reduction35% Flood through Shore Protection10%
BUILDING STRONG®
More than a tenfold increase in GDP since 1928! Similar level of investment will not keep pace with GDP.
Decreasing levels of investment magnify the effect.
20 years
Corps Mission-Related Investments
19
Presenter
Presentation Notes
-GDP has grown by factor of 10 since 1928. Investments in USACE-related infrastructure have generally fluctuated at levels between $2B and $11B. Majority of infrastructure was constructed before 1970s. Around 1970, investments in water-related infrastructure decreased and the value of associated infrastructure has been declining since. !! What we’re risking is a return to levels of service that existed during prior to the existence of INFRASRUCTURE SYSTEMS that resulted from or were made possible by those investments (not just the water-related infrastructure). BACKGOUND and BACKUP: From BROOKINGS (4-JUN-2010) Economics of Infrastructure in a Globalized World: Issues, Lessons and Future Challenges): New estimates of returns in investment in infrastructure are based on physical stock, versus infrastructure spending, and suggest a 10% increase in infrastructure assets causes GDP per capita to increase by 0.7% to 1%. The marginal productivity of infrastructure is higher in countries with relatively lower levels of physical infrastructure. By way of example: The Lanzhou-Xinjiang railroad in China was found to have increased eastbound trade volume by over 40% and decrease eastbound trade costs ~30% within three years of the railroad’s completion. In China and India (for 1950 to 1998) the influence of faster transport was found to be equivalent to reducing tariffs on manufactured goods by 21%. However, benefits were found to be limited and non-linear, ”Once an efficient, reliable and uncongested transport network is in place, direct benefits to building yet another highway are limited”. “If countries demand value for money and strive for productive efficiency, first-rate evaluation of infrastructure projects is necessary to separate the good projects from the bad ones.” In Australia, potential infrastructure investments have been reviewed and prioritized by a new agency (Infrastructure Australia) to evaluate projects/programs for contributions to efficiencies and outputs. Brookings found that not all infrastructure spending is “good”. While developing countries can realize greatest benefits from infrastructure projects, developed countries need to pay closer attention to value yielded by infrastructure (return on investment), and worst time to do so is during crises (particularly when evaluation and delivery has not been thought through well in advance).
BUILDING STRONG®
United States Relative to Other Nations
Low investment in infrastructure! (equivalent to Greece)
20
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Relative to all nations, the United States ranks with Greece in its investment in infrastructure.
BUILDING STRONG®
Relative Quality of US Infrastructure
Not even among the top 15!
21
BUILDING STRONG®
China plans to invest $32 Billion in Yangtze River port &navigation development, 2011-15
Brazil is investing $27 Billion in ports over the next 4-5 years
The Army Corps of Engineers’ 2014 Navigation budget is $1.8 Billion
Global Navigation & Inland Waterway Investments
Presenter
Presentation Notes
China is investing $32 billion during 2011-2015 USACE 2013 inland navigation budget is $760 million, of which only $200 million is construction, the remainder being OM & MRT-M. NOTE TO CG: From the report it appears Brazil is not making much investment in Waterways but is investing heavily on Ports, rails and roads. $27 billion in Ports in next 4-5 years. $21 billion for roads in next 20 years. $45 billion for railroads in next 20 years. CG might also like include slide 17 (above) as it clearly shows the present advantage the US has over Brazil, however if Brazil makes the investments noted above, while our system deteriorates then this advantage will change significantly. Slide 19 (next slide) also shows the advantage the US currently has.
BUILDING STRONG®
• TRANSFORM CIVIL WORKS: Develop a Balanced and Sustainable Civil Works Program
• Balanced: • Funding Accounts • Business Lines and Missions • Watersheds / Geography
• Sustainable: • Across All Mission Life Cycles • Reduced Mission Requirements • Adequate Resources / Financing Mechanisms • Environmentally
What to Do?
