the

Volume 19, Issue 5 | October | November 2012

®

The Business of Engineering and Education

2 The GeorGia enGineer

OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012 3

Publisher: A4 Inc.1154 Lower Birmingham Road

Canton, Georgia 30115Tel.: 770-521-8877 • Fax: 770-521-0406

E-mail: GeorgiaEngineer@a4inc.com

Managing Editor: Roland Petersen-FreyArt Direction/Design: Pamela Petersen-Frey

Georgia Engineering Alliance233 Peachtree Street • Harris Tower, #700

Atlanta, Georgia 30303Tel.: 404.521.2324 • Fax: 404.521.0283

Georgia Engineering AllianceGwen Brandon, CAE, Director of Operations

Thomas C. Leslie, PE, Director of External Affairs

Georgia Engineering Alliance Editorial BoardJimmy St. John, PE, Chairman

GSPE RepresentativesSam Fleming, PETim Glover, PE

ACEC/G RepresentativesB.J. Martin, PE

Lee Philips

ASCE/G RepresentativesDaniel Agramonte, PESteven C. Seachrist, PE

GMCEA RepresentativeBirdel F. Jackson, III, PE

ITE RepresentativesDaniel Dobry, PE, PTOE

John Edwards, PE

ITS/G RepresentativesBill Wells, PE

Shaun Green, PEKay Wolfe, PE

WTS RepresentativeAngela Snyder

ASHE RepresentativeEd Culican, PEJenny Jenkins

SEAOG RepresentativeRob Wellacher, PE

GeorgiaEngineerthe

The Georgia Engineer is published bi-monthly by A4 Inc. for the Georgia EngineeringAlliance and sent to members of ACEC, ASCE, ASHE, GMCEA, GEF, GSPE, ITE, SEAOG,WTS; local, state, and Federal government officials and agencies; businesses and institutions.Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the Alliance or publisher nor dothey accept responsibility for errors of content or omission and, as a matter of policy, neitherdo they endorse products or advertisements appearing herein. Parts of this periodical may be re-produced with the written consent from the Alliance and publisher. Correspondence regardingaddress changes should be sent to the Alliance at the address above. Correspondence regardingadvertising and editorial material should be sent to A4 Inc. at the address listed above.

4 The GeorGia enGineer

Advert isementsA4 Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46AECOM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Albany Tech. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Association of Energy Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Atkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45Ayres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Burns & McDonnell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Cardno TBE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19CDM Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Chastain & Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Columbia Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46CROM Prestressed Concrete Tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31Cummins Power South . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Deemer, Dana, Froehle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47Engineered Restorations Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7GEL | Geophysics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30Georgia Concrete Paving Association. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14Georgia Power Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23, 29Greater Traffic Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Hayward Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back CoverHazen and Sawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4HDR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Heath & Lineback Engineers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25HNTB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Innovative Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 28JAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13M.H. Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Middleton-House & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Photo Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Pond & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28Power Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Prime Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Reinforced Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32RHD Utility Locating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Rosser International. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6RSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Santa Ed & Elf Evie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Schnabel Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Silt-Saver Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17Southern Civil Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35Southern Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Stevenson & Palmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6T. Wayne Owens & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Terrell Hundley Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12THC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31United Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Front CoverWilburn Engineering LLC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Willmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Wolverton & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Woodard & Curran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

THE GEORGIA ENGINEER October | November 2012

GSPE

ASCE40

ITE42

ACEC38

ITS45

ASHE37

SEAOG

GMCEAGEA

GEF WTS

8 EPD Expedites Permit Approvals

10 Overview of a Design Firm Mergers & Acquisitions

12 Q/A with Keith Golden, PE, Georgia DOT Commissioner

15 A Sous Chef, A Schoolteacher, and a Civil Engineer Walked into a Problem

18 Question Your Accounting Principles

21 The Changing State of Structural Engineering Regulation in the United States

24 Your Leadership DNA

26 End of Year Tax Planning Considerations

30 What’s in the NEWS

35 After the Referendum ~ What’s next for Georgia Transportation?

his is a photo reflection on theart of doing engineering business

in Georgia. Our state has an urgentneed for fresh talent to join the engi-neering community.v

T

6 The GeorGia enGineer

Visit: thegeorgiaengineer.com

The Georgia Engineer Web site

is new and improved!

www.thegeorgiaengineer.com

7OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

uch has been said,and little done,regarding plan re-views and permitapprovals—untilnow. Like much

in government, it is never quite as good asadvocates claim nor as bad as critics charge.Nonetheless, the Georgia EnvironmentalProtection Division has taken a substantialstep to expedite permit approvals for waste-water projects.

The IssueFor a wastewater treatment plant, a DesignDevelopment Report must be prepared

which describes design and performance cri-teria. Importantly, it stipulates plant dis-charge standards that the plant is required tomeet in order to satisfy in-stream water qual-ity criteria. After approval of the DDR, anengineering firm prepares the detailed designdrawings and specifications for the construc-tion of the facility. Heretofore, these plansand specifications would be carefully re-viewed by EPD staff, ‘redlined,’ and returnedto the design engineer for modification (or‘correction,’ in some eyes).

For a large wastewater project, there canbe hundreds of sheets of design drawings andover a thousand pages of specifications. Thispackage gets dropped on the desk of an EPDengineer for review. As the workforce at EPDgrows older and retirements occur more fre-quently, the reviewing engineer is increas-ingly in the early part of his/her professionalcareer rather than toward the end. A Profes-sional Engineer, registered in Georgia, mustseal the plan set, which presumes that qual-ity control measures have been taken withinthe firm to be assured that the plans/specs are‘adequate and accurate.’ Still the EPD reviewengineer was expected to perform regulatoryoversight with a vague notion of assuring thepublic that a facility constructed in accordwith the plans/specs would meet expecta-tions.

In short, it was not unusual for EPD tobe overwhelmed with reviewing plans for fa-cilities (especially large, complex projects),which led to delay in approvals of some per-mit applications.

Legislative ActionThis issue seemed to boil up during the 2011General Assembly. Late in the session, SR1281 was introduced that urged EPD towork with stakeholders in developing a “for-mal process for . . . approval of (documents)for water and wastewater treatment facilitiesin lieu of a detailed review by (EPD).” Spe-cific stakeholders were named in the resolu-tion: GAWP, ACCG, GMA, ACEC/G, andGEA. This resolution did not move out of

committee, but it clearly sent a signal thatchange was needed.

In other legislative action, SB 427 di-rected the EPD Director to “develop andimplement procedures for timely process-ing of applications made to” EPD for per-mits. The procedures contemplated inlegislation included “expedited review andgranting of applications upon payment of afee . . . to offset the cost of expediting” thework. The legislation also anticipated thatEPD could hire an outside consultant to re-view plans and that the fee charged wouldbe commensurate with the cost of the con-sultant(s). This legislation did pass and wassigned by the Governor.

