GuidingPrinciplesFinalReport Infrastructure[1]

8/7/2019 GuidingPrinciplesFinalReport Infrastructure[1]

1/42


2/42

Giding Principes or eNions Criic Inrsrcre


3/42

Giding Principes or e Nions Criic Inrsrcre

2

Library o Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Guiding principles or the nations critical inrastructure / prepared by the ASCE Critical

Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical reerences and index.

ISBN 978-0-7844-1063-9

1. Construction projectsManagementStandards. 2. Public worksUnited States. 3.

National securityUnited States. 4. Inrastructure (Economics) I. ASCE Critical Inrastructure

Guidance Task Committee.

TA23.G85 2009

363.1dc22

2009020356

Published by American Society o Civil Engineers

1801 Alexander Bell Drive

Reston, Virginia 20191

www.pubs.asce.org

The material presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with

generally recognized engineering principles and practices, and is or general inormation only.

This inormation should not be used without rst securing competent advice with respect to

its suitability or any general or specic application.

The contents o this publication are not intended to be and should not be construed to

be a standard o the American Society o Civil Engineers (ASCE) and are not intended or use

as a reerence in purchase specications, contracts, regulations, statutes, or any other legal

document.

No reerence made in this publication to any specic method, product, process, or service

constitutes or implies an endorsement, recommendation, or warranty thereo by ASCE.

ASCE makes no representation or warranty o any kind, whether express or implied,

concerning the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or utility o any inormation, apparatus,

product, or process discussed in this publication, and assumes no liability thereor.

Anyone utilizing this inormation assumes all liability arising rom such use, including

but not limited to inringement o any patent or patents.

ASCE and American Society o Civil EngineersRegistered in U.S. Patent and Trademark

Oce.

Photocopies and reprints. You can obtain instant permission to photocopy ASCEpublications by using ASCEs online permission service (http://pubs.asce.org/permissions/

requests/). Requests or 100 copies or more should be submitted to the Reprints Department,

Publications Division, ASCE (address above); e-mail: [email protected]. A reprint order

orm can be ound at http://pubs.asce.org/support/reprints/.

Copyright 2009 by the American Society o Civil Engineers.

All Rights Reserved.

ISBN 978-0-7844-1063-9

Manuactured in the United States o America.

17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 1 2 3 4 5


4/42


3

FOREWORD 4

ExECutIvE SummaRy 5

ChaPtER 1: Critical Inrastructure 8What Went Wrong in New Orleans 9The Value Proposition 10Who Leads the Charge? 12

ChaPtER 2: Guiding Principles or Critical Inrastructure 13ChaPtER 3: Quantiy, Communicate, and Manage Risk 15

Risk Management 15Understanding Risk 16A Shit in Thinking 16

ChaPtER 4: Employ an Integrated Systems Approach 20Sustainability, Redundancy, and Resiliency 20Integral Solutions 21

ChaPtER 5: Exercise Sound Leadership, Management, and Stewardship 24The Inrastructure Leader 24

Strong, Flexible Organizations 25ChaPtER 6: Adapt to Dynamic Conditions and Practice 29

Knowns and Unknowns 30Overcoming the Resistance to Change 30

ChaPtER 7: Strategies or Change 33Strategies or End-Users, Voters, and Citizens 33Strategies or Design and Construction Proessionals 33Strategies or Elected Ofcials 34Strategies or Regulators 34Strategies or Owners 34

aCkNOWlEDGEmENtS 37 CREDItS 40

[ t a B l E O F C O N t E N t S ]

On the Cover:(top) Los Angeless Four Level Interchange between the Hollywood Freeway (US 101) and thePasadena Freeway (SR 110) was the frst stack interchange in the world and is today one othe busiest, with more than 455,000 cars per day passing through it.

(bottom) Considered an engineering marvel at the time, the Eads South Pass NavigationWorks, New Orleans, Louisiana, opened a channel (in 1879) at the mouth o the MississippiRiver that allowed large boats easy access to the Port o New Orleans.


5/42


4

The devastating consequences o the levee ailures in New Orleans ocused

the nations and the civil engineering proessions attention on the root

causes o what is considered one o the worst inrastructure disasters in our

nations history. As reported in the American Society o Civil Engineers

(ASCE)Report Card or Americas Inrastructure1, the nation is beginning to

acknowledge the act that its aging inrastructure is in need o repair or, in

some cases, replacement.

Ater months o intense analysis o the New Orleans disaster, the

ASCE Hurricane Katrina External Review Panel urged that organizations

responsible or critical lie-saety acilities be organized and operated to enable,

not to inhibit, a ocus on saety and that engineers continually evaluate the

appropriateness o design criteria, always considering how the perormance

o individual components aects the overall perormance o a system.2

These insights have become an imperative to all organizations

and individuals involved in planning, unding, designing, constructing,

and operating critical inrastructure. This report is an important step in

addressing the types o engineering and institutional ailures that werebrought to light by the studies ollowing Hurricane Katrina and other recent

inrastructure disasters.

The ASCE Board o Direction established the Critical Inrastructure

Guidance Task Committee to develop this guide to ensure quality in critical

inrastructure systems that may involve multiple constituents, multiple

jurisdictions, and complex nancing. The Critical Inrastructure Guidance

Task Committee ormulated the guiding principles that are the ocus o this

document. Although this document uses critical inrastructure to illustrate

the importance o the guiding principles, they apply to all inrastructure

systems.I am grateul to all o the individuals involved in this eort or

their hard work, initiative, and insight. Success in working with critical

inrastructure depends on each one o us.

D. Wayne Klotz, P.E., F.ASCE, D.WRE

ASCE President 2008-2009

1 American Society o Civil Engineers, Report Card or America's Inrastructure (Reston, Virginia, ASCE).

2 American Society o Civil Engineers Hurricane Katrina External Review Panel, The New Orleans HurricaneProtection System: What Went Wrong and Why, (Reston, Virginia: ASCE Press, 2007), p. vii.

[ F O R E W O R D ]


6/42


5

Critical inrastructure systems are acilities and assets such as roads and

bridges, water supply, wastewater treatment, food-reduction structures,

telecommunications, and power grids so vital that their destruction or

incapacitation would disrupt the security, economy, saety, health, or welare

o the public. Well unctioning inrastructure systems are vital to the nations

prosperity and well-being.

Recent catastrophic ailures o critical inrastructure systems in this

country have served as a stark reminder o the vital importance o our

nations critical inrastructure. These ailures (including the collapse o the

I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis and the levee ailures in New Orleans ater

Hurricane Katrina) resulted in loss o lie and extensive property damage as

well as severe disruption to regional and national economies.

The rst Fundamental Canon o the American Society o Civil

Engineers (ASCEs) Code o Ethics states, Engineers shall hold paramount

the saety, health, and welare o the public and shall strive to comply

with the principles o sustainable development in the perormance o their

proessional duties.3 Other engineering and proessional societies havesimilar clauses in their respective codes o ethics.

To better protect public saety, health, and welare, the ASCE Critical

Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee developed a set o interdependent

guiding principles to inorm the planning, unding, design, construction,

and operation o critical inrastructure systems. The guiding principles were

then validated by a group o more than 65 leading inrastructure experts

and stakeholders at the ASCE Summit on Guiding Principles or Critical

Inrastructure along with strategies to implement them.

The our guiding principles, developed to protect public saety,health, and welare, are:

1. Quantiy, communicate, and manage risk.

2. Employ an integrated systems approach.

3 American Society o Civil Engineers, 2008 Ocial Register, (Reston, Virginia: 2008), p. 13. The Code o

Ethics was adopted on September 2, 1914 and was most recently amended on July 23, 2006.