23
Presenter
Presentation Notes
By now you have probably heard about how we’re transforming the Civil Works program. Let me start with a rundown on why we considered it necessary. Showing this slide, I’m reminded of an old Gary Larson “Far Side” cartoon: a convention of dinosaurs, with one stegosaurus addressing the assembly: “The picture’s pretty bleak, gentlemen. The world’s climates are changing, the mammals are taking over, and we all have a brain about the size of a walnut.” The first point is still a topic of discussion today; whether mammals will stay on top for the long haul is an open question; and as to the size of our brains, I’ll leave that to your judgment. On a more serious note, The Nation is facing severe fiscal challenges. We are concerned about the state of our existing Infrastructure, rising O&M Costs and the future of Planning & Construction Programs to meet the Nation’s new water resource needs. We’re learning to “do less with less.” We’ve had to zero out funding for maintenance dredging at some of our low use harbors, and outsource the operation of some of our recreation areas. Another possibility is to reduce service at locks that are seeing hardly any commercial traffic, and not much recreational boat traffic either. Can we really afford to keep these open 24-7, or would the need justify a shorter schedule? Or is there another agency or organization that would be willing to operate and maintain them? A few words about our maintenance backlog: Can anyone guess how much it currently is? (Call on members of audience to take a guess.) Now who believes we can clear it using only funds in the Treasury’s General Fund? We’d have to get an extra billion dollars a year, indexed for inflation (fat chance!) for 90 years to clear up the current backlog – and then we’d have to start on fixing whatever backlog built up on our current infrastructure, plus whatever new projects come on line, over those 90 years! We can, and do, plead with OMB, the Administration and Congress for more maintenance funds, but while we can yell all we want, and hear lots of echoes, we don’t see anyone riding to the rescue. We need a Plan B.
BUILDING STRONG®
Watershed-Informed Budget
Development
Methods of Delivery
Delivering on Commitments
Transforming Civil Works
Planning Transform’n
24
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We are transforming our Civil Works (CW) program to: Produce better justified solutions faster and with reliable quality through planning modernization. Build a justifiable and sustainable Civil Works Budget utilizing a systems-based watershed approach, which will prioritize based on national goals to achieve the highest rate of return on investments and greater benefits. Modernize our portfolio of water resources infrastructure with a strong asset management and life cycle strategy to make educated investments and also explore alternatives for infrastructure financing for additional funding. Improve methods of delivery to deliver more efficient and cost effective solutions while enhancing processes, guidance and technical competencies.
BUILDING STRONG®
Implementation of the Capital Projects Business Model
25
Recommendation Status
Project Management Certification Olmsted team and Lower Mon team certified; KY Lock team working on certification
Risk-based cost estimates Updated for Olmsted; Lower Mon scheduled for spring 2014
Conduct Independent External Peer Reviews of IMTS project
Conducted on Olmsted Post Authorization Change Report and certified cost estimate and will be completed for all future projects and PACRs
Appoint a board member to each IMTS Project
Rep appointed to Olmsted team; others in progress
Project status updates to IWUB Updates provided at each meeting
Include Board Chairman signature on PMPs
Unable to accommodate per Corps counsel, but participation in meetings ok.
Evaluate use of Early contractor involvement
To be considered when new projects begin
Apply Military Construction Principles Large projects are difficult to fully fund given Civil Works budget constraints
Establish new start recommendation procedures
Limited applicability at this time given IWTF constraints. Will revisit in FY14 with CPBM update.
BUILDING STRONG®
Implementation of the Capital Projects Business Model
26
Recommendation Status Obtain approval for CPBM model regulation
Awaiting implementation via OPORD
Create Design Centers of Expertise Inland Nav Design Center established
Develop standardized designs Inland Nav Design Center is developing lessons learned to be used when design work proceeds. Used at small scale by designing similar components for KY and Chick Locks
Revisit use of continuing contracts- increase threshold to $50M from $20M
Requires Congressional legislation. Prohibited by Congress in approps bills from using continuing contract on IWTF projects
Increase Capital Investment Program Funding to $380M per year
Limited by IWTF revenues
Decrease IWTF cost share for major rehabs on all dam projects and major rehab lock projects below $100M
Requires Congressional legislation; opposed by Administration
Establish cost-sharing cap Requires Congressional legislation; opposed by Administration
Increase waterways fuel tax Requires Congressional legislation
BUILDING STRONG®
Planning Modernization
27
Chief’s Reports
Education & Training
Smart Planning
Portfolio Management
• Determine Federal Interest • Authorization Backlog • Follow-on Work
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Planning Modernization efforts are geared toward improving the efficient delivery of Chief's Report's and other studies; managing the planning portfolio to assure limited resources are aligned with the most viable studies with the greatest benefit to our nations water resources; and enhancing capability through training, certification and development. The Corps has undertaken aggressive steps to manage the feasibility study portfolio and the current active portfolio of studies has been significantly reduced. Since the passage of WRDA 2007, USACE has produced 30 Chief’s Reports and expects up to an additional 34 by end of 2014. If authorized and funds appropriated, this investment recommendations will support national economic growth and new infrastructure that this nation needs to provide stability and security. Project planning processes and procedures are being streamlined to produce more timely federal investment recommendations while preserving quality, consistency and adherence to applicable laws, regulations and policy.