The signal was clearly sent, and EPDhas responded accordingly.

New EPD PolicyJud Turner, the new EPD Director, in an in-terview with the Georgia Engineer Magazinein June 2012, expressed several concerns overthis topic: EPD staff is diminishing underthe state budget crunch, must execute its ob-ligations in the most efficient way possible,and conduct itself in a way that adds valueto the process. The stakeholders were con-vened by the Water Protection Branch Man-ager Linda MacGregor to consider a processfor permit approval that did not include ‘de-tailed review’ by EPD. In short order, sheproposed that the design engineer’s profes-sional seal on the plans/specs plus an accom-panying certification by the PE would be asufficient basis for prompt approval of the

Thomas C. Leslie

EPD Expedites Permit ApprovalsBy Thomas C. Leslie | Georgia Engineering Alliance | Director of External Affairs

M

8 The GeorGia enGineer

9OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

permit application. ACEC/G reviewed thecertification language with a group of mem-bers and legal/insurance advisors and sug-gested changes that would achieve EPD goalswithout creating unanticipated nor unrea-sonable liability for the engineering firm.These changes were promptly accepted.

On July 26, 2012, the Water ProtectionBranch issued a policy that would be fol-lowed in plan reviews. The following certi-fication is “a required component of allwastewater infrastructure plans and specifi-cations submitted for WPB approval”:

“I certify that I have been in responsiblecharge of the design of this project in accor-dance with the rules of the Georgia StateBoard of Registration for Professional Engi-neers and Land Surveyors. I further certify,

to the best of knowledge and belief, thatthese plans and specifications were preparedin accordance with the current standard en-gineering practices and accurately reflect theDesign Development Report (DDR) previ-ously reviewed and concurred in by EPD. Ifurther certify that the system as designedcan reasonably be expected to consistentlymeet all currently applicable permit limits,conditions, and regulatory requirements,provided the facility is constructed as de-signed and properly operated and main-tained.”

The new policy closes with the follow-ing: “Complete sets of plans and specifica-tions containing this certification willgenerally be regarded as approvable . . . Assuch, detailed technical review by WPB staff

will not be required in such instances.”This seems to be a substantial step in

streamlining plan review and permit ap-provals at EPD. It places responsibilities onthe Professional Engineer to assure compe-tency in performing his/her professionalservices, the Board of Professional Engineersand Land Surveyors to discipline those PEswho do not perform accordingly, and EPDand individual clients to report a PE’s failurein this regard. After a test drive with this pol-icy for “wastewater infrastructure plans andspecification”, it will be interesting to see ifEPD extends it to other EPD regulatory ac-tivities, such as safe dams program, landfilldesign, drinking water facilities, etc. v

2013 Engineering Excellence Call for EntriesEngineering Excellence is an annual design competition provided by the American Council of En-gineering Companies of Georgia and held in conjunction with Engineers Week. Engineering Ex-

cellence recognizes engineering achievements demonstrating the highest degree of merit andingenuity. Entries are rated on the basis of uniqueness and originality; future value to the engi-neering profession; social, economic and sustainable development considerations; complexity;

and successful fulfillment of client/owner’s needs, including schedule and budget. Engineering Ex-cellence offers all competition entrants a valuable opportunity to be recognized by showcasing

their talent, their experience, and their profession.

For entry requirements, visit ACEC/G’s Web site, www.acecga.org.

10 The GeorGia enGineer

ergers and acquisi-tions among con-sulting engineeringfirms have longbeen a feature of theindustry. However,

over the last two decades they have becomemore prominent. This article lays what’sbehind mergers and acquisitions amongconsulting engineering firms, and the pat-tern and trends shaping our industry’s con-solidation.

What’s driving M&A in our industry?The growth strategies of industry leaderscontinue to drive much of the consolidationthat we see among consulting engineeringfirms in terms of the types of acquisitionsAND numbers of acquisitions. Let’s look atthe type of acquisition first. Many owners—in the private, public, and institutional sec-tors—are looking for a ‘one stop shop’ todesign and build their facilities. They don’twant to deal with a separate architect and en-gineer and construction firm. They want oneentity to assume responsibility for the proj-ect. That is why you see a growing numberof engineering firms acquiring architecturefirms and construction firms. With respectto how the industry leaders drive the num-bers of acquisitions that we see in the indus-try: most of the publicly-traded firms in thisindustry cannot grow earnings fast enoughthrough hiring to meet the return on invest-ment requirements of the public capital mar-kets. Therefore, they have to acquire firms togrow. Thus, the industry leaders stimulatedemand in the market place for design firmacquisitions.

On the other side of the coin, manysmaller industry firms continue to find thisnew competitive landscape particularly un-friendly to them and see a firm sale or mergerin many cases as the only option. Addition-ally, many firms in our industry—capitalizedand run by baby-boomer engineers—havenot done a good enough job in developingnext generation leaders or putting in placeviable ownership transition plans (both go

hand in hand). This triple threat of toughcompetitive environment combined with fal-tering leadership and ownership transitionscreates the supply in the market place for de-sign firm sales.

Global AEC M&A activity back to all-time highsGlobally, 2011 was a record year for AECfirm mergers and acquisitions—with over330 deals announced world-wide. Globaldeal-making in the industry increased rap-idly from 2004 through 2008—a period ofgreat economic growth. But world-wide in-dustry consolidation declined by 23 percentafter the financial crisis of 2008, recoveringslowly in 2010 and then surging to have arecord year in 2012. In general industry,M&A tends to follow the economic growthcycle—with consolidation increasing duringgood economic times (since companies havemore capital to spend and are more opti-mistic about the future) and declining duringrecessionary periods. We fully expect thisyear to set another record for global industryconsolidation and anticipate deal volume ofbetween 350 and 370 transactions.

U.S. industry consolidation slowly picks up paceDomestically, industry consolidation hasbeen relatively slow to recover after the fi-nancial crisis (Figure 2). Industry mergersand acquisitions reached a peak in 2008 with180 deals taking place in the United States.Deal-making activity declined some 17 per-cent as the nation entered recession andslowly recovered through the recovery to re-turn to 2007 levels. However, we fully ex-

pect M&A activity to reach record levels thisyear—with between 190 and 200 deals an-nounced as the buy-side and sell-side driversthat we discussed above continue to play outamong firms across the country.

