Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
4 Implementation Strategy for A National Infrastructure Research Agenda A new force and direction for infrastructure research ~ ret quired if we "e to overcome the sub~tanti~ barriers to innovation in the U.S identified in the precarious chapter. The existing institu- tions for man aging research mode by mode, discipline by discipline, material by material (concrete amd asphalt, for instance) and ju- riediction by jurisdiction produce real improvements =d should be supported ~ their cont~nu~g program of research Ad develop meet. Much more ~ needed, however, for the nation to overcome the many existing barriers to innovation, to fib ~ the major gaps in current research efforts, and tp begin meeting the infrastructure needs of the 21st century. Implementing the committee's derision of a new agenda that captures both crosscutting and modal opportunities requires in- stitutional as well as technical response. No single government agency or other organization ~ responsible for the state of all m- frastructure systems. Rather, Republic works infrastructures is an umbrella term for services provided by innumerable organizations representing the various modes. Each mode ~ different historically and technically as well as in its professional practices, financing problems, and public attitudes toward it. While this diversity of outlook and organization ~ both an understandable and effective response to the great variety of local conditions to which ~nfra 39
40 structure must be accommodated, it strode ~ the gray of realiz ing fully the opportunities for innovation that are needed if we are to effectively rebuild and update our ~nfirastructure systems. The committee believes that a new organization ~ needed to iden- tify voids and opportunities for improvements and that these are likely to be found only if infrastructure ~ perceived as a whole. The committee recommend that ~ two-year implementation prm gram to develop the strategic pl" for this organization, focuming on the details of mission, financing, managerial structure, "d constitutency involvement, be initiated i~r~rr ediately. BulLDlNG ON CUl~llENT PllOGl"MS How this new organization ~ to be constituted and to func- tion are issues yet to be addressed. Neverthele - , the committee can describe certain characteristics this new organization should have. Such an organization would provide national coherence and focus for infrastructure research and development, and it would serve as a catalyst for initiating research. Above all, it must not detract from the wealth of established and extremely valuable re- search progeny sponsored by exiting organization (see box on next page). These programs, and the technical community ~ each mode, are the primary elements upon which continuing research and development must be bred. Such programs are linked to the needs of their respective technologies and the capabiltities of their professional communities. The close ties betweem these programs arid the user community that hare been cultivated over the yew by these programs will be important to the success of the new agenda of ~nirastructure reteach and development. This ~ par- ticularly true In the area of technology transfer where some mode programs have demonstrated succe - . The new organization the committee envisions should exploit their accumulated wisdom And experience by building close working relationships with existing modal program and, where possible, a88istiIlg, strengthening, and enhancing their current activities. Research by mode is well established in many areas including, for example, electric utilities where the Electric Power Research Institute currently has a $325 minion program; nature gas util
41 The Diven~ty of 3~frastruct~ Regears Research ~ t}`c U.S. relating to ~fr~tr~cture ~ undertilcen ~ a variety of we" by a diverse my of government entities tat. the federal, state, and local levels, by not-for-profit ~d.other research organization, academician, add the pirate sector. ]~ mclud" architect~gmeer~g~construction firms, equipment vendors, and firm whose principal markets are not currently infrastructure band but may provide future wirastructure application. It ~ not the intent of this report to enumerate the detailed my of orgs~at~o~ conducting ~ffastractllre related research, but it is worthwhile to md~catc that the mDc of part~cip~ts ~ very broad, Fitly some of the most adduced regears actwities berg conducted withm metitutional sett~ge not initially thought of relative to ~fra$tr~ctore Aim. Withm the federal system, far example, research directly Ad indirectly related to infr~tsmctore Arcs ~ being conducted at the National Burean of Standard;s, at the National ~boratones under the pried of the Department of Energy, and at Department of Defense laboratories including Dose of the Corps of Engmeere. Regears in suc}t Neckties addresses a variety of u~frastn~cture~related subjects, including: don Ad waterway contraction operation and moiety notice tcc~u~lles, ~ - airport and h-tray construction Ad maintenance te~- . . . . nIques~ , . . . . . . . .... ~ nondest~ctne cvatoat~on of str~c~ materials, i:: -- adduced materials for a Bar-Or of application inchamg contraction, piping, co~nbust~on? filtration, · - =ore Ad controls, ~ m~rement of public attitudes, : economic ami policy Types.: . . . . . ... ities where the Gas Research institute manages a $175 million progrmn, and water works where the American Water Works AN socisted Research Foundation manages ~ $2.9 million program (-e box on next page). While applauding these programs, the committee notes that efforts on research and subsequent intro auction of new, more efficient, and led costly technology, is not given sufficient attention by other modes. The new organization the committee envisions can help to fill the voids, initiating new programs within certain modes, and in other cases significantly strengthening existing programs.