BUILDING STRONG®
Budget Development
28
Watershed - Informed Budgeting
Smart Investments Management Controls
Engaging Stakeholders
Presenter
Presentation Notes
In budgeting, shifting from project-by project to systems approach Watershed budget development process Performance-based budget Fund projects likely to produce greatest benefits to capacity, get them operating Avoid “salami slicing” – better to have some projects producing than a lot in the works Eliminate stop-and-start funding Align programs and business lines to National goals and objectives Seek alternative funding mechanisms and partnerships End state: Maximized value to taxpayers of Civil Works Budget Improve justification and defense of budget allocations Incorporate integrated water resources management concepts into budget development framework Implement watershed budget development process, while continuing to produce a performance-based budget Communicate transformational budget development processes to both internal and external audiences. Vertically align and integrate programs and business lines to National goals and objectives “No earmark” rule eased process In FY12 in addition to specified projects, received ~$500 M “pot” to use on priorities we determine. This slide shows what we accomplished, and lessons learned along the way
BUILDING STRONG®
Methods of Delivery Deliver on Commitments
Building the Bench
Delivering Value for the Nation:
OUTCOMES
29
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Maintaining technical competence is key for USACE to perform its missions. There are critical technical competencies are “can’t miss” for the USACE Civil Works mission, including Dam Safety and design of inland navigation structures. But we must also maintain our leadership skills. That’s where programs like this come in to build the bench to make sure we will have the competence we need for years to come. We learned great lessons about using Design-Build and Early Contractor Involvement* for Civil Works projects here in New Orleans, working with companies like Shaw Group, Cajun Constructors, Kiewit and others to build the IHNC Surge Barrier, the West Closure Complex, Seabrook Floodgate Complex and the St. Bernard floodwall. We are doing everything possible using the constrained fiscal resources that we do receive to improve delivery of projects and programs on schedule and under budget.
BUILDING STRONG®
Infrastructure Strategy Asset Management Life Cycle Management
Kentucky River Lock #2, in service since 1839
Alternative Resources
Replacement Value= $250 B
30
• Accelerate Execution • Pilots • Obstacles • Authorities • Re-Invent Operations
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Infrastructure Strategy is an integral part of the Civil Works Transformation (CWT) initiative, and follows the principles of the Civil Works Strategic Plan. The Infrastructure Strategy sets the foundation for the future USACE Water Resources portfolio with an effective lifecycle management through Integrated Water Resources Management in a systems-based context. The endstate goal of the strategy is an infrastructure portfolio that is resilient, reliable and enables achievement of National imperatives for healthy communities, global competitiveness, security, national energy independence, and economic growth with job creation. Much of the infrastructure that we rely on today was constructed by past generations. Unfortunately as a Nation, we have not been investing the resources necessary to maintain this infrastructure. China is investing approximately 8.5% of GDP in infrastructure, Japan 5%, India 4.7%, while the US is at approximately 2.6% of GDP investment in infrastructure. The water infrastructure system managed by the Corps plays a pivotal role in the US economy, providing substantial economic benefits to the nation. The system is aging, and in many places repairs and maintenance are being deferred because of budget constraints. To ensure that this infrastructure continues to be viable, it must be sustained and new infrastructure investments must be reinvigorated. We must develop new criteria and procedures for selecting projects which provide maximize benefits, incorporate new investment methods, including utilizing appropriate private investment, and continue to work with local and regional entities to determine the needs within the broader watersheds.