AEC firm mergers and acquisitions inthe United States have tended to follow apretty consistent geographic pattern. Figure3 below provides a ‘heat map’ of deals acrossthe United States through the beginning ofAugust—the darker the state the more de-sign firms sold there. You can see that Cali-fornia and Texas saw the most firms throughthe first seven months of the year. This is notsurprising—and has traditionally been thecase—since both are the largest stateeconomies. However, of particular interestthis year—and a departure from prioryears—is the relatively high level of M&Aactivity in Louisiana (in large part driven bythe state’s oil and gas industries) andFlorida—an indication that many in the in-dustry see the state in the beginnings of a rel-atively strong recovery.

Georgia saw relatively high level of firmsale activity in 2008 when four design firmssold and in 2010 when six firms sold—rep-resenting four percent of all U.S. transactionsthose years. This year, M&A activity inGeorgia has been relatively muted with justone deal announced—the merger of Atlanta’sBVM Engineering (BVME) with Scotland’sIntegrated Environmental Solutions (IES).

Defensive deal-making characterizesindustry consolidation in 2012One of the key M&A indicators that we keepa close eye on is the number of deals that take

Overview of a Design Firm Mergers & AcquisitionsBy Mick Morrissey | Managing Principal | Morrissey, Goodale LLC.

M

Figure 1: Global AEC M&A

Figure 2: U.S. AEC industry M&A activity

11OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

place across state lines in the U.S. as this is away to gauge the health of the AEC industry.

Before the Great Recession, the majority(between two-thirds and three-quarters) ofall AEC deals in the U.S. took place acrossstate lines (See Figure 4). This rate of inter-state M&A activity represented the fact thatthis period of an expanding domestic econ-omy gave rise to ‘growth driven’ acquisitions.In other words, firms were acquiring to ex-tend their geographic reach—either to cap-ture more opportunities or to diversify theirearnings streams.

Well, the downturn that began inthe industry in 2008 saw steady erosion inthe number of deals made across state lines.This declined continued through the reces-

sion and even into to the recovery. Indeedinter-state deal-making is at its lowest pointon record in 2012—accounting for just 51percent of all AEC deals in the U.S. The na-ture of deal making has changed- from‘growth driven’ inter-state activity to ‘defen-sive deal-making’ within states. Instead ofconsolidation transforming the industry na-tionally, more and more it’s ‘hardening’ in-dividual state AEC markets.

The reason for this change is that manyfirms are feeling ‘beat up’ by this economicenvironment. They have been limping alongat break-even—or at best barely profitable—for almost four years now. After laying off30 percent of their staff they have more officespace than they know what to do with, and

it’s killing their bottom line. Their balancesheets are damaged badly, and their owner-ship transition plans are stalling. And manyof them cannot find a buyer.

So instead, what we are seeing more andmore is that firms within states are findingways to merge with either peers or formercompetitors. In doing this, they are able tojettison excess, duplicate or non-performingassets (i.e. over-payed principals who are notcarrying their weight), combine their clien-tele, rationalize their office-space and otheroverhead costs, and continue on somewhatstronger than they were prior to the merger.This is the strategy that more and more firmsare using to weather this economic ‘recovery.’And given the trends that we are seeing, weexpect this pattern to continue through theearly part of next year. v

Figure 3 “Heat Map” of U.S. design firm sales in 2012

Figure 4: AEC inter-state deal-making

About the AuthorMick Morrisseyis managingprincipal ofleading AECindustry strat-egy, M&A, and

Executive Search firm Morrissey GoodaleLLC. www.morrisseygoodale.com. A civilengineer by training, Mick writes the reg-ular article on Industry Mergers & Acqui-sitions for ACEC’s Engineering Inc. Hecan be reached at mmorrissey@morrissey-goodale.com or (508) 380-1868.

12 The GeorGia enGineer

Keith Golden is in his 26th year with theGeorgia Department of Transportation;the last one as its Commissioner (first asinterim beginning in September 2011and then with a full appointment sinceMarch 2012). Prior to becoming Com-missioner, he was Director of the Permitsand Operations Division. Golden is aregistered Professional Engineer and re-ceived BS (1986) and MS (1989) degreesin Civil Engineering from Georgia Tech.

On August 23rd, Eddie Williams andTom Leslie sat down with Mr. Golden todiscuss his first year as Commissioner..

Since assuming the top leadership roleat GDOT, what has been the biggest surpriseto you since you took this position? Or hasit been just like you thought it would be?

Some may suspect that the biggest sur-prise revolved around politics and media rela-tions. Actually, this was about as I thought itwould be, and I am working very hard tomaintain good, professional relations in botharenas. The biggest surprise was a disconnect

between the GDOT headquarters office andthe district offices. There is a perceived ‘us’and ‘them’ split, with the districts left to fendfor themselves without support from the Cen-tral Office. In fact, we are all in this together.We must heal the split. The districts need tomake decisions within their authorities andmove forward; the central office needs to re-spect those actions without second-guessing.We must move away from a common districtsentiment, “It’s (an issue) sitting in Atlanta,and we can’t get a decision.”

Each month you report to the DOTboard the number of current employees,which is almost always less than the preced-ing month. Do you think this trend willcontinue? Have you restructured the de-partment to accommodate this decline? Ifso, how are things different?

Our current headcount is somethingnorth of 4,300 employees. When I began atGDOT, there were over 6,000 employees(and as high as 10,000 sometime beforethat). When retirements or other ‘separa-tions’ occur, my first impulse is to ask man-

agers if the jobs were part of our core mis-sion, and if so, how is the best way to getthem done? I want our management teamto think the same way, and not immediatelyconclude that we must hire a replacementemployee. For example, we now contractout right-of-way maintenance along someinterstate highways. We had asked districts,“What do you least like to do/where do youleast like to work?” The answer was routinemaintenance of interstates. Another obser-vation is that not everybody in the depart-ment is in the right position, so we aremoving folks around to maximize our effec-tiveness. Some may think the goal is to hit3,500 employees that was named in a Senate

Q/A with Keith Golden, PE, Georgia DOT Commissioner

Resolution in 2011. There is no magic num-ber for our total staff. We must keep lookingfor the best way to execute our business andadjust to do it efficiently as circumstanceschange.

Have you had a chance to contem-plate transportation legislation that the de-partment would pursue in the 2013 GeneralAssembly? What are those issues?

Our top issue is an amendment to de-sign-build legislation. We now must award D-B projects exclusively on the basis of lowbid, which precludes much of the advantageof this procurement method. We are work-ing with the contracting community to comeup with language that will work for us.There may be a two-tier system where large,

time-sensitive projects are procured on a bestvalue basis, and other smaller jobs remainlow-bid. We will continue to work on a wayto move forward with legislation in 2013.There will probably be legislation that is ofinterest to us, but that relate mostly to rou-tine/administrative matters.

What has been your biggest challengein managing GDOT since becoming com-missioner?