42 E]c~ic :Power Xes~ch Inn. The Electric Power Regears In- st~¢te. (EPRI3..m a.pm~te-.¢rganization t}~at..conducts~a.$echnicaI -I.:. resear~.and:~:.pr.ogram.for-.t}~e electric-ntility industry. ' . ~'.~=atid Ace: 19.73,:`EPRI3.8 '-~id~g- ~:om-es ~from. nearly :500 'U:S. Tile - Em rep~t~g 70 p.era~nt..of $he.nBtion'~-~lectric power deice. ]$e ~utrion::~t Each mummer -= Awed on -its ~k~tt-5onr - sa~ ;- gross-. Meres. The .i987 huger .~.-m S325 million, 7 c1ndm~ contract mcP~ditore {or Search :and a envelopment Of S259 -. ~ ~.;~:1987 35:P-.~ mill have.1,l;O;O::actwe-projects~der its manager - smelt.- .Near-te~ : research .~: ~-ilev.~opment (~dally avail-: . ~ :able m~vui.lO years): accou~-for:app~ately.61 percent of : I:P~'s: program fig; Wee -research :.add develo.p~nent (10~5."ar:co~me~r a~ilable):~.-34..percent; Ed long-term restart (25 yew ~r.more) is ~:.perccat. ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ,. ~ .. :G.as much Anode G.as Research .~.t~nte (GRI) ~.a not-for :~a~p orga~ion-;~! ~tn:ralo~..pipohae Ned din-, :~Ion. Compasles. -C;~R] plasm manages, and ::6e - lops financing for .a ~ ma ~.de~lopment program :des~gned -to advance. : sappy,. tr~spoft~..starage: and ent~:. tec}~-olog~es-~d :to. conduct basic A. ~,he.~;ng madam for the:.:program..= band . . ::on ..the.: Volume Of ~ sales mid .tr~portafx~ --Arc-: of ~ ~RI3.s mem- . .. .:- b.~rs;:.::It-~. Abject ~ anneal .=new..~d approve by .the:.Federal: .: .- .. Emu . ~I~-a~: iLnd, wIiere- ~ppropruLte' far. :st~te -.: .~;egulatory aged Ale: 1.987 budget m~at:a }egret of Sty Lyon. . .; ~ : :; . :=e; program-. includes {;O<3. . K6nre contracts.- :. Ma~tnrers, - ~ : gas . pipeline: ~ dictfih~. company - , ~ Gas .produce=, sewiee - ~ - ~ ~mpall.ies; Aroma- .age'icies, ^.major .ellergy ~-rs, and Tesear~ .~ ..and~ ..de-Iop~ebt Contractor joan Wilt. MR! ~..-.m -the imp- of .:: .-.~s...of,spec~ai.~erest. :~T~.eooperat~n-~;;~he.cost- ~- . ~--~-..cffecti~ of-~e...program Al Me A: of ~ reship-- .~: -: -. ~ . .DociiD~:~d~:g :.leads to -. Me.,-at :.:.involVement ~ 4~'s . .. .: i~dibereby;.~ceste~nolog~r.t~er. Proms -: ~^ :~:l:gZ8:~:~ Girl the :;e~nr~ totaled :.Sn3 --ante - . Da same~di~l I' me totaled aver ~65~t Ants Wioi Wry ;doDar muted -lD3r; GRI). ~ ~ -I -.;- - .-.Whili- ~a ~g--progi=L.~.~£:-~ ..sc~tific -~- ~ ALGA ~;.~~.r~ta~: Act: ~8 ~:~p~ :on pry d - . :-. ..vcbpm~ss:~at.mect-.~-t:.a~d..perfor~ce.cateria.set by-the : ~ A-; of HI AID: condone research Con I. ; ~4e&ied:;~b'0~is ~-.p~ Ned a ....-~..~.~act~ve]ir~rS~:ipate.i~ Parser , 2 '.'. ~W ' - , . . ~ . . . , '_ ~ , I, . ,, _ . , .~;A__ ~.~ ~:~o=.: :The ..-Amer --I -: ~n.::Watcr Worlci:A-ciao ~::F.04~i~ (1LWwAR~) :Ls-a~nonpro6t corporation IS up grate water ~pp~ .md~try . ' '., ' ', in' '!2~',~' · ' ', ' , - ' ' 'me at' ' '' '-' · I' _ . . . .