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Lock Levels of Service Level Title Guideline Description
1 Full Service > 1000 Commercial Lockages 24x7, Every Day
2 Reduced Service 500-1000 Commercial Lockages 2 Shifts, Every Day
3 Limited Service < 500 Commercial Lockages; or > 1000 Recreational Lockages 1 Shift, Every Day
4 Scheduled Service
Limited Commercial and/or substantial Recreational traffic, with a more consistent daytime pattern of lockages
Lockages at set times each day
5 Weekends & Holidays
Little or no Commercial Lockages; > 500 Recreational Lockages
1 Shift per day, weekends and holidays only
6 Service by Appointment
Limited commercial traffic with no consistent pattern of lockages (<500 commercial or recreational)
Commercial Lockages by appointment
Data source: USACE Lock Performance Monitoring System, (LPMS) database; FY 2010 and 2011 average Lockages Future: 3-year rolling average
BUILDING STRONG®
Environmental Restoration & Sustainability Program
32
Presenter
Presentation Notes
SLIDE NOT COMPLETE!!
BUILDING STRONG®
Communicating the Strategy
33
Articles
Strategic Engagements
Web sites
Presentations
Webinars
Brochures
Strategic Messages
Reports Press Releases
OpOrds & FragOs
Congressional Hearings & Briefings
BUILDING STRONG®
What Can You Do?
• Tell the Story
• Help us Transform Civil Works
• Collaborate with ALL Stakeholders and Beneficiaries of the Civil Works Program
• Facilitate a Watershed-Informed approach
• Help the Nation Prioritize efforts, programs, and projects
• Support innovative Approaches for Alternative Resourcing
34
Presenter
Presentation Notes
But a crisis of this magnitude requires partnership – at every level of government, private industry, NGOs. Tell the Story – help us demonstrate the value of these projects. Example of the soybean growers commercial. Historically we have tried to fund too many individual projects and weren’t able to make the best use of our limited federal dollars. Too often, this resulted in projects being delayed and being conducted in a start-stop manner. It has been an inefficient model of project delivery and it wastes time and money. We need to re-examine and re-shape the civil works process, moving towards watershed and systems-based decision-making. It’s going to mean making some tough choices and it will require collaboration. We will all need to work together to decide what our most significant funding needs are and how to invest limited dollars. The Corps needs to be in synch with the NWC and other stakeholder groups to prioritize actions that are in the national interest and find alternative methods of funding.
BUILDING STRONG®
BUILDING STRONG®
USACE Vision Engineering solutions for our Nation’s
toughest challenges.
USACE Mission Deliver vital public and military engineering
services; partnering in peace and war to strengthen our Nation’s security, energize the
economy and reduce risks from disasters.
What will be OUR Legacy?
BUILDING STRONG®
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG®
Questions & Discussion
BUILDING STRONG®
Ready for the Panama Canal? U.S. Harbors 45’ or Greater
WEST COAST
Seattle/Tacoma (>50’) Oakland (50’) LA/Long Beach (>50’) San Diego (47’)
GULF COAST Mobile, AL New Orleans Houston/Galveston/Texas City Corpus Christi Freeport, TX
EAST COAST NY/NJ (50’ underway) Baltimore (50’) Hampton Roads (50’) Morehead City, NC Charleston, SC
39
Presenter
Presentation Notes
These are the ports that can currently handle 45’ draft ships (the maximum depth of the old Panama Canal was 42 feet. This is good, but 50’ will be needed for future when Panama Canal can pass ships with 50’ draft. Currently, there is significant freight shipped to the eastern half of the United States over the intermodal land bridge formed by the rail connections to West Coast ports. Expansion of the Panama Canal (completion scheduled for 2014) may cause even more freight traffic to shift from West Coast to East Coast ports. Southeast and Gulf Coast may also have opportunities based on population growth and agricultural product exports.