My biggest issue is how to regain pub-lic confidence in GDOT. There is a generaldistrust of government, and we certainly arepart of that sentiment. We have never beenas bad as some say. We do many things verywell, but we are also a big target. We want tospeak to our successes, not ignore falsecharges, and correct our mistakes. I haveasked Todd Long to be pro-active in this areawith local governments and Josh Waller todo the same with the General Assembly. Wewant to embrace change in the way we dobusiness as well as innovative approaches towhat we design and build.

Many engineering firms think that theOffice of Program Management, which re-

ports to the Chief Engineer, is an effectiveway to expedite project delivery. Do youthink this has been beneficial to the De-partment?

The concept is good, but we are stillworking on getting the right people with theright skill set in the right positions. The goalis to deliver projects on budget and when wehave them scheduled. This becomes evenmore important as we move to manage theTransportation Referenda projects in thethree regions where it was approved.

It seems that the two biggest innova-tive projects currently in the works are the Nx NW public private partnership (managedlanes on I-75 North in Cobb County and I-575) and the Multi-Modal Passenger Termi-nal in downtown Atlanta—both have been

13OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

14 The GeorGia enGineer

talked about for years. Neither seems to belinked to the Transportation Referendum.Do you think they will continue to move for-ward? Do you think they will be operationalin ten years?

As you know, we have recalibratedfor the NxNW project. We have short-listed four well qualified teams, and I be-lieve we will be successful in executing theproject. To be honest this is our first one,and we are still learning on it. We are stillrefining our relationships with SRTA andGSFIC, but the project procurementprocess is going very well, and I believe itwill get done.

I just returned last night from visits tomulti-modal projects in San Francisco,Denver, and Salt Lake City. I was struck bythe large amount of development/redevel-opment that was occurring around theseprojects, even in this down market (andeven when some are still under construc-tion). Also there was no state money (orvery little) in these projects. I see GDOTdoing the transportation part of a multi-modal 3P and then handing it off to others(an entity of some sort including local gov-ernments, developers, private transporta-tion companies, etc). For the AtlantaMMPT we are helping to pay for and facil-itating with other partners the NEPA doc-uments and planning for the transportationelements. I think it is going very well, andwe want to hand-off the non-transportationelements to someone else.

What can you tell us about the $11million in federal transportation earmarksthat GDOT must use or redirect?

The referenda passed in three regions,and we are actively preparing for a flawlessexecution of our implementation role. Thisis an essential task for us to, as mentionedearlier, rebuild trust in GDOT. We did notwrite the legislation, and we did not pick theprojects, but we are going to get them deliv-ered effectively. v

15OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

The qualities required for successare the same that undermine it.~ Florina, 2009, p. 52

Everybody tells us that we need diversity tosucceed. And everybody is right. But thosediversity elements we need to ensure successare the same elements that are most likely toblow up and result in failure. Diversity is es-sential to the resolution of a Wicked Prob-lem. Yet diversity itself is fraught withWicked Problems.

Some sources of diversity that were dif-ficult to manage ten years ago are still diffi-cult to manage now. That ‘ideal’ skilled andexpert team you work hard to put togetheris still a challenge to manage. An expertteam brings with it diversity of opinions—and strong opinions at that. (Florina, 2009,p. 54; House, 1988, pp. 30-34)

Today there are many emerging sourcesof diversity to manage as well. Ten years ago,you might have been on a large project teamof ten members. Today, your large team ismore likely 100 members. Ten years ago,you met periodically face to face on solidground. Today, even face to face is up in theair via WebEx, Go-to-Meeting, Connect orsome other online platform. Ten years ago,your team all spoke fluent English; today,some do and some don’t. Ten years ago, thenorm was direct, explicit communication;today you must attend as much to the way amessage is delivered as you do to the actualcontent. Ten years ago, you knew the per-son across the table; today you are facing(virtually) a stranger. (Florina, 2009, p. 52)

Parker’s Triangle spells out how differ-ences like these escalate into destructive con-flict. We’ve all seen it happen. Differencesresult in discomfort; discomfort leads to an-noyance; annoyance intensifies into irrita-tion; irritation escalates to heightenedtension, heightened tension to frustration.Before long, people are fighting each other. (Parker, 2008, 28-34)

Parker’s Triangle is an excellent tool foran After Action Review. What we all wantmost, however, is a tool for in-flight correc-tion. We want to see differences escalate intocollaboration, instead of conflict. Whatwould that take? For starters….• Suspend judgment. Put your own feel-

ings, your own agenda on Hold. Forstarters, you are here as learner, not asprotagonist. Simply see the worldthrough the eyes of the Sous Chef andthe Schoolteacher—without providingthe colors or shapes of your own knowl-edge, your own opinions, your own ex-periences.

• Shift to Receive Mode and keep allsenses open—even when you hear aname you don’t think you can pro-nounce; even when you breathe in un-familiar scents; even when your eye isdrawn to a feature of dress or appearanceyou haven’t seen before. Keep receivingeven when you detect differences in ed-ucation level or professional back-ground. Non-technical is not a synonymfor non-intelligent; formal educationisn’t the only way people learn.

• Be fully present in your diversegroup. This is not the time for multi-tasking. Turn off your i-Phone, savethat file folder for another time, stopchecking your watch. Give your full at-tention to the person standing in frontof you. If you have difficulty pronounc-ing the other person’s name, get helpwith it. Don’t shift to easier to pro-nounce nicknames—even when in-vited—until you have gotten the realname right. Face the person in front ofyou squarely; don’t give the impressionyou are poised for the opportunity tomake a break for it. Make eye contact—especially important when the other per-son is talking.

• Recognize the presence of cultural dif-ferences. If the person in front of youdoes not look like you and does notsound like you, you are likely to expectdifferences. Skin color, accent, age, andnational origin are among the obvioussources of diversity. It’s the differences youdon’t immediately see or hear that takeyou by surprise. These differences are themost likely to lead to destructive conflict.

A Sous Chef, a Schoolteacher, and a Civil EngineerWalked into a Problem

By Dr. Ruth Middleton House & Doris I. Willmer, PE, FACEC, LEED® AP

Dr. Ruth Middleton House

Doris I. Willmer, PE,FACEC. LEED® AP

16 The GeorGia enGineer

• At the end of the day, culture is a setof ground rules about what is OK ornot OK to know, to do, and to feel.(House, 2005, 152-158) There areground rules for everything: how peo-ple relate to people, how people relateto time, how people relate to nature(Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner,2012, 10-14). Not all differences inground rules translate into differencesin behavior; some are articulatedthrough different meanings assigned tothe same behavior. Trickier yet. It’s notso much shared behaviors that will leadto reconciliation, it is shared under-standings (Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner, 2012, 30). Achieving sharedunderstandings is the key to success inmergers and acquisitions. In fact, sharedunderstandings may be the key to suc-cess in all relationships.