43 to research common problems. AWWARF is run by water n:til- ~ - for water :utilities, with the actnre involvement and support of en~eenag cc,multaDts,-m~ulactorers, univemities? and other :~ry-related groups. : ~ ~roiInc~D;g -aunt $500,~30- per -year, dues constitute: - AWWAU's :hasic support. The {oundat~on's major new ;~d- ma: Iffy- is the Ream :Subecri~?tion: Program, through which water ntHit~:~bscube :to t}te r~esrth program and mane ~ an- -nap: pays proportionate to the voinme of water they deI=er. Tli~ concept := moving ~4WW~AR3? ~.to~ ~ goal of a lI0 million Anal Aged ~ 1990 Ad thereaficr. R-earch contractor ~:on- Scribe 25 percent.or more of the cost of the projects -ill WhiCIL they are involved. : i: : ~ Usm~ ~ elaborate olann~ and renew Process. -the {ounda-: ~ _ ~ trod has developed a fire-year plan to sewe as the framework of :~ts program in the Upcoming yea=. Over 180 projects have been listed Odes 19 program gem. Mare than 60 of-these projects are ~ already completed or under way. Rl:SEAlICH ID DEVELOPMENT ACROSS MODES The technical communities in each mode generally have gem arate controb, political constituencies, and funding mechanisms. Despite the diversity of function there are technical and manage- rial operations that are cormnon to many of the separate modes. These cro~cutt~g activities can be supported by common re- search and development efforts, some of which win occur only if stimulated by an organization formed for that purpose. Such an organization would bring together the various modal commu- n~ties to encourage an exchange of experiences and ideas. The introduction of new technologies in field not normally related to infrastructure (e.g., aerospace engineering and ocean engineering) to these modal communities would also be a target of such an orga- nization. The Vitiation of programing aimed at Strewing barriers to innovation that are common to various modes would be part of its agenda. In addition, there are research needs which Fire out of a systems approach to infrastructure facilities, in which broad goad and objectives transcending the boundaries of single modes are defined by an organization with the goal of developing cro~cutt~g opportunities for improvement. The case study on nondestructive testing represents ~ area where research across modes cart be utihized effectively. Research on NDE techniques ~ ongoing and ~ desirable at many locations.
44 Detailed product engineering ~ properly conducted by individual utilities and other modal research programs. However, research which involves such topics as standards development and tech- nology transfer, those topics common to all the modes utilizing this technique, is needed to provide ~ technology base for both equipment and associated software. Provision of this technology base is best suited to a Angle unit where coordination and stan- dardization can be more readily achieved. A centralized research program can overcome the problems inherent ~ ~ion-oriented agencies or utilities, and command the resource investment needed to accomplish this task. LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE STRATEGIC HIGlIWAY RESEARCH P1tOGRAM In its work on implementation, the committee kept in mind other efforts to create new research programs, of which the most recent ~ the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP). This ~ a five-year, $150 million program, under the aegis of the National Research Council, intended to significantly enhance highway ret search. SHRP is newly initiated and it is too early to judge its impact or succor. However, the committee believes the process leading to the unplementation of SHRP can be used ~ a mode! for understanding the difficulties of creating an infrastructure ret search program. As noted in the box on page45, SHRP took no led than fire years to launch. This period was needed to educate and encourage the participation of the highway professional and user community, as well as the Congress which authorized its program fund~ng.3 3 The Strategic Transportation R - carch Study (STRS) which led up to the initiation of SHRP was also conducted at the National R-earn} Council. This study produced a prioritized research agenda for the highway industry. The study took approximately 18 months to complete under a budget of $170,000 (1980 dollars), and was conducted ~ a committee of 13 volunteers with the support of two full-time professional staff. The task recommended by the committee has a significantly larger scope and constituency and should anticipate correspondingly larger budget and staff.