BUILDING STRONG®
We Can’t Wait
Advance infrastructure projects at 5 East Coast ports:
•NY / NJ •Charleston •Savannah •Jacksonville •Miami
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We Can’t Wait Initiative – 7 nationally and regionally significant infrastructure projects will be expedited to help modernize and expand 5 major ports in the United States. OMB charged with overseeing a government-wide effort to make the permitting and review process for infrastructure projects more efficient and effective, saving time while driving better outcomes for local communities. 5th Generation of Cargo Ships (Post-Panamax) require deeper drafts than ever before and will represent 62 percent of the container ship capacity by 2030. Port is considered “post-Panamax ready” if it has a channel depth of about 50 feet with allowances for tide, as well as sufficient channel width, turning basin size, dock and crane capacity. - More than 90 percent of the Nation’s 50 busiest ports require maintenance dredging to allow access for larger vessels and their volume. To date almost 30 percent of vessel calls at U.S. ports are constrained due to inadequate channel depths, which translates into higher transportation costs. Recent global rankings by the World Economic Forum place the U.S at 23rd in port infrastructure quality, down from 13 just two years ago.
BUILDING STRONG®
3-17 Jan – Review of draft FY 2016 Budget EC by HQ BLMs, SMEs, Account Managers 27 Jan – FY 2016 Budget EC – Major Changes – BLM briefs to the MSC CWID Chiefs 31 Jan-14 Feb - MSC Review, Update of draft EC, and Coordination w/ HQ BLMs (Phase II) 3-7 Mar – Final draft FY 2016 Budget Development EC to HQ BLM/SMEs/Account Managers for review 7 Mar – Posting of Final draft FY 2016 Budget Development EC on Intranet for MSC/District use 31 Mar – Publish Final FY 2016 Budget Development EC on Internet 14 Apr-16 May - Planning CoP/MSC CWID Chiefs brief Proposed Continuing GI For FY16 Budget 21 Apr-16-May - BLM priority ranking eligibility of GI studies and RI-Investigations by BL 28 May - Planning CoP/BLM LIR for Continuing GI & RI-I applicable Budget Issue Paper to OASA 30 Apr - MSC CWID Chiefs brief Proposal Continuing CG For FY16 Budget 6 May - BLM priority ranking eligibility of CG projects and RI-Construction by BL 27 May - BCR Changes from FY2015 due to OASA(CW) 4 Jun - BLM LIR for Continuing CG & RI-C applicable Budget Issue Paper to OASA 16 Jun - MSC CWID Chiefs brief Proposal O&M For FY16 Budget 16 Jun - Final MSC Budget Submissions Loaded in CWIFD 17 Jun-22 Jul - BLMs Review, Conduct QA, and assign initial Hqs rank by BL 21 Jul - New Starts and Resumptions and Remaining Items for GI and CG briefings 16 Jun-26 Jul - Balance the Crosswalk tables 23 Jul - Pre-Briefing to PID Chief 24 Jul - Pre-Briefing to DCG and C&EO 23 Jul - Review of draft crosswalk before brief to OASA 28 Jul - Submit and Brief Pre-Final Budget and balanced Crosswalk tables to OASA(CW) NLT 7 Aug - Engagement 1 - Briefing to CCG and MSC Cdrs by ALL on budget submission 13 Aug - Briefing to ASA(CW) on Final Recommended Budget across BLs
FY16 Budget Development Timeline
As of 9 Jan 14 41
Presenter
Presentation Notes
01-03 Jul 13RIT Program Managers to Log MSC Request Forms in OWPR Tracking System (Purpose: review completeness, determine priority as follows: discrepancies between project cost estimates in form vs J-sheets, FY15 project completions and budget requests). RIT program managers are to notify HQ CW PID (Budget Cost discrepancies 05-17 Jul 13Evaluation period for HQ PCM Review Team – Priority #1 MSC Request forms (PMs may be contacted for additional information and/or insight to project challenges, history, etc.)