• Pay attention to everything. Every-thing could matter; pay attention to itall. Mentally record your interactions inhigh resolution. Do not discard or dis-count anything. Small variations inyour expectations, nuances of expres-sions, pace, distancing—all of thesethings could mean something. Now isthe time to immerse yourself in the de-tails, not to judge or categorize them.

• Check for understanding. As you lis-ten your way through the interactions,check for understanding by feeding backboth the emotional and the feeling con-tent you think you have heard. Youmight say, “Sounds like you feel cautiousabout proceeding because you have hada disappointing experience with thisgroup in the past.” Then be quiet andlisten for affirmation or clarification. Atthis point, don’t inject your own opin-ions or experiences into the mix.(House, 1988, 133-134)

• Excavate. Somewhere in high schooldebate class we learned about askingprobing questions. These questions arestill in order if you are in a formal de-bate or doing research. However, if thereis high emotional content in a situation,

using probing questions would be liketaking a bulldozer to an archaeologicaldig. What you need to get the under-ground treasure to the surface intact is ahand shovel and a sifter. You want togently go deeper and sift out the debrisas you go.

• ‘I Statements’ are nondestructive tools.“I’m confused. I thought I heard thatyou had already made the move. NowI’m getting the impression you are stilljust considering it.” “I’m wonderingwhat would happen if….”

Follow up on the “I Statements” withanother check for understanding. Noquestions, no war stories, no judgments.

• Reflect. After your interactions, takesome time to reflect.• What happened that affirmed your

expectations before you entered thesituation?

• What happened that disruptedyour expectations?

• What triggered an unexpectedemotional reaction in you? Whatdid you feel at the time? Whatdoes your reaction tell you aboutyourself?

• What were the points of agree-ment?

• What were the points of disagree-ment?

• Have shared understandings beenachieved by the leader? By theteam?

• What higher order values seem tobe shared by most of the team?

When a sous chef, a schoolteacher, and a civilengineer walk into a problem learn fromthem. Keep on learning. You won’t have theluxury, however, of learning it all before youstart doing. You’ll soon need to be learningand doing at the same time.

That will be tricky enough if you are an

individual contributor. What if you are thedesignated leader of the effort? Uh-oh. You’llnever outgrow the solid transactional leader-ship skills that have served you well in a morestatic environment. They will no longerstand alone, however. Now you’ll need toadd the full suite of transformational leader-ship skills to your repertoire. How? Tune innext issue for From I Have a Plan to I Havea Dream.

References.Florina, Ramona. (2009). Managing inter-national project teams—challenges and para-doxes. Review of Management and EconomicEngineering. 8(4), 51-57.

House, Ruth. (1988). The human side ofproject management. Reading, MA: Addi-son-Wesley.

House, Ruth. (2005). Its time to change theway you change. Kennesaw, GA: Middleton-House & Company.

Parker, Carol G. (4th Edition). (2008). eemotional connection of distinguishing differ-ences and conflict. In Carol P. Harvey and M.June Allard (Eds) Understanding and manag-ing diversity. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pear-son, 28-34.

Trompenaars, Fons and Hampden-Turner,(3rd Edition). (2012). Riding the waves ofculture: Understanding diversity in globalbusiness. New York: McGraw-Hill. v

17OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

18 The GeorGia enGineer

couple of weeks ago, Iwent to the Georgia So-ciety of CPAs’ South-eastern AccountingShow for two days of

continuing professional education. I tend toget so involved with A/E firms and govern-ment contracting that I sometimes forgetthat I am a CPA, or accountant, as I like tosay. The entire two days was spent in theA&A track, which means I was surroundedby accounting and auditing topics. The pur-pose of this article is not a self-help stepwhere the first phase is to admit you have aproblem, but rather a commentary of whereCPA firms are heading as a profession, andhow this can affect your A/E firm.

One of the hot topics was compilationsand reviews, which are levels of service belowan audit where the CPA expresses limited orno assurance on the integrity of the financialstatements. These levels of service are wherethe majority of CPA firms practice. As a mat-ter of fact, one topic seemed to spark themost intense discussion: the basis of ac-counting formally known as ‘OCBOA’ (ac-counting humor). OCBOA stands for ‘othercomprehensive basis of accounting’ and in-cludes cash, tax and regulatory bases—ac-counting principles that are not GAAP,generally accepted accounting principles.

The term is now SPF, special purposeframework. There is no set definition forSPF, only that you define what the basis isand then apply this basis consistently. SPFcan be a combination of accrual, cash, andtax. Seems good, and if you can form anopinion based on the reaction of the hun-dreds, yes hundreds, of practitioners presentit was a big hit. This SPF pretty much letsCPAs produce financial statements usingwhatever accounting principles are conven-ient and easiest for them.

T. Wayne Owens & Associates, PC, hasa very different practice from other CPAfirms. Even though we are a full service firmand have many clients using our full services,

we also havemany clientsthat we onlyp e r f o r mFAR ori-e n t e ds e r v -ices for.T h i sgives us au n i q u eoppor tu -nity to seethe workproduct ofother CPAfirms. We comein after the tax re-turn and financialstatements have beenprepared and perform an FAR audit or com-pilation. We consistently have to make ad-justments to get the firm’s financialinformation on a GAAP basis which is re-quired for FAR purposes. These adjustmentsinclude recording prepaid expenses, accountspayablesn and accruals. Pretty frequently wehave to recompute depreciation from taxbasis (non-GAAP and expressly unallowable)to straight-line. I also have the opportunityto review the financial information of manyA/E firms and I see the same issue there. SPFis alive and well, and the profession has fi-nally changed the rules to make it acceptable.

When is SPF Viable?In many cases SPF is appropriate. Where acompany is small with limited employeesand revenuen then it is a good deal that willsave some money and make life easier foryour CPA. For most companies, includingALL A/E firms who do any government con-tracting, SPF is a horrible idea. I will admitthat the accounting rules have begun to geta little ridiculous (revenue recognition andleasing are two examples), but the purpose offinancial statements is to give management a

tool to help them make effective de-cisions about their firm. Timely, reliable fi-nancial information is necessary for firmmanagement to evaluate the progress of theirfirm. In the financial management classes Iteach, virtually everyone is interested inbenchmarking. In order for benchmarkingto be meaningful, a firm must have reliablefinancial information that is GAAP—sinceGAAP is the basis for the benchmarking. Asthe old saying goes: garbage in, garbage out.