45 STRS and SHIP The Committee on Infrastructure Oration suggests that one cu'Tent model for how opportunities for mirastracture research and Oration may be identified and captured ~ the Strategic Highway ~search Program (SHRP). Managed by the National Research Council, SOP is a newly initiated five~year, S150 million research program directed at em areas of high technology: asphalt, long- term pavement performance, m~nten~cc effectivene - , protection of bridge components, cement and concrete, and snow and ice removal. While the need for sndh a program had become mereasingly apparent over a period of some years, the genesis of SHRP was a Strategic Transportation R - ea=}t Study (STRS), conducted by the Transportation R - earch Board of the National Research Council. The STRS effort, which took nearly two years to complete, directly Evolved may of the highway industry's managers. This participation kindled management interest ~ research and assured the program's relevance to practical problems. The relearn topics selected were ones wine" mnovatio~ pronged to yield significant monetary savings. RecogisLug that highway research, like highway contraction, is dispersed m small fragments among a great variety of-relatively small units, with no Angle agency having the money or mandate to address the biggest problem, STRS became the vehicle for iden- tibring potentially valuable but neglected projects. For eec~nplc, relearn topics with high potential payoffs, topics that have been d~proportionate},r neglected in period work, topics on which re Farm will require overcoming sn~tantial-org~mational barriers, or topics that requme long-term commitments were felt to desire special scatty. Based on screemag criteria soc}t as these, STHS recommended a small number of regears arch where a major, concentrat-1 new effort could yield results to provide the md-- try with the bash for a quantum Improvement us; its matenals, practices, Ed producti~nt~r. The STRS effort produced ~ report entitled Amcnca's Sighed: A=deratin, the Scarce for ~nnoua~` That report proposed a film year research program, estimated its mat, and suggested how to *and it. It did not suggest a specific argan=stional structure, noting as option for operating the program both modifications of existing organ~ationn or creating a new organization such as a "special-purp~, chartered, nonprofit reseal ageDc~r.. Congre - , creating SHRP, took t}tc latter course. The approach that Ed to the Strategic Highway Research Program ~ now berg emulated {or public transit, again through a strategic traD - ortation research outlay. The recommendation of that study will be tailored to the specific problems and opport~i- ties faced by public tramit ~8~ throughout the Unwed Stat - . This committee considered the STRS and SHRP model in rearms its recommendation presented ~ Chapter 4.
46 MOVING B1:YOND 1~IST~G PROGRAMS The new organization can use existing research programs as a foundation to move beyond the barriers to innovation to pro- ~ride a national coherence, focus, and stimulus for infrastructure research. Such an organization would approach its objective with a double strategy: (1) to initiate, strengthen, enhance, or assist, as necessary, the various programs of research, development, and technology transfer that are associated with the many modes of infrastructure, ~d (2) to create a program of research, develop meet, ~d technology transfer that addresses problems common to more than one mode and that provides a systems approach to meeting the needs of future communities. The committee recommends that the Congress establish and provide funding for an unplementation program to determine the managerial structure, roles, and funding mechanisms for this con- t~nu~ng organization. The unplementation program should formu- late a national strategy for infrastructure reteach and develop meet, including a statement of goals, objectives, priorities, and an operating plan which would identify immediate targets of c~ppor- tunity. ~ concert with the shaping of this new organization, the infrastructure modes shoed be encouraged to strengthen their own programs In a manner similar to the highway and transit endeavors (SHRP and STRS) noted earlier In this chapter. The committee recognizes that the task of formulating a new and continuing organization for infrastructure research will be difficult and complex, involving army participants. The specific charge and structure of a contusing organization will depend on the answers to some difficult questions to be addressed by the implementation program including: Which institution Could 6c logical to house such an orga- nization? A number of federal institutions are currently active in at least one of the modes of infrastructure. Some of these include the Environmental ProtectioI1 Agency, the Department of Tr~n~portatioIl, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the National Science Foundation, and the National Bureau of Standards. ~ addition, there are many private orga- ~zations, some of which are described earlier ~ this report. An infrastructure research program could be housed ~ one of these institutions, but there are other competing advantages to creating a new entity an entity which draws in the states and some of the
47 major local governments, the primary funders and operators of infrastructure facilities. A careful evaluation of the benefits and deficiencies of one organization over the other deserves attention. ~ How wd! this organization interface untie the states, local and regional government, federal agencies, national laboratories, private industry, professional societies, univers~tics, etc. ? Bow will the organizational structure maintain balanced representation from the many constituencies involved? An organizational structure which balances the needs and desires of ad the various constituen- cies wiD require special care and consideration. Representation and rotation of membership on the go~rern~g bond of such an Organization, for example, may address this constituency balance issue. An evaluation of the many alternatives possible here wiB be needed. . How will this organization be funded? Possible sources of financing for an infrastructure research agenda can be described in three generic categories: (1) voluntary contributions from ~nter- ested parties, (2) "mandatory funding through government am propriations or regulatory maculate, and (3) government incentives to encourage voluntary funding. Within these generic categories are a variety of financial instruments. Voluntary contributions are funds provided at the discretion of government agencies, contrac- tors, suppliers