BUILDING STRONG®
Reducing Risk
Building Codes
Risk Communication
Evacuation Plans
Insurance
Natural Storage
Non-Structural (Floodproofing, Elevation, etc)
Structural (Levees, Dams, Floodways)
Residual Risk
Local
State, Local
Federal, State, Local
Federal, State, Local, Individual Individual
Federal, State, Local
Federal, State, Local
Federal, State, Local
Zoning
Initial Risk
Identify risks and make decisions based on relative risk –recognize not all will get the same protection
Modified from USACE
Ris
k • Absolute protection from floods
is not possible – must plan for exceedence (Residual Risk)
• Cannot rely on single structural approach - implement a portfolio of measures
BUILDING STRONG®
Presenter
Presentation Notes
In one reaction to the reduction in risk and the Riley stairstep, the state of California in its project called FloodSafe California, developed a multi-faceted initiative to improve public safety through integrated flood management. A big focus is the State-Federal system in the Central Valley and Desert, where considerable development exists behind levees. There is a general recognition of shared liability by all stakeholders, and areas of pursuit for reducing flood risk include such things as flood hazard zones and land use, building codes, mitigation banking, ecosystem restoration, maintenance, and annual flood risk notification. We are very excited by this practical example of buying down risk in action. What makes it even more interesting, is California’s assignment of a stuckee-an agency with responsibility-for each of the steps.
BUILDING STRONG®
To Meet the Challenges, We Need to Change • We are in a non-earmark environment • We have funded too many studies/projects
at less than capability • It takes too long to complete studies and
projects • Sponsors and stakeholders are concerned
about timeliness and cost effectiveness • We need emphasis on importance of quality
assurance and quality products
47
Presenter
Presentation Notes
.
BUILDING STRONG®
• Aging infrastructure: Critical need for robust asset management & a long-term recapitalization
program • Domestic discretionary funding: Need for
innovative financing, capital stock divestment, market-based solutions
• No focus on America’s infrastructure needs and investment – need to elevate water infrastructure to national level of attention
• Competition for water, including increasing environmental & water supply needs
• Climate change adaptation & water-food-energy nexus
Challenges in CW’s Future
48
Presenter
Presentation Notes
By now you have probably heard about how we’re transforming the Civil Works program. Let me start with a rundown on why we considered it necessary. Showing this slide, I’m reminded of an old Gary Larson “Far Side” cartoon: a convention of dinosaurs, with one stegosaurus addressing the assembly: “The picture’s pretty bleak, gentlemen. The world’s climates are changing, the mammals are taking over, and we all have a brain about the size of a walnut.” The first point is still a topic of discussion today; whether mammals will stay on top for the long haul is an open question; and as to the size of our brains, I’ll leave that to your judgment. On a more serious note, The Nation is facing severe fiscal challenges. We are concerned about the state of our existing Infrastructure, rising O&M Costs and the future of Planning & Construction Programs to meet the Nation’s new water resource needs. We’re learning to “do less with less.” We’ve had to zero out funding for maintenance dredging at some of our low use harbors, and outsource the operation of some of our recreation areas. Another possibility is to reduce service at locks that are seeing hardly any commercial traffic, and not much recreational boat traffic either. Can we really afford to keep these open 24-7, or would the need justify a shorter schedule? Or is there another agency or organization that would be willing to operate and maintain them? A few words about our maintenance backlog: Can anyone guess how much it currently is? (Call on members of audience to take a guess.) Now who believes we can clear it using only funds in the Treasury’s General Fund? We’d have to get an extra billion dollars a year, indexed for inflation (fat chance!) for 90 years to clear up the current backlog – and then we’d have to start on fixing whatever backlog built up on our current infrastructure, plus whatever new projects come on line, over those 90 years! We can, and do, plead with OMB, the Administration and Congress for more maintenance funds, but while we can yell all we want, and hear lots of echoes, we don’t see anyone riding to the rescue. We need a Plan B.
BUILDING STRONG®
Trends Influencing CW’s Future • Aging infrastructure: Critical need for robust asset management & a long-term recapitalization program • Major Floods & Lessons learned: Katrina, 2011 Floods, Super Storm
Sandy • Focus on sustainability: IWRM perspective, collaborative planning, revised PR&G • Climate change adaptation & water-food-energy nexus • Competition for water, including increasing environmental & water supply
needs • Intersection of international water security & USACE OCONUS
missions • Globalization: Waterborne trade implications, homeland security &
international water resources, expansion of Panama Canal • Domestic discretionary funding: Need for innovative financing, market-
based solutions
49
BUILDING STRONG®
Harbor Deepening Challenges Study Process: Difficult and lengthy from
study to authorization Funding: Federal appropriation process
uncertainties Dredging: Escalating costs, placement,
environmental mitigation Handling Facilities and Space: Need for
expanded cargo handling facilities and improved intermodal connections
50