[ E x E C u t I v E S u m m a R y ]


7/42


6

3. Exercise sound leadership, management, andstewardship in decision-making processes.

4. Adapt critical inrastructure in response to dynamicconditions and practice.

These guiding principles are ully interrelated. No one principle is

more important than the others and all are required to protect the publics

saety, health, and welare. The ollowing paragraphs provide a brie

overview o the intent o each guiding principle.

Quantify, communicate, and manage risk: Risk management is theapplication o a systematic process or identiying, analyzing, planning,

monitoring, and responding to risk so that critical inrastructure will meet

service expectations. Within the context o these guiding principles, risk

is dened as the probability that an event may occur multiplied by the

magnitude o consequences that would result rom that event.For most critical inrastructure projects, risk has not been quantied

nor communicated to the end-users (typically, the public). Without this

inormation, end-users are not prepared to make decisions about the risk

and the consequences associated with critical inrastructure ailures. A major

shit in thinking is needed within the critical inrastructure sector to make

risk analysis, management, and communication the standard basis on which

projects are developed and implemented.

Employ an integrated systems approach: Critical inrastructure must

be planned, unded, designed, constructed, and operated as a system thatis appropriately integrated with all other interdependent systems. Critical

inrastructure systems must also be resilient and sustainable throughout the

systems lie cycle. The systems must be properly maintained, operated, and

modied, as necessary, to perorm eectively under changing conditions.

A lie cycle systems management approach as developed and endorsed by

the project stakeholders will help ensure that appropriate political will,

organizational structures, and unding mechanisms are established and

implemented throughout the entire lie o the project.

Exercise sound leadership, management, and stewardshipin decision-making processes: The long-term viability o anycritical inrastructure system no matter how resilient and sustainable it

is will ultimately rely on the human and organizational stewardship the

inrastructure system receives. Eective organizations can control program

outcomes through technical oversight, coordination with related projects

and activities, appropriate control and change management, and eective

communication with project stakeholders. Conversely, without sound

leadership and management o critical inrastructure projects, the nations

saety, health, and welare are at risk.


8/42


7

Adapt critical infrastructure in response to dynamic conditionsand practice:Critical inrastructure systems typically have a long liecycle that oten spans decades. These projects are normally designed to

meet perormance expectations deemed appropriate at the time o design.

However, conditions continually evolve and change, and project owners

must adopt change-management systems that can eectively address newconditions. Change management systems need to be fexible and robust,

and must establish discipline in the way critical inrastructure systems are

operated, reviewed, maintained, and upgraded throughout their lie cycle.

Public saety, health, and welare are at stake. The nations economic

well-being is at stake. The investment that the nation has made in its built

and natural environments is at stake. The leaders o our nation, the owners

o our critical inrastructure, design and construction proessionals, and thepublic as end-users must take these matters seriously. To be successul, they

all must embrace the guiding principles and embed them in their decision-

making and organizational cultures. And they must hold paramount the

saety, health, and welare o the public.

Engineers shall hold paramount the saety,health, and welare o the public andshall strive to comply with the principles osustainable development in the perormanceo their proessional duties.

First Fundamental Canon o ASCEs Code o Ethics*

* American Society o Civil Engineers, 2008 Ocial Register, (Reston, Virginia: 2008), p. 13. The Code o

Ethics was adopted on September 2, 1914 and was most recently amended on July 23, 2006.


9/42


8

Critical inrastructure includes systems, acilities, and assets so vital

that their destruction or incapacitation would have a debilitating

impact on national security, the economy, or public saety, health, or

welare.4 Critical inrastructure may cross political boundaries and may be

built, natural, or virtual. Built critical inrastructure includes energy; water

and wastewater treatment, distribution, and collection; transportation; and

communications systems. Natural critical inrastructure systems include

lakes, rivers, and streams that are used or navigation, water supply, or

food water storage, as well as coastal wetlands that provide a buer or

storm surges. Virtual critical inrastructure includes cyber, electronic, and

inormation systems.

Critical inrastructure projects or programs are oten large in breadth

and scope. Depending on their purpose and the population they serve,

smaller projects may also be considered critical. Critical inrastructure

projects oten take a long time to develop and construct, and are intended

to perorm over an extended period o time. They may be unded rom

multiple sources over many years. On some projects, unding might be

sporadic or insucient to build the projects to adequate levels o service.

Critical inrastructure systems oten cross geographic, political, cultural,

and organizational boundaries. Critical inrastructure systems, in short,are complex and interdependent, and may require special treatment to

provide the intended level o service. I built and maintained properly,

inrastructure works as planned and lie goes on, uninterrupted. Investment

in inrastructure typically has an invisible payo.

Unortunately, our nation has been lulled into a alse sense o

security. Human nature is such that it can take a disaster to wake people up

to the less-than-optimal situations that surround them.

4 U.S. Department o Homeland Security, National Inrastructure Protection Plan: Partnering to enhance

protection and resiliency, 2009, www.dhs.gov/xprevprot/programs/editorial_0827.shtm (Accessed June 1, 2009) p. 7

[ C h a P t E R 1 ]

Critical Inrastructure

Those who cannot remember thepast are condemned to repeat it.

George Santayana, The Lie o Reason, 1905-1906


10/42


9

As civilizations have become more complex and engineered

solutions more sophisticated, the public has come to rely on the integrity

o built projects or saety and well-being. When those projects ail, the

consequences have become commensurately more devastating. Notable

inrastructure disasters that have occurred over the past century serve as a

stark reminder o the importance o critical inrastructure to public saety,health, and welare.

W Wen Wrong In New OrensOn the morning o August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina struck southeast

Louisiana and triggered what would become one o the worst inrastructure

disasters in the U.S. The storm overtopped levees and foodwalls throughout

southeast Louisiana, and also caused the levees and foodwalls in the New

Orleans area to ail or breach in more than 50 locations. Water fooded over

80 percent o the city more than 10 eet deep in some neighborhoods. 5

Many actors led to the catastrophic fooding during HurricaneKatrina, but they can be readily grouped into our broad categories. First,

experts knew that a hurricane like Katrina was inevitable, and that when

it occurred the city would be fooded. No one heeded their warnings or

eectively communicated the risks to decision makers, government ocials,

or the people who lived in New Orleans.

Second, although the southeast Louisiana hurricane-protection

system was a complex assemblage o earth levees, concrete and steel walls,

pump stations, drainage-ways, and food gates, it was a system in name

only. It was not designed as a system, nor operated as one. It was planned,

designed, constructed, and operated without a system-wide approach orintegration with land use, emergency evacuation, or recovery plans.

Third, everyone was in charge, and yet no one was in charge. The

U.S. Congress authorized construction and appropriated ederal unds.

The U.S. Army Corps o Engineers

planned the projects and prepared the

designs. Local levee boards paid the

local share; infuenced the planning,

design, and construction process;

and were responsible or operation

and maintenance. No single agency

or organization was empowered to

provide system-wide oversight or a

ocus on critical lie-saety issues. The

result was management by committee,

and no one could say, The buck stops

here.

5 American Society o Civil Engineers Hurricane Katrina

External Review Panel, The New Orleans HurricaneProtection System: What Went Wrong and Why,

(Reston, Virginia: ASCE Press, 2007), p. v.

The levee ailure in New Orlecaused by Hurricane Katrina

let 1,118 people dead (as oAugust 2, 2006) and resultedin over $27 billion in propertydamage.


11/42


10

Finally, the hurricane-protection system was designed and

constructed over a 40-year period with little adjustment to changing regional

conditions. Despite new meteorological inormation, the standard project

hurricane (the design hurricane) was not updated. Despite knowledge o

regional subsidence, design elevations were never adjusted. And despite eld

test data that showed unacceptable defections in I-walls resisting loads romfoods, I-wall designs were not revised.