A/E firms need to take responsibility fortheir financial information and questiontheir CPA about the basis of accounting usedin preparing their financial statements. (Ifyou are a full service client of ours, yours isGAAP but we would welcome any inquiryas a teaching opportunity.) If you do nothave full accrual financials with book depre-ciation it will be difficult to make effectivefinancial decisions based on this information.I know that ‘tax planning’ is important but itshouldn’t be the basis for business decisionsand financial statements. Converting fromaccrual to tax is a very easy process. It’s toughout there, and firms need reliable informa-tion to make informed decisions, and I be-lieve GAAP is the word.

There are some compelling reasons for

Question Your Accounting PrinciplesBy T. Wayne Owens, CPA

A

maintaining a full accrual general ledger forsmall and large firms. First and foremost iscash flow. This is particularly a problemwith architects. Managing a lump sum con-tract with sub consultants can be challeng-

ing without full knowledge of the status ofall consultants. One missing sub consultantinvoice will seriously distort profitabilityand available cash. This happens way toooften and contributes to the bad reputation

of architects.As mentioned earlier, benchmarking is a

valuable tool for managers. The benchmark-ing process depends on reliable financial in-formation to be effective. Multiplier, payrollfactor, and overhead rates can artificially fluc-tuate monthly without attention to pre-paidsand accruals. This fluctuation makes it verydifficult to identify trends from which man-agement decisions can be made.

Obviously, the problem is more preva-lent with smaller firms (fewer than 100 peo-ple) but it does occur at larger firms withprofessional in-house accounting staff. Es-tablishing a monthly process that includesreconciliations is not difficult, and once es-tablished will generate better financial infor-mation and make year-end planning mucheasier and more productive. v

19OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

About the AuthorT. Wayne Owens, CPA, is the founder of T.Wayne Owens & Associates, PC, a CPA firmwith a singular focus on the design industry,providing accounting services, overhead audits,financial statement audits, tax returns, andmore to A/E/C firms. Contact: wowens@twocpa.com.

20 The GeorGia enGineer

he practice and regulationof structural engineeringhas undergone a changeacross the country over thelast few years, and thechange is accelerating.

What is different about structural engineer-ing, and why would state regulation of struc-tural engineers be any different thanregulation of other engineers? To address thatquestion let’s examine three things; the newNCEES (the National Council of Examin-ers for Engineers and Surveyors) standards,increasing code complexities, and recentevents and movements in other states.

Based on a comprehensive practice andknowledge study, NCEES, as of April 2011,has instituted a 16-hour structural exam asthe examination standard for demonstratingminimum competence in the practice ofstructural engineering. An NCEES task forceworked for two years, surveying hundreds ofpracticing structural engineers, and con-cluded that the previous eight-hour examswere not adequate to evaluate the minimumcompetence of a structural engineer. Struc-tural engineering is the only discipline of en-gineering that requires more than aneight-hour principles and practice examina-tion. NCEES has created a model law struc-tural engineer (MLSE) standard, alsoadopted by ANSI, which requires the 16-hour exam for structural engineering licen-sure in addition to certain education andexperience criteria. As a result, the StructuralEngineering License Coalition (SELC),which represents all four major structural en-gineering organizations (NCSEA, ASCE-SEI, CASE, and SECB), has endorsed theMLSE standard and advocates that jurisdic-tions require separate licensure for structuralengineers who design significant structures.

In recent years, the building and mate-rial design codes have evolved remarkablyand increased greatly in complexity, espe-cially with regard to lateral force design

The Changing State of Structural Engineering Regulation in the United States

By Robert M. Weilacher, PE, LEED APBD+C | President | Structural Engineers Association of Georgia (SEAOG)

T

21OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

22 The GeorGia enGineer

(wind and seismic). The development ofcommon building and bridge codes (i.e. theInternational Building Code, which Georgiawas one of the first to adopt) now allows foruniform testing standards throughout theUS. The new 16 hour structural exam testsfor breadth and depth of knowledge with in-tegrated design, analysis, and detailing ques-tions pertaining to entire structural systems,not just isolated components. The intent isto comprehensively test the knowledge thatis really needed to design and detail complexstructures and to be compliant with thenewer code demands. By adoption, the codesare the law and they represent the standardfor safeguarding the life, health, and prop-erty of the public—which is also the purposeof our licensing laws.

Many states have already decided not toaccept standards less than those recom-mended by the NCEES model law andANSI consensus, and they have changedtheir laws. These states also realize that hav-

ing common standards will allow their struc-tural engineers to easily gain comity to prac-tice in other states. Separate structuralengineering licensure in some form is alreadya requirement in ten states, including Cali-fornia, Utah, Hawaii, and Illinois. Otherstates, such as Texas, Oklahoma, Connecti-cut, and Florida, are currently in the processof creating similar requirements, and thereare a half dozen other states beginning theprocess.

So there is certainly ample precedentand compelling recent development whichwould cause Georgia to reconsider its struc-tural engineering licensing laws, and to do sosoon. Currently, in Georgia, any profes-sional engineer may practice structural engi-neering if that PE considers it to be withinhis or her area of competence. The law hasno control over this practice except that ‘afterthe fact’ disciplinary action may be imposedif someone is reported and found incompe-tent. There are even documented cases in

which the design engineer’s lack of structuralknowledge, which would have been tested ina more rigorous exam, has led directly to thecollapse of structures and loss of life. TheGeorgia Board of Professional Engineers andLand Surveyors has determined that the 16-hour exam should be the structural exam ad-ministered in Georgia, and as a temporarymeasure has adopted a policy requiring thatexam for all applicants whose experience isstructural engineering. But this is not yetwritten as law, and the Georgia engineeringcommunity must be circumspect of what ishappening around us, and consider how andwhen we should upgrade, by law, the safe-guarding of the life, health, property, andwelfare of the residents of this state.

The Structural Engineers Association ofGeorgia (SEAOG) is currently examining allthose issues and evaluating how such licen-sure law upgrades might best be enacted inGeorgia. SEAOG would welcome commentsand ideas on the subject from all engineers.v

http://www.georgiapower.com/

24 The GeorGia enGineer

an you think of a time youwere really uncomfortable?Maybe it was a time you hadto speak in front of a largegroup, or a time you had toconfront someone who

works with you on a difficult issue. Would-n’t it be nice to make situations like that a lit-tle easier on you? Wouldn’t it be great if youcould make them less painful?

You can, and if you want to be your bestas a leader, you must. When we are in un-comfortable situations, it’s usually becausewe’re acting outside of our natural way ofbeing. When we align our natural way ofbeing to the situations in which we find our-selves, we are happier, less stressed, and moreeffective.

Your Distinct Natural Attributes (Your ‘DNA’)You are hardwired with certain characteris-tics that make you you—distinctly, irre-placeably, inimitably you. The way you live,the way you learn, the way you lead—all ofthese are guided by the gifts you were givenat birth and the ones you have collected inthe course of your life. Knowing these at-tributes gives you tremendous power.