and professionals. Mandatory funding includes line item appropriations, ear-marking ~ percentage of appropriation accounts, apportionment of a percentage of budget accounts ret fated to infrastructure, arid regulatory requirements to allocate a percentage of grant recipients' operating revenue. Incentives include super-match~g ration for voluntary expenditures or fa- vorable tax treatment for such expenditures through accelerated expensing or tax credits. An external funding source will require an acountability mech- anism such as (1) political accountability through use of a govern- mental agency, (2) public interest accountability through broad- based governance, and (3) financial accountability through re- quired matching financial contribution. Ascertaining the most appropriate Binding mechanism for this orgariization as well ~ the appropriate accountability mechamem will involve carefi~1 plan- ning from financial, legal, and political perspectives. ~ How wRith" organization conduct in bumne"? What lim- itations should be considered on the scope of I activities? The
48 specific charter of this organization must be thoughtfully consid- ered with inputs provided from the many constituencies involved with infrastructure facilities. Of necessity, the scope of the orga- n~zation wiD be limited and could range from planning research, to contracting with others who conduct research, to conducting research within the organization, itself. The charter should define limits appropriate for the organization. What ~ the research agenda that this organization' should tie addressing? What egor~should receive high priority?Although this report provides some illustrative examples in Chapter 2 of the types of research that are needed, a more comprehensive effort at developing and prioritizing research, development, and technology transfer projects ~ required. The needs, both within and across modes, can be prioritized after careful study and deliberation with the user community. Answem to the question outlined above were beyond the scope of this committee's alignment and resources, and it was felt that the resolution of these questions should involve a larger constitutency than the membership of the committee aDowed. The best answers to questions such as these ~D only come from those indi~ridus~ and organization which wiD be impacted by the ampere the user groups, professional organizations, city man- agers, and university researchers, for example. The most critical players will have to be involved in formulating the answers in order for the results to be acceptable. Recogn~z~g these limitation, the committee drew from the experience of the Strategic Highway Research Program. The pros cess leading up to the organi~.ation and funding of this program lasted five years and included delineating an appropriate research agenda followed by consensus building and support gathering prior to the initiation of the program. The Rues addressed prior to the establishment of SHRP and, more importalltly, the process of con- stituency building which resulted in the creation of SHRP provide many lessons applicable to the formation of a program of infuse structure research. One difference between an Off - tructure research program and the SHRP program ~ scope. The SHRP program involves a relatively narrow field of research In one mode highways- while ~ inFrmtrUcture program must effectively deal with a scope encompassing many modes. Thus the program of research for infrastructure facilities is not directly comparable to the program
49 of SHRP. However, the process leading up to the implementation of SHRP has may parallels. TH1: 1~?IEMENT=ION PROGRAM The committee recommends that an implementation program should be started immediately to plan and initiate the continuing orgar`~zation. The committee believes this program, while ambi- tious, can be accomplished within two years. The implementation program should include the following tasks: · develop a strategic plan which embodies crowers to the questions raised above; bean developing a national agenda of research and develop ment for mfi~"tructure systems that identifies the current gasps in research and notes research opportunities for ad drese~g problem common to several modes. This activity is expected to become an ongoing task of the permanent organization; bring into the program the talent and expertise of the caries existing modal research groups; establish minimum goad ~d criteria for research and an plementation; identify early targets for research; ~d . . inform federal agencies, the user and professional commu- n~ties, and the public of the opportunities for research in building a more effective infrastructure system. The implementation program should utilize representation from many disciplines including scientists, engineers, economists, urban planners, social scientists, legal experts, and government officials. The committee recommend that Congress identify an organ uzation to house the implementation program, set a budget for the program, and establish a tune free for the conduct of its busme - . EXPECTED }tESUITS Within two years the work of the unplementation program should be complete and the formation of the continuing organiza- tion underway. The cotta ng orgar Cation wiD then become the primary catalyst for:
50 Encouraging the development of necessary reteach prm grams where they are deficient, Giving attention to prong long-term research projects which do not now- have readily apparent constituent inter- ests, Fostering research broadly applicable to all parts of our infrastructure. In these ways, the continuing organization will become a vital part of a new set of fore" intended to counter the exiting barriers to innovation described ~ the third chapter of this report. It will also guarantee the ice" and provide the leadership required to ensure that existing systems serve the public better arid that alternative systems are developed where appropriate. The committee has no illusions that it will be easy to construct ail effective research program that applies broadly to the system in which we travel, do our work, educate our children, obtain our water, and remove our wastes. It will be frustrating, at turner contentious; and it will require continual good will, patience, and resources. But the committee also believes that it can be done, if done carefully, sy~tematicaDy, and with attention to the views of Al parties. If done well, the committee believes that the United States can gain enormous benefits In the quality of the services that support the environment in which Americans live add work in the next century.