Could this disaster have been avoided? In short, it would have

required time and money: rst, to manage and communicate risk; second,

to design and operate it as a system; third to put someone in charge; and

ourth to make adjustments based on new knowledge. Cutting corners on

cost and schedule had the inevitable eect o compromising public saety, an

unortunate outcome in which more than 1,100 people died and billions o

dollars o property damage occurred. Some o these same themes are present

in the root causes o other inrastructure disasters, all o which illustrate the

need to protect public saety, health, and welare.

te ve ProposiionThe United States has achieved great prosperity in large measure because o

our investments in inrastructure. Highway, waterway, air, and rail systems

have allowed unparalleled mobility o people and goods. Water-borne

diseases are virtually nonexistent because o water and wastewater treatment,

distribution, and collection systems. In addition, telecommunications and

power systems have enabled our economic growth.

What i irrigation were no longer viable in the arid west? What i

the water supply to most o Caliornia, the seventh largest economy in theworld, was interrupted or more than two years? What i our agricultural

goods were not price competitive in international markets? What i our

energy inrastructure systems were requently incapacitated, interrupting

the fow o energy? What i much o the critical inrastructure o our coastal

counties and cities, home to more than hal o the nations population, had

to be physically moved?

These are not just uture possibilities; in some cases they are

already part o our nations inrastructure challenges. According to the

U.S. Geological Survey, the Ogallala aquier, a vital natural inrastructure

and principal source o irrigation water in the arid west, has declined

signicantly since large-scale irrigation began. Some sources estimate only

25 years o continued viability. Urban and agricultural areas protected

by a ragile system o levees in the Caliornia Delta (the confuence o

the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers) could experience losses o more

than $40 billion rom seismic induced levee breaches. The breaches could

inundate much o the Delta with saline water, cutting o the resh water

supply to Southern Caliornia or more than 24 months.

Our agricultural products remain price competitive in part because

o our inland navigation system and the ease o moving bulk products rom


12/42


1

arms to ports. Yet this navigation inrastructure is

aging, challenged by new demands rom increased

high fows, greater throughput requirements,

and environmental restrictions. Fuel prices

spike whenever a hurricane hits the Gul and

our energy inrastructure is highly vulnerable tothese events. The complex and interdependent

inrastructure required to maintain the

production and transmission o energy is aced

with increasing challenges rom maintenance

demands, security, and natural hazards. Sea level

rise presents a multi-aceted problem. It increases

risk dramatically by magniying the impact o

severe storms on inrastructure systems, a growing

population, and assets in coastal zones.

The nations overall risk o sueringrom the consequences o critical inrastructure

ailures is now greater than ever. Yet people are

rarely aware o these risks because the risks have

not been quantied in most communities, and

i quantied, not communicated adequately. To

serve as intended, individual projects must be

treated as part o an overall integrated system,

recognizing dependencies and interdependencies.

Meeting these challenges will require a new kind

o leadership that redenes governance o criticalinrastructure systems and restores the ocus

on public saety, health, and welare. Finally,

inrastructure systems must be adaptable to

unexpected changes in order to be sustainable. In

short, we will have to plan, develop, and manage

inrastructure as risk-based systems that can adapt

to change through enlightened and collaborative

leadership.

From lessons learned, we have the

opportunity to regain our ocus on the

importance o critical inrastructure systems in

protecting public saety, health, and welare.

As the ASCE Hurricane Katrina External Review

Panel concluded, The lessons learned rom

the engineering and engineering-related policy

ailures triggered by Hurricane Katrina have

proound implications or other American

communities and a sobering message to people

nationwide: we must place the protection o

When talking about the American

Recovery and Reinvestment Act o2009, President Barack Obama

had this to say about stewardship

o our nations transportation

inrastructure: But what makes

this investment so important is not

simply that we will jump-start job

creation, or reduce the congestionthat costs us nearly $80 billion a

year, or rebuild the aging roads

that cost drivers billions more a

year in upkeep. What makes it so

important is that by investing in

roads that have earned a grade

o D- by America's leading civilengineers roads that should

have been rebuilt long ago we

can save some 14,000 men and

women who lose their lives each

yeardue to bad roads and driving

conditions. Like a broken levee or

a bridge with a shaky oundation,

poor roads are a public hazard

and we have a responsibility to fx

them.March 3, 2009 (italics added or emphasis)


13/42


12

saety, health, and welare at the oreront o our nations priorities. To do

anything less could lead to a ar greater tragedy than the one witnessed in

New Orleans.6

Wo leds e Crge?Meeting these varied challenges to upgrade our critical inrastructure systemswill require new kinds o leadership and new ways o thinking at all levels.

The perormance o critical inrastructure is everyones responsibility. This

includes design and construction proessionals, elected ocials, regulators,

owners, and the public, as end-users.

The inrastructure sector includes organizations and people who have

a vested interest in ensuring that critical inrastructure is planned, built, and

operated such that the saety, health, and welare o the public is protected.

The inrastructure sector is not a ormal entity and unortunately, at present,

its stakeholders are disconnected and may not have a shared vision. The

guiding principles represent a ramework within which the inrastructuresector can work together to create a shared vision or protecting public

saety, health, and welare.

Each o the inrastructure sector stakeholders plays an important but

distinct role. These roles are both collaborative and hierarchical, and the

responsibilities are necessary and cannot be delegated. Owners must ensure

that critical inrastructure meets its intended purpose o protecting and

enhancing the saety, health, and welare o its users in a sustainable manner

over the lie cycle o the project. Regardless o whether owners are public

or private entities, they must provide leadership and advocacy or their

respective projects.Design proessionals are responsible or the conceptual and detailed

design o critical inrastructure. As such, the saety, health, and welare o

the general public are dependent on engineers sound judgment, decisions,

and practices during the planning and design phases o a project. Design and

construction proessionals are uniquely positioned to serve as the catalyst or

improvements in the way critical inrastructure is designed and constructed.

Government ocials who establish policy and provide unding or

critical inrastructure projects must understand, support, and adequately und

these projects so that public saety, health, and welare are not compromised.

The public, as end-users o critical inrastructure, is responsible or

understanding the perormance o critical inrastructure systems and the

consequences o ailure. Through this understanding, individuals can make

inormed personal decisions based on the risks associated with living in

their communities and can advocate or adequate investment in critical

inrastructure.

6 American Society o Civil Engineers Hurricane Katrina External Review Panel, The New Orleans Hurricane

Protection System: What Went Wrong and Why, (Reston, Virginia: ASCE Press, 2007), p. viii.


14/42


1

Any single critical inrastructure disaster should be proo that we as

a nation need a new collective imperative or planning, designing,

building, and operating our critical inrastructure systems. However,

it was the devastating consequences o the levee ailures in New Orleans

during Hurricane Katrina that ocused the nations and the civil engineering

proessions attention on the root causes o what is considered one o the

worst inrastructure disasters in our nations history. At the same time, the

nation is waking up to the act that its aging inrastructure is in need o

repair or replacement.

The ASCE Critical Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee was

charged with developing a guide or engineers and nonengineers to ensure

quality in critical inrastructure systems that involve multiple constituents,

multiple jurisdictions, and complex nancing. Ater much discussion

and deliberation, the Critical Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee

ormulated the guiding principles that are the ocus o this report.

The guiding principles were validated by a group o more than 65leading inrastructure experts and stakeholders at the ASCE Summit on

Guiding Principles or Critical Inrastructure in December 2008. During two

days o presentations, breakout groups, and discussions, participants also

developed prioritized implementation strategies or each guiding principle.

Summit presentations and a list o participants are available at www.asce.org.