To be able to tap into your brilliance,you must answer the question, ‘What makesyou unique?’ You need to discover your Dis-tinct Natural Attributes—your DNA.

Your Distinct Natural Attributes include:• Your strengths. What do you do espe-

cially well? When are you at your best?

• Your weaknesses. What’s harder for you,goes slower, or is more stressful?

• Your personality. What do you know tobe true about yourself?

• Your preferences. How do you prefer todo things?

Your vulnerabilitiesWhat makes you feel small and insecure?

Your styleWhat’s ‘your way?’

You can use your DNA to turn an ineffectivesituation into one in which you’ll naturallysucceed.

Mapping Your DNAThe more strategies you use to find your Dis-tinct Natural Attributes, the more completeyour view will be. Asking yourself the ques-tions above will get you started. You can re-veal more of your DNA by askingopen-ended questions. To find strengths, ask: • Where are you especially talented?

• What do you love to do?

• What do you do without even thinking?

• What do people count on you for?

• In your social life, what role do youplay?

• At work, what are you recognized for?

• Given the freedom to do things yourway, how do you do them?

To find weaknesses, ask: • What activities would you gladly never

have to do again?

• What do you wish you could pass on tosomeone else?

• When do you feel dragged down?

• What do you dread?

• When do you procrastinate?

Continue the process of exploring yourDNA from every angle, getting to knowyourself as much as possible.

Putting Your DNA to WorkOnce you have a sense of your DNA, youcan use your new knowledge to capitalize onyour strengths.

Let’s imagine three people, each withdifferent DNA, in a similar situation. Theyeach have to confront a colleague who is notpulling his weight on the team, and it’s start-ing to affect both the team dynamics and theresults. Notice that each of these people willhandle the situation differently, based ontheir DNA.

Person A is shy and reserved, but very car-ing. She might approach this situation in aquiet one-on-one conversation in which sheexpresses concern for the person’s feelings asshe confronts the issue.

Person B is brash, direct, and focused onresults. He might choose his words carefullyto avoid insulting the person, and then ap-proach the situation by showing the personthe disconnect between their results andtheir behavior.

Your Leadership DNABy Joelle K. Jay, Ph.D.

CYour virtues

What can you claim as beingyour most virtuous qualities?

Once you have a sense of your DNA,you can use your new knowledge to cap-italize on your strengths.

25OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

Person C is honest and insightful, but finds ithard to have face-to-face conversations with-out getting flustered. He might actually writethe difficult message he has to deliver downon a piece of paper and either use it as a guideto have a phone conversation or turn his notesinto a letter or e-mail to address the situation.

You can use the same approach bythinking about your DNA and understand-

ing how it would be most effective for youto conduct yourself in any situation. Know-ing your attributes gives you the opportunityto choose from among a varied collection ofinner resources, dipping into them as neededfor the ones that will serve you best and leadyou to your goals.

ExerciseReflect on a time in your life when you felt

most powerful. What might that experiencehave to teach you about your Distinct Natu-ral Attributes?

Like your genetic DNA, your DistinctNatural Attributes define ‘what’s true aboutyou.’ What’s genuinely true about you—thegood and the bad—is also what’s greatabout you. v

About the AuthorJoelle K. Jay, Ph.D. (http://joellekjay.com/) is an executive coach specializing in leadership development and the author of The InnerEdge: The 10 Practices of Personal Leadership, which shows leaders how to improve their effectiveness by learning to lead themselves.Her newsletter, Inner Edge Insights, offers articles, exercises, tips, quotes, and success stories from real leaders to help you excel. To reg-ister, please visit www.TheInnerEdge.com and click on Newsletter, or e-mail Info@TheInnerEdge.com.

e are heading intothe final stretch of2012, and it’s timefor us to review taxplanning strategies

with our clients. The $64,000 question is,what do we tell them? Do you plan for 2012assuming in 2013 rates go up or do you as-sume Congress will do a last minute extenderbill? If you look at Congressional history re-garding taxes, past experience has shown thatthere probably will be a last minute extenderbut it’s anyone’s guess as to what it will be.

Before we start answering the questions,let’s review what we currently know is sched-uled to expire or become effective January 1,2013:• Expiration of Bush-era tax cuts, i.e. in-

creased capital gains tax, individual in-come tax rates, and ordinary income taxon dividends, to name a few

• Expiration of two percent payroll taxholiday—employee social security with-holding will return to 6.2 percent

• Expiration of estate and gift tax rate of$5 million exemption with tax rate of 35percent and portability of unused exclu-sion between spouses, return to $1 mil-lion with a 55 percent rate

• Reduction in section 179 depreciationin 2013 to $25,000

• Expiration of 50 percent bonus depreci-ation

Effective January 1, 2013:Surtax on unearned income of higher in-come individuals – 3.8 percent Medicare tax• Increased Medicare tax of 0.9 percent on

high income workers and self-employedtaxpayers

• Automatic budget cuts of approximately$1 trillion over the next 10 years to besplit between defense spending andother budget items.

This is by no means an all inclusive list ofchanges, but ones that will probably affect alarger number of taxpayers.

Since it’s an election year, what are thecandidates proposing to do regarding taxes?

President Obama ~• Higher tax rates for higher-income tax-

payers, i.e. those who earn over$200,000 single or $250,000 married

• Higher capital gains/dividend tax rateson higher-income taxpayers

• Reduction in maximum corporate rateto 28 percent, 25 percent for manufac-turing

• Abolish Alternative Minimum Tax(AMT) but replace it with the “BuffettRule” – taxpayers making more than $1

million annually would pay an effectivetax rate of at least 30 percent

• Estate tax exemption of $3.5 millionand a 45 percent tax rate with the ex-tension of current rules for portabil-ity—gift tax exclusion would be $1million

Governor Romney ~ • Maintain current individual tax rate in

2013

• Eliminate tax on investment income fortaxpayers with adjusted gross incomebelow $200,000

• Reduce maximum corporate rate to 25percent

• Abolish AMT

• Abolish estate and gift tax

One of the things both candidates agree onis that something needs to be done otherthan a complete expiration of the Bush-eratax cuts. They also agree that some of the ex-tender provisions which expired at the endof 2011 should remain in place as well, i.e.tax-free charitable distributions from IRAs,deduction for teacher’s classroom expenses,and state and local sales tax deductions, toname a few.

What has Congress proposed? Bothhouses passed tax-cut extension bills prior tothe August recess. The House bill would ex-tend the Bush-era tax cuts through 2013 andincrease the AMT exemption. The Senatebill also contained those items but the Bush-era tax cuts would not apply to high-incometaxpayers. No surprise that the two housesfell behind their respective party’s candidateregarding taxes since the House majority isRepublican and the Senate is Democratic.