The process o dissecting critical inrastructure ailures and successes

and ormulating these guiding principles led task committee members and

summit participants to a much more undamental realization about the true

[ C h a P t E R 2 ]

Guiding Principles or

Critical Inrastructure

Overarching Principle The design,construction, operation, and maintenanceo critical inrastructure systems must holdparamount the saety, health, and welare othe public it serves or aects.


15/42


14

importance o critical inrastructure to our nations saety and well-being.

Guiding principles are necessary to inorm decisions, drive actions,

and align behaviors or all types o inrastructure projects and systems. These

principles provide a strategy to address public saety, health, and welare

throughout the lie cycle o critical inrastructure systems rom planning

through decommissioning. Use o these guiding principles is appropriatewhen assessing whether existing critical inrastructure systems are

perorming to the proper levels o service. These guiding principles should be

used or sel-assessments and external evaluations and can be applied to both

existing and new projects.

Over the past ew decades, the ocus on public saety, health, and

welare has been overshadowed by project costs and schedules. Appropriate

inrastructure investment and project lie-cycle perormance have also been

compromised by a ocus on election cycles and short-term gains. When

planning, designing, constructing, and operating a project, the overarching

principle must be applied.Adherence to the overarching principle is a responsibility o all

stakeholders and is a undamental canon in codes o ethics or design

proessionals, including ASCE, the National Society o Proessional Engineers,

the Institute o Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the American Society o

Mechanical Engineers, and the American Institute o Chemical Engineers.

In support o this overarching principle there are our pillars or

guiding principles. These guiding principles are ully interrelated no one

principle is more important than the others, and all are required to achieve

the overarching principle. The our guiding principles are:

1. Quantiy, communicate, and manage risk.

2. Employ an integrated systems approach.

3. Exercise sound leadership, management, and stewardship indecision-making processes.

4. Adapt critical inrastructure in response to dynamic conditionsand practice.

Together, these guiding principles create a ramework within which

the eectiveness, adaptability, and resilience o critical inrastructure systems

can be assessed and managed. By eectively applying these principles,

critical inrastructure systems will be resilient and sustainable throughout

their lie cycle. Each guiding principle is described in subsequent chapters,

including recommendations on how they should be implemented through

best practices and policy.


16/42


1

Inrastructure projects are created, rom inception through construction

and operation, by a series o decisions, such as those regarding project

location, design criteria, unding, and designer and contractor selections.

Each decision contributes to the adequacy o the nished project and its

resulting level o service and saety. However, many decisions are constrained

by unding or schedule considerations. They can also be constrained

by limits in the technical understanding o how a project will perorm

under unknown conditions. Decisions can be infuenced by philosophical

dierences between the net benets o competing objectives (e.g., value or

people versus value o the natural environment).

These compromises represent the gap between the best possible

project or program that could be implemented and the actual project or

program that is created. They also represent the risk o less-than-optimal

project perormance that, in turn, increases the likelihood o compromises to

the saety, health, and welare o the projects users.

Ris mngeenWe live in a world lled with risk. Regardless o the level o care and stewardship

invested in a critical inrastructure project, a perect (i.e., risk-ree) solution

cannot be created. Real projects will always include some level o residual risk

that requires quantication, management, and communication.

Risk management is the application o a systematic process or

identiying, analyzing, planning, monitoring, and responding to risk so

that critical inrastructure will meet service, saety, health, and welare

expectations.

Within the context o these guiding principles, risk is dened as

the probability that an event may occur, multiplied by the magnitude oconsequences that would result rom that event:

Risk = (Probability) x (Consequences)

Probability includes two components: the probability that an

event (such as an earthquake or food) will occur, and the probability

that the critical inrastructure will not perorm to required levels. These

probabilities refect signicant uncertainty. For example, it is dicult to

predict the timing and magnitude o events such as hurricanes, tornadoes,

[ C h a P t E R 3 ]

Quantiy, Communicate,

and Manage Risk


17/42


16

and earthquakes. It is also dicult to oresee human-caused events such as

maintenance ailures or terrorist acts.

Consequences represent the range o possible eects o an event,

such as loss o lie, economic impact, environmental damage, or cultural

loss. Assessing consequences means that we must work with disciplines

outside o engineering and ultimately with the stakeholders and the public.While challenging, the inclusion and integration o multiple perspectives in

assessing risk is our ethical responsibility and will provide the greatest value

o our proession to society.

The inclusion o risk as a perormance criterion is a undamental

shit in the approach to critical inrastructure development and operation.

Risk-based design will require a greater understanding o the anticipated

physical behavior o inrastructure systems under a wide range o events that

may occur. Such detailed analyses were not practical or even possible a ew

decades ago, but can be readily accomplished today.

Perhaps more challenging than technical analyses are thedeterminations o acceptable risk levels by decision makers. Risk-based

design requires owners and stakeholders to decide, in advance, the level o

economic damage and human hardship that is acceptable.

Considering these challenges, leaders with short-term vision may see

little value in tackling these important questions. However, the risks remain,

and avoiding these questions will not resolve them. Without a thorough and

candid risk management approach, the people at risk will continue to be

uninormed about the economic and physical threats that they ace.

undersnding RisFor most critical inrastructure projects, risk has typically neither beenquantied nor communicated to the end-users (typically, the public).

Without this inormation, end-users are not prepared, either technically or

politically, to make decisions about the risks and consequences associated

with critical inrastructure ailures. End-users are, consequently, not

demanding an adequate level o protection or their critical inrastructure

systems. Without adequate inormation about the risks, an uninormed

public must make uninormed decisions about their level o protection.

Every American should have the opportunity to choose the risk they

are individually willing to accept. Traditional inrastructure design practices

in the U.S. have not helped citizens make such choices. Although not widely

available, we now have the analytic and communication capabilities to

support individual assessments and better engage the public, as stakeholders,

in events that aect their security and saety.

a Si in tiningUnlike the overarching principle or other guiding principles, risk analysis,

risk management, and risk communication represent a new approach to

inrastructure design, construction, and operation that is now viewed as

the best way to bring decision makers and stakeholders to a common,


18/42


1

inormed rame o reerence. The ollowing are recommendations on

how to eectively integrate risk assessment, risk management, and risk

communication strategies into our nations critical inrastructure programs.

I. Produce a best-practices guide and develop and publish

codes, standards, and manuals or assessing andcommunicating risk.

Risk assessment and management is a relatively new tool as applied

to critical inrastructure systems. A team o qualied risk experts and

stakeholders rom within and rom outside the inrastructure eld should

come together and write the book on how risk should be analyzed,

managed, and communicated or critical inrastructure projects. This guide

needs to be supplemented by a suite o learning tools, such as curriculum

modules, workshops, workbooks, and classroom materials.

In assessing risk, it is necessary to consider tradeos. These tradeos

need to be evaluated by using common metrics, one o which is monetarycost. It is challenging, however, to assign costs to intangible items such as

the value o an endangered species or a human lie. Similar assessments

are also necessary or issues such as social, economic, political, and

environmental quality. Standard and accepted methodologies or intangible

tradeo analyses are needed as part o a best-practices guide.

Acceptance o risk management methodologies will be dicult unless

regulatory agencies sanction and require them. To attain widespread use o these

risk management methodologies, portions o a best-practices guide should be

integrated into applicable ederal, state, and local design standards and codes.

II. Develop a public-policy ramework that establishes tolerablerisk guidelines and allocates costs or managing risks andconsequences.

Many industries, such as the insurance and nancial sectors, have

developed methodologies and analytical tools to evaluate and manage risk

proles. These industries have also developed standards or what constitutes

tolerable and intolerable levels o risk. Such baseline risk values will provide

a ramework or identiying projects that exceed acceptable risk guidelines,

so that those projects can be restructured.

A major shit in thinking is needed withinthe critical inrastructure sector to make riskanalysis, management, and communicationa standard basis on which projects aredeveloped and implemented.


19/42


18

Within the inrastructure sector, established and accepted guidelines

regarding appropriate risk levels or engineering design as they pertain to loss

o lie, loss o property, or economic loss are rare. One notable exception is

the Reclamation Saety o Dams Act o 1978, which led to the development

(by the U.S. Department o the Interior, Bureau o Reclamation) o guidelines

or achieving public protection in dam saety.Appropriate proessional organizations and agencies within the

ederal and state governments (with input rom local governments) should

develop systematic approaches to establishing tolerable risk guidelines and

standards or all types o critical inrastructure systems. Ater systematic

approaches are established, regional and local government agencies can

acilitate discussions with critical inrastructure stakeholders, including the

public, about acceptable levels o risk to economics, public saety, health,

and welare or that community. These guidelines can then be codied

through the public-policy ramework at the appropriate state and local levels.

The public-policy ramework should also include a discussion owhich entities or organizations should be responsible or managing risk, how

risk should be dealt with in the context o a risk-management strategy, and

who should pay the costs o risk management.

III. Provide proessional education and training to members o thedesign and construction industries on identiying, analyzing,and mitigating risk.

Most planners, architects, engineers, and constructors did not learn

risk management methodologies in their ormal education. A continuing

education program o risk management best practices is needed to educateindividuals in the design and construction industry. In addition, a ormal

university-level program o study on risk analysis, risk communication, and

risk management is needed to educate uture generations o design and

construction proessionals.

IV. Screen all existing critical inrastructure projects to determinei updated risk analyses are warranted. Require that riskanalyses be perormed or all proposed critical inrastructureprojects.

Project owners are ultimately responsible or the success or ailure

o their projects during design, during construction, and over the projects

lie cycle. It is in the project owners best economic interest as well as

the owners responsibility as a good citizen to ully understand the level

o risk inherent in each critical inrastructure project and to inorm the

communities that the project serves about this level o risk.

Given the rapid changes our nation is undergoing, evaluating the

suciency o existing critical inrastructure is increasingly important. The

consequences o ailure o critical inrastructure projects built even 20 or

30 years ago may now be signicantly dierent rom the consequences

The I-35W Bridge in

Minneapolis, Minnesota,collapsed into the MississippiRiver and riverbanks on August1, 2007, killing 13 peopleand injuring 145.


20/42


1

o ailure when the project was originally developed. New predictive and

analytical tools can now enable a much more comprehensive view o the

probability o ailure.

V. Publicize the risk o individual critical inrastructure projects

and illustrate the impacts to society i an inrastructure systemwere to ail.

Many people choose to live and work in high-risk areas or example,

in ocean-side communities at risk rom hurricanes and coastal erosion,

river-ront communities at risk rom fooding, or hillside developments at

risk rom earthquakes or landslides. These citizens oten make these choices

because they perceive that the benets (jobs, commute time, views, prestige,

etc.) outweigh the risks.

People and communities oten expect the presence o critical

inrastructure to compensate or the choice o high-risk land use. They

expect critical inrastructure systems to adequately protect their amilies

and investments. This protection is assumed to be absolute, and they do not

appreciate the possible consequences that could result rom inrastructure

ailure. However, there are no risk-ree solutions.

The public, as end-users o critical inrastructure systems, deserves an

opportunity to learn about the risks associated with critical inrastructure

in their communities. Decisions regarding tolerable risk must include input

rom public stakeholders. The public should be active participants in how

residual risk is managed through risk acceptance, disaster preparedness,

evacuation policies, increased ortication o critical inrastructure systems,

or other strategies to buy down the risk.Although owners, designers, and constructors typically intend or

their critical inrastructure projects to provide adequate protection, the risk

o ailure remains. Although ederal, state, or local governments provide

project oversight and reconstruction assistance, this does not alleviate the

individual end-users responsibility or making wise decisions.

There are a number o ways to incentivize wise choices or

appropriate risk-management strategies. Federal, state, and local program

unding or critical inrastructure could be given preerentially to

communities that implement land-use policies that limit development

in high-risk areas. An organizations bond rating or insurance rates couldbe tied, in part, to a demonstration o how well the organization reduces,

manages, mitigates, and communicates risk in its projects. For example, the

National Flood Insurance Program, administered by the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, provides food insurance premium subsidies or those

homes and businesses located in communities that implement zoning and

building codes that minimize damages to structures aected by a food

event. The adoption o similar regulatory and short-term nancial incentives

or other natural and human-caused disasters may eectively reduce human

and property risks.

Three Mile Island Nuclear

Generating Station is the siteo the worst civilian nuclearaccident in United States hiswhich occurred on March 21979.


21/42


20

[ C h a P t E R 4 ]

Employ an Integrated

Systems ApproachI

n the past, owners, designers, and end-users oten thought o critical

inrastructure as isolated projects designed to perorm a nite set o

unctions. The interrelationship between critical inrastructure and the

surrounding physical and societal web was not always taken into account,

and the long-term viability and adaptability o a project was not always ully

explored.

It has become increasingly apparent in our complex world that

almost everything is interrelated, and critical inrastructure is no dierent.

To be eective, critical inrastructure must be considered within the contexto all other elements that may aect it or that it may aect. Inrastructure

projects must be developed using a systems approach with an understanding

o all connections, interactions, and interdependencies between system

components.

This is more dicult than it might seem. Critical inrastructure

projects and, indeed, our sociological and political structures are

complex. There are many moving parts, the interdependencies o which

may not be well understood. Humans have a natural propensity or breaking

down projects into smaller, more manageable pieces, and it takes eort to

integrate them again as a whole. Also, the many players on large projectsmay not have the same motivations and may even be at odds with each

other.

Regardless o the challenges, every critical inrastructure project

should be planned, designed, constructed, and operated as a system that is

appropriately integrated with all other interdependent systems. The system

must also be properly maintained, operated, and modied, as necessary, to

perorm eectively under changing conditions throughout its lie cycle.

A lie-cycle systems management approach, developed and endorsed

by the project stakeholders, will help ensure that appropriate political will,

organizational structures, and unding mechanisms are established andimplemented throughout the entire lie o the project.

Ssinbii, Redndnc, nd ResiiencSustainable development is dened as the challenge o meeting human

needs or natural resources, industrial products, energy, ood, transportation,

shelter, and eective waste management while conserving and protecting

environmental quality and the natural resource base essential or uture


22/42


2

A double-deck reeway in

Oakland, Caliornia, collapsduring the Loma Prietaearthquake on October 17,1989, crushing the cars on lower deck and killing42 people.

development.7 To be sustainable, critical inrastructure must be considered

within the context o the resources needed to build and maintain it, and

within the context o the impacts to the surrounding ecosystems, now and

in the uture.

Redundant systems include having backup systems in place that

will help mitigate consequences i critical inrastructure ails to perorm.Redundancy is, by denition, a consideration o the potential perormance

o the critical inrastructure system within the context o surrounding

systems that might act as back-ups. Those backup systems could consist o

some combination o land use, secondary inrastructure, evacuation plans,

and other strategies that would help mitigate the risk to public saety, health,

and welare and damage to the environment.

Resilient critical inrastructure systems are able to withstand and

recover rom extreme conditions (such as greater-than-designed-or loading

conditions). Resilient systems are more likely to perorm well over the long

term and under unoreseen conditions that may arise. A resilient criticalinrastructure system and the communities it serves is more likely to

bounce back or recover more quickly and eciently than a nonresilient

system.

Developing resilient critical inrastructure systems may require

additional up-ront project unding. However, the long-term costs, especially

i disaster strikes, will be ar less. Consider that an additional $2 billion

investment in the levees surrounding New Orleans may have reduced the

tragic loss o lie caused by Hurricane Katrina.

Inegr SoionsClearly, uture critical inrastructure projects will be shaped by a needto accommodate expanding populations and associated economic

development. Most inrastructure systems have more than one acceptable

conguration or design. The most eective designs will be those that work

in concert with other inrastructure projects, the evolution o surrounding

population and economic centers, and the changing natural environment.

Engaging project stakeholders is a key requisite to ensuring that the

appropriate political support, organizational structures, and unding

mechanisms are established and implemented throughout the lie cycle o a

project.

The challenges o implementing a lie-cycle, integrated systems

approach are well known. Critical inrastructure projects are typically large

and complex. Organizations and systems must be in place to ensure that

critical inrastructure is properly operated and maintained over time. The

ollowing items outline broad-based ways to achieve this.

7 ASCE, The Role o the Civil Engineer in Sustainable Development, ASCE Policy Statement 418, Adopted

April 24, 2007.


23/42


22

I. For each program or project, create a regional ramework,develop a statement o unifed vision among stakeholders,and defne a lie-cycle management and unding approach.

A well-dened regional organizational ramework is the rst step

in establishing a context or discussions concerning critical inrastructure.Such a ramework should encompass all activities and stakeholders that are

relevant to, and potentially aected by, a critical inrastructure system. The

ramework should consider the surrounding built and natural environments,

socioeconomic conditions, organizational jurisdictions, and broader

implications such as impact to regional commerce. A timely decision-making

process must be employed.

Regions or communities may have several interrelated critical

inrastructure projects within their boundaries. Thereore, it will be

important to nd a mechanism to acilitate coordination. A coalition o

critical inrastructure project owners along with regional planning agencies

is a logical starting point or such collaboration. For critical inrastructure

projects that involve land-use considerations, local and state government

involvement may also be required.

Such organizations can quickly become unwieldy as competing

interests, authorities, and jurisdictions o participants come into confict.

However, the growing interdependency o critical inrastructure systems,

population centers, and economic development will require eective

leadership and collaboration.

II. Integrate and apply technological tools, such as systems-drivendynamic simulations and asset-management models, to assessthe interdependencies and the range o benefts and costsassociated with critical inrastructure projects.

Within complex systems, the many components may each ollow

simple rules on an individual level, but have no view o the overall system

behavior. When those components interact, however, they can generate

complex system-level behaviors that, based on their individual behaviors,

may not be expected.

Dynamic models and tools that can simulate and predict this

emergent behavior are becoming more available and widely used. Simulatingthe many components associated with critical inrastructure systems and the

interdependencies between them can support the strategic decision-making

process and thus can help enhance public saety, health, and welare.

Project owners are ultimately responsible or the success (or ailure) o

their projects, not only during design and construction, but over a projects

entire lie cycle. The success or ailure o a critical inrastructure project will

hinge on how well the project is integrated into its surroundings and on

how resilient and sustainable it is. Project owners should use the available

models and tools on existing critical inrastructure projects to understand


24/42


2

these complex interdependencies. These models and simulations can enable

designers to portray various design alternatives and their implications in an

engaging and inormative way, so that project stakeholders can eectively

weigh in on the project.

Public unds oten comprise a signicant portion o critical

inrastructure project unding. Elected executives and legislators shouldbecome engaged in the dialogue about critical inrastructure to ensure

projects are implemented using a systems-based approach that seeks to

balance long-term benets with short-term costs. While cost is oten

a primary consideration when designing and constructing a project,

ocials should consider saety, aesthetics, and sustainability o the various

alternatives with equal care. The use o models and simulations can greatly

help stakeholders understand and balance various and competing outcomes.


25/42


24

[ C h a P t E R 5 ]

Exercise Sound

Leadership, Management,and Stewardship

The long-term viability o any critical inrastructure system no matter

how sustainable and resilient it is will ultimately rely on the human

and organizational stewardship the inrastructure system receives. We

cannot simply build inrastructure and then neglect to adequately maintain

it, hoping that it will continue to perorm adequately.

History has shown that ailure to adequately communicate

and collaborate, by both individuals and organizations, may lead tomisunderstandings, omissions, and grievances. With complex critical

inrastructure systems, the problems are oten magnied.

Notable inrastructure ailures have been caused in part by a lack

o denition o who is in charge and by not having in place a clear or

eective decision-making process. Critical decisions are sometimes made at

an inappropriate level o an organizations hierarchy (either too low or too

high).

Without sound leadership, management, and stewardship o

critical inrastructure projects, the nations saety, health, and welare are

at risk. On the other hand, strengthening the leadership and decision-making processes will support a proper level o protection and service rom

critical inrastructure. Below are several suggestions on how this can be

accomplished.

te Inrsrcre lederLeadership is an ability to direct, motivate, and infuence others to perorm

in a particular manner. Good leaders provide a long-term vision and are

characterized by their ability to organize and encourage those they lead to

eectively accomplish tasks, while creating and sustaining a positive work

environment. Management is the ability to plan, organize, and direct a serieso activities required to accomplish a task.

While denitions dier, the main dierence between leadership and

management is the motivational aspect o leadership. It is this motivational

aspect and related innovative decision making that moves individual

activities and entire projects orward.

Not every person working on a critical inrastructure systems will

be comortable in a leadership position. However, or a system to perorm

adequately, appropriate leadership and management needs to be applied


26/42


2

in strategic positions throughout an organizations workorce. Critical

inrastructure projects must be led by motivated, innovative, and skilled

leaders to be successul. In return, society should reward those leaders

commensurate with the valuable services they oer.

Srong, Feibe OrgnizionsWhile strong leadership and management may help achieve anorganizations mission, the organization itsel must be structured to enable

and empower employees to make appropriate decisions at their levels

o responsibility. Complex projects oten require complex management

structures to oversee them. Management responsibility may reside within

a single organization or may cross several entities. Management structures

may be well established, or may have evolved organically with some residual

disorganization.

Most problems concentrate at the interaces between people and

between organizations. Through these interaces, however, problems canbe solved. Eective organizations can control program outcomes through

technical oversight, coordination with related projects and activities,

appropriate control and change management, and eective communication

with project stakeholders. The early and consistent use o external reviews

can also help identiy areas or improved coordination. However, no amount

o engineering can oset a dysunctional organization.

Without strong leadership and management to acilitate critical

inrastructure stewardship, the nations continued economic development

in addition to the saety, health, and welare o its citizens is at risk. On the

other hand, strengthening the leadership and decision-making processeswill support a proper level o protection and service rom the critical

inrastructure. Given the importance o this aspect o organizational health,

summit participants identied the ollowing suggestions.

I. Establish or upgrade organizational structures, use inter-and intraorganizational communications and collaborationmechanisms, and apply organizational change managementtechniques.

A project owners responsibility, when considering critical

inrastructure, is to establish or implement a vision or the project (withappropriate input rom stakeholders); champion the project through its lie

cycle; acilitate good decision making that supports the vision and purpose

o the project; garner and allocate the resources needed to implement,

operate, and maintain the project; and manage change. An owner, public or

private, can delegate authority to act on various issues, but cannot abrogate

their overall responsibility or the project.

Within the complexities o many critical inrastructure projects, a

clear project champion is sometimes dicult to identiy. At a minimum,

The Teton Dam in southeaste

Idaho collapsed on frst fllingon June 5, 1976, causing thdeaths o 11 people and $2billion in damages.


27/42


26

project owners need to make sure that there is one entity or individual in

charge, that there are clear lines o authority and responsibility, and that

there are unambiguous denitions o what that responsibility entails.

Organizations should strive to improve communication skills and

protocols among project teams and with stakeholders, including the public.

It is critical to eectively communicate important issues and implicationspertaining to a project.

II. Educate and cultivate engineers and other designproessionals to be better leaders, and urge others to honorthe engineers assessments on issues pertaining to saety,health, and welare.

Critical inrastructure systems require many engineering decisions to

properly design, build, operate, and maintain. However, project owners are

oten nonengineers. Similarly, projects are oten led and managed by non-

engineers. This is acceptable, except in instances in which nonengineers

make engineering decisions and inappropriate management decisions

overcome sound engineering practice. For critical inrastructure projects, the

result can be deadly.

Engineers need to exercise a stronger voice within organizations that

develop and manage critical inrastructure projects. During the value-setting

process, engineers must advocate or public saety, health, and welare, and

must communicate the risks associated with various project alternatives.

Throughout the lie cycle o the project, engineers need to remain active,

engaged, and respected members o decision-making and management

teams to ensure that the saety, health, and welare considerations are notoverlooked, downplayed, or misunderstood.

There will always be trade-os between cost and risk. For example,

cost-cutting measures may aect the resiliency o the project and lead to

a decreased level o service and saety. These types o decisions need to be

based on a thorough understanding o the risks posed by the changed plan

or operating condition. Knowledgeable and qualied engineers should make

such assessments.

Engineers rightully dedicate a large portion o their college

education and postcollege careers to the technical aspects o their respective

disciplines. Summit participants suggested that uture engineers alsodemonstrate prociency in topics such as public policy, business and public

administration, teamwork, and leadership in addition to their technical

expertise.

Todays critical inrastructure systems cannot wait or the engineers o

tomorrow, however. Engineers need to take the initiative to learn leadership

and management principles and apply them more proactively in their daily

work. Furthermore, the owners, developers, and managers o todays critical

inrastructure need to help elevate the engineers role in the project and


28/42


2

respect the engineering perspective as important to the decision-making

process.

III. Engage and orm coalitions to advocate or criticalinrastructure, and ensure the process o establishing priorities

and allocating resources is disciplined, air, rational, andtransparent.

The nations saety, health, and welare as aorded by the nations

critical inrastructure should be placed higher on the list o national and

local priorities. No single group o people can eect this change. Rather,

coalitions that include a broad range o policy makers, design proessionals,

owners, decision makers, and stakeholders are needed to advocate or critical

inrastructure. These coalitions create power in numbers and richness

in perspectives. They can serve as voices o reason to highlight issues,

and provide a sound basis o opinion to assist elected ocials, agency

representatives, and other decision makers.

Even i coalitions are understood to be an optimal (and perhaps the

only) means by which positive change can occur, a number o inherent

barriers can make coalition orming dicult, including the lack o eective

contacts in other proessions or organizations. There may also be a concern

that conficts could arise between groups. It takes committed leadership to

manage those conficts.

Regardless, the ormation o a coalition can shit the balance o power

and alter the uture course o an issue. People who pool their resources

and work together are generally more powerul and better able to advance

their interests. A coalition can bring more expertise and resources to bearon complex issues, when the technical or personnel resources o any one

organization would not be sucient. And a coalition can build a lasting base

or change.

IV. Create adaptable, nimble, and progressive learningorganizations.

Change is dicult or almost all organizations, but is especially

challenging or those with long-established or rigid hierarchies and those

hamstrung by outdated protocols. But change is absolutely necessary toaddress the challenges o protecting the nations saety, health, and welare.

Organizations within the inrastructure sector need to strive to be more

adaptable and nimble in order to negotiate these changes and to continue

to incorporate best practices and innovation into their critical inrastructure-

related work.

Organizations within the inrastructure sector including project

owners, government agencies, proessional organizations, and design-

construction rms must be willing to perorm a complete bottom-to-top

The northeast blackout oAugust 2003 let 50 millionpeople across eight states anone Canadian province withpower, causing a cascadingailure o interdependent critiinrastructure systems. (topimage 20 hours beore theblackout; bottom about 7hours ater.)


29/42


28

examination o their existing policies and programs. They will need to

implement new programs and garner additional expertise. They will need

to build partnerships with new people and organizations. They will need

to think creatively to develop new unding sources. In short, organizations

must be willing and able to adapt to change.


30/42


2

The world is continually evolving and changing. Consider, or example,

the proound changes to society rom the industrial revolution a

century ago and rom the inormation age and globalization today.

Consider the dramatic potential changes that climate change may cause.

The traditional approaches to the development and operation o

critical inrastructure projects have not necessarily taken this mosaic o

change into account. Critical inrastructure systems have a very long lie

cycle spanning decades or even centuries. These projects have traditionally

been designed to conorm to perormance levels deemed appropriate at the

time o design.

Dramatic changes in the latter hal o the 20th century and the

beginning o the 21st century necessitate a new approach considering

critical inrastructure within the context o dynamic conditions to ensure

that projects adequately protect public saety, health, and welare over their

lie-cycles.

For example, U.S. population grew rom 152 million in 1950 to 304

million in 2008.8 U.S. population is expected to continue to grow and some

estimates place 80 percent o this growth within 100 miles o coastlines that

are oten subject to severe storms. Clearly, the consequences o ailure are

increasing.

Concurrent with these types o changes, the design proession

8 U.S. Census Bureau, International Database, Total Midyear Population or the World: 1950-2050

http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/popclockest.txt Accessed June 10, 2009.

[ C h a P t E R 6 ]

Adapt to Dynamic

Conditions and Practice

It is change, continuing change, inevitablechange, that is the dominant actor insociety today. No sensible decision canbe made any longer without taking intoaccount not only the world as it is, but theworld as it will be.

Sir Isaac Asimov, 1981


31/42


30

has increased its understanding o how inrastructure perorms through

improved analytical and predictive techniques and analyses. We can now

better observe potential deciencies that we may not have been able to

see beore. The combination o increasing consequences and the ability to

rapidly assess inrastructure perormance has created a new imperative to

ortiy the nations inrastructure beore disaster strikes.

knowns nd unnownsIn any project, there are knowns and unknowns. For critical inrastructure

projects, typical knowns include current site conditions and surrounding

land use, reasonable predictions o near-uture conditions, and short-term

expectations regarding the level o protection provided by the project.

Unknowns include uture population growth and proximal development,

changes in technology, changes in geopolitical jurisdictions, and the possible

eects o climate change.

In the past, project owners and engineers have done a airly goodjob o working with the current knowns to develop and design critical

inrastructure systems. This is no longer sucient. Consider the example

o a dam originally built in a relatively rural area to design standards that

aorded a certain level o protection. I signicant land development occurs

downstream, the dam should be reassessed and possibly retrotted with

additional protection eatures to adequately protect the people downstream

or the development would have to be limited.

A systems approach includes designs that anticipate uture events

and their consequences, construction that is adaptable to uture conditions,

and the operation and maintenance o the project throughout its lie cycle.Critical inrastructure requires conscientious operation and consistent,

adequate maintenance investments to provide the levels o service and

protection developed by the designer and expected by the customer and

aected public.

It is equally important that project owners adopt change

management systems so that current and uture unknowns can be eectively

addressed. Change management systems must be fexible and robust, and

must establish discipline in the way critical inrastructure systems are

operated, maintained, and upgraded throughout their lie cycle.

Oercoing e Resisnce o CngeThe most dicult challenges to reocusing our critical inrastructure to be

adaptable to uture conditions are not technical in nature, but political,

social, and organizational.

Given unding limitations and project complexities, it can be

daunting to obtain additional resources to implement necessary changes.

Regular reviews o risk and expected perormance can be compared with

current best practices to engage stakeholders and guide inormed decision

making.


32/42


3

Such a shit in construction and operational philosophy requires

leadership by project owners and elected ocials. The ollowing suggestions

by the participants in the Summit on Guiding Principles build on this

concept.

I. Raise awareness and understanding among policy makersand the general public about the importance o long-termstewardship and advocacy or critical inrastructure.

Once a critical inrastructure project is in operation, the public is

oten lulled into a alse sense o security. They either orget about the project

altogether, or assume that the project is too robust or too large to ail. They

turn their attention to the next new issue where their input can have an

immediate and observable aect, rather than considering that the original

project requires periodic reevaluation, maintenance, and upgrades.

Education and awareness-enhancing activities are needed to ensure

that policy makers and the public give proper attention to those issues that

aect the long-term perormance o critical inrastructure. They must be

routinely reminded that proper resources especially unding need to

be allocated to long-term stewardship. They must also be reminded o the

associated risks i that support is not provided.

II. Increase research and development to refne tools and modelsthat will anticipate uture technical and societal needs andrequirements.

Adapting to dynamic conditions and practice means applying arigorous methodology to envision scenarios, consider and analyze possible

outcomes, and develop potential courses o action. Possible uture physical

conditions, such as sea level rise, and possible uture sociological conditions,

such as population growth, must be considered.

Better wisdom and vision are needed to develop probable scenarios

and potential outcomes. Better tools and models are needed or analysis.

Stronger leadership (as described in the previous chapter) is needed to guide

this process and implement solutions.

Investing in research and development will lead to more powerul

tools and models. More thorough and extensive evaluations o i-thenscenarios could then be perormed eciently and cost-eectively. Advances

in remote sensors, inrastructure instrumentation, and eld data collection

devices can provide better input or more accurate modeling results. An

emphasis should be placed on using powerul graphics and 3-D visualization

and animation tools to communicate inormation more readily to

stakeholders, including the public.

The Central Artery/Tunnel

Project (also known as the BDig) in Boston, Massachuseis considered the mostexpensive highway projectin the U.S, costing more tha$14.6 billion. On July 10,2006, a concrete ceiling paweighing 3 tons ell onto a ckilling a passenger.


33/42


32

III. Adapt current public-investment models to incorporate utureconditions. For example, require lie-cycle management andstewardship as prerequisites or obtaining unds or criticalinrastructure.

Project unding can be used as an incentive to encourage stewardshipor critical inrastructure over its lie cycle. Project capital unding could

be predicated, or example, on a clear demonstration that systems are in

place to ensure ongoing unding or lie cycle operation and maintenance.

Funding could also be predicated on demonstrating that change-

management systems are established and institutionalized over the lie o

the project.

Funds could be set aside in escrow or long-term project stewardship,

or special long-term taxes, user ees, or assessments levied. Special

inrastructure districts could be established to provide the requisite

stewardship, or existing agencies or organizations chartered to do so.

Regardless o how the proo o stewardship is structured, project capital

unds should not be allocated until it is has been demonstrated that the

project will be unded throughout its lie cycle.

IV. Apply adaptive management, lie-cycle management, orsimilar working models and techniques to manage, assess,and reevaluate project risks and perormance.

Adaptive management is a structured, iterative decision-making

process or projects that have elements o uncertainty associated with them.

One o the objectives when using adaptive management techniques is toreduce the amount o uncertainty over time via system monitoring.

Under an adaptive management approach, perormance and

capability goals are established at the outset. Over the course o time,

more inormation is learned about uncertainties through observation and

experimentation to determine the best management strategy.

For critical inrastructure projects, the projects current conditions

should be evaluated periodically in light o any new developments or

situations. The results o this evaluation can then be compared to the

projects original objectives and requirements. Success (or ailure) should be

measured against the metrics established in the planning phases, and anydeciencies would need to be addressed.

New knowledge must be continually incorporated. This means not

only keeping abreast o and applying new technologies, but also mining and

capturing institutional knowledge.


34/42


35/42


34

Use adaptive management to improve critical inrastructure systems to

enhance public saety, health, and welare.

Abide by and advocate or the guiding principles.

Sregies or Eeced OfcisWork with organizations representing design and constructionproessionals (including ASCE) to develop coalitions that advocate or

critical inrastructure systems as a high priority issue at both the national

and local level.

Condition unding on lie-cycle planning or all critical inrastructure

projects.

Rely on the knowledge and skills o design and construction proessionals

to help set policy, prioritize projects, and allocate resources.

Support science and engineering education, research, and development

to keep our nation competitive.

Implement checks and balances that reward actions that are in

accordance with these guiding principles and that penalize actions that

are contrary.

Facilitate dialogue among stakeholders and develop a systematic

approach to establish tolerable risk guidelines or critical inrastructure

systems.


Sregies or RegorsFacilitate dialogue among stakeholders and develop a systematic

approach to establish tolerable risk guidelines or critical inrastructure

systems.

Condition unding on lie-cycle planning or all critical inrastructure

projects.

Require periodic risk assessments o critical inrastructure systems and

public dissemination o results.

Work with owners to establish a ramework that promotes a systems

approach or all critical inrastructure projects.

Work with organizations representing design and construction

proessionals (including ASCE) to develop coalitions that advocate or


and local level.

We dont have great highways because we

are a great nation. We are a great nationbecause we have great highways.Attributed to Dewitt C. Greer (1902-1986),

ormer head o the Texas Transportation Commission.


36/42


3




Sregies or OwnersCondition unding on lie-cycle planning or all critical inrastructureprojects.

Require periodic risk assessments o critical inrastructure systems and

public dissemination o the results.

Lead the eort to enact a systems approach or each critical inrastructure

project.

Apply tolerable risk guidelines to all critical inrastructure projects.

Promote eective leadership and stewardship o critical inrastructure

projects.

Rely on the knowledge and skills o design and construction proessionals

to help prioritize projects and allocate resources.

Work with organizations representing design and construction

proessionals (including ASCE) to develop coalitions that advocate or


and local level.



Implement independent peer reviews or the design and construction o

critical inrastructure systems to ensure adequate public saety, health,

and welare.

Facilitate dialogue among stakeholders and develop a systematic approach

to establish tolerable risk guidelines or critical inrastructure systems.


The success o critical inrastructure in protecting the public and

promoting economic development depends on a wide range o individuals

and groups ullling their unique responsibilities.

the greatest advances in improvinghuman health were the development oclean drinking water and sewage systems.So we owe our health as much to civilengineering as we do to biology.

Attributed to Dr. Lewis Thomas (1913-1993),ormer Dean, Yale Medical School.


37/42


36

Public saety, health, and welare are at risk. The nations economic

well-being and the investment that the nation has made in its built and

natural environments are at risk. The leaders o our nation, the owners o our

critical inrastructure, design and construction proessionals, and the public

as end-users must take these matters seriously. Each group must embrace

the guiding principles and embed them in their decision-making andorganizational cultures to ulll their responsibilities to protect public saety,

health, and welare.


38/42


3

ASCE is indebted to the hard work, initiative, and insight provided by

the ASCE Critical Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee members in

developing the guiding principles and this document. The ASCE Critical

Inrastructure Guidance Task Committee was established by the ASCE Board

o Direction in 2007 to develop a ramework or assessing and managing the

uncertainties and vulnerabilities o large complex inrastructure systems in a

changing world. Task committee members include:

Joe Manous, Jr.,Ph.D., P.E., D.WRE, M.ASCE, Chair

Donald Basham, P.E., M.ASCE

William F. Brumund,Ph.D., P.E., D.GE, F.ASCE

Marla Dalton,P.E., M.ASCE

Gerald E. Galloway, Jr., Ph.D., P.E., Hon.D.WRE, Dist M. ASCE

Robert B. Gilbert,Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE

Sybil E. Hatch,P.E., M.ASCE

Andrew W. Herrmann,P.E., F

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	muizz-oyetunji-salaam
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

GuidingPrinciplesFinalReport Infrastructure[1]

Documents