Whichever candidate is elected, their taxinitiatives will not happen overnight. At theearliest it would be the middle of 2013 be-fore anything is passed. The general belief is

End of Year Tax Planning ConsiderationsBy Janet Prather, CPA | Partner | Deemer Dana & Froehle

W

Janet Prather

26 The GeorGia enGineer

27OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

that after the election, Congress will extendsome or all of the Bush tax cuts in conjunc-tion with a deficit reduction bill and pass theproblem to the next congressional session.After the Presidential inauguration in Janu-ary, 2013, Congress will probably take upthe issue of tax reform, and I wouldn’t besurprised if in June, 2013 tax legislation isenacted which will be retroactive to January1, 2013. That would have the effect of nul-lifying the extension.

Given the current uncertainty of ourtax system, the potential effect of increasedtaxes on the economy, it’s no wonder thatbusinesses are waiting to see what happensbefore hiring additional employees or mak-ing significant capital investments.

So, what are we advising our clients todo? We are encouraging our high incomeclients to do some estate tax planning to takeadvantage of the $5 million gift tax exemp-tion ($10 million for married couples) bygifting property to the next generation eitherthrough trusts, outright gifts or family lim-ited partnerships, depending upon their re-spective goals. If you’re a high incomeindividual (modified adjusted gross incomeof more than $250,000 married or$200,000 single) with investment incomeand unrealized gains on stocks which youplan to sell in 2012 or 2013, you probablywant to sell the investment in 2012, due tothe surtax becoming effective in 2013 whichwould increase your tax liability as a resultof the sale. Selling in 2012 would not onlyresult in saving the 3.8 surcharge but thegain would also be taxed at a lower capitalgains tax rate.

Self-employed taxpayers who are highincome earners may not want to defer in-come into 2013 due to the expected increasein individual income tax rates as well as theincrease in Medicare tax. One of the thingsyou may want to consider is invoicing clientsearlier in December rather delaying to theend of the month in order to collect thefunds prior to year-end. But, this couldchange at the last minute if Congress ex-tends the Bush-era tax cuts.

Before initiating any tax strategies, besure to discuss the potential pitfalls or issueswith your tax professional. It is always eas-

ier to assist a client with strategies before atransaction occurs because once it’s com-pleted there’s usually not anything we can doto help minimize the tax cost. v

28 The GeorGia enGineer

http://www.georgiapower.com/commercialsavings

30 The GeorGia enGineer

W h a t ’ s i n t h e

N E W S

Solving Subsurface

Problems Since 1981

• Subsurface Utility Engineering (SUE)

• Underground utility locating

• Subsurface mapping and profiling

• Concrete imaging and inspection

• Geophysical exploration

• 3D subsurface imaging

• Geophysical borehole logging

GA: 770-980-1002 SC: 843-769-7379

NC: 919-406-1808 www.gel.com

Willmer Engineering Inc. is pleased toannounce the addition of Thomas E.Scruggs, PE to our team. A highly skilledand distinguished engineer with over thirtyyears of technical expertise, Tom will joinWillmer as a principal consultant to our ge-otechnical and construction materials con-sulting services clients.

Most recently the Geotechnical Engi-neering Bureau Chief with the Georgia De-partment of Transportation (GDOT), Mr.Scruggs brings to Willmer an extensive back-ground of geotechnical engineering services.He served the GDOT Geotechnical Bureaufor thirty years, over nine years as the StateGeotechnical Engineer, supervising the Ge-otechnical, Environmental, and PavementDesign branches. He acted as the Co-chairof the GPTQ Geotechnical Subcommitteeto advance the GDOT Geotechnical Man-ual for drilling, sampling, and report writingguidelines.

Tom’s extensive resume of professionalengineering services includes such notableprojects as the preparation of the foundationdesigns and construction inspection for thenew Sidney Lanier Bridge in Brunswick,Georgia, foundation design and instrumen-tation of the Southwest Bypass Project in Sa-vannah, Georgia, foundation design for theI-520 road extension and bridges throughPhinizy Swamp in Augusta, Georgia, the de-sign of steep reinforced earth slopes usinggeosynthetic reinforcement on the I-285widening project in Atlanta, Georgia, andthe design of the dynamic compaction treat-ment for the West Thomasville Bypass road-way through a municipal landfill inThomasville, Georgia.

Mr. Scruggs received his Bachelor of Sci-

ence in Civil Engineering from Clarkson Uni-versity in Potsdam, New York, and has been aregistered Professional Engineer in Georgiasince 1985. He served on the GeotechnicalCommittee of American Society of Civil En-gineers and the Transportation ResearchBoard committees A2K02 and A2K01. Tomreceived the Commissioner’s OutstandingAchievement Award for work performed afterthe 1994 floods in Georgia, and the Com-missioner’s Merit Award for work performedon the design and construction supervision ofdrilled caissons on the Sidney Lanier Bridge inBrunswick, Georgia.

In his role as principal consultant atWillmer, Mr. Scruggs will utilize his breadthof experience and professionalism to providemanagement and technical expertise servingour diverse client base.

We look forward to a rewarding rela-tionship with Tom, as he helps Willmer con-tinue our tradition of 30 years of successfulproject and client services delivery to ourclients. v

United Consulting Names Russell Griebeland David Huetter as Executive VicePresidents

United Consulting has promoted RussellGriebel, P.G., C.P.G. and David Huetter toExecutive Vice Presidents. Both Russelland David have served as environmentalteam leaders with United Consulting forover ten years.

Russell Griebel is a licensed ProfessionalGeologist and Certified Professional Geolo-gist. Russ has extensive experience acting asa liaison between public/private entities andvarious states environmental agencies. Hiscurrent role is providing technical and man-agerial support for projects including; sitecharacterization, remedial actions, vapor in-trusion, risk assessment, and Brownfieldproperty redevelopment. He is active in nu-merous professional organizations includingthe Air and Waste Management Association,

Russell Griebel

31OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

Heery Designing Renovation of GSU BuildingGeorgia State University has selected HeeryInternational to provide interior design andengineering services for the first phase of anadaptive reuse of the former SunTrust Bankheadquarters building in downtown Atlanta. The project involves retrofitting six floors ofthe 27-story office tower for use by GSU.The approximately 90,000 square feet ofspace will be converted to accommodate fac-ulty, staff, and graduate student offices, meet-

where he resides as a director and the Na-tional Brownfield Association. He receivedhis Bachelors Degree in Geology from Clar-ion University of Pennsylvania in 1995.

David Huetter, Director of EcologicalServices for United Consulting, has over 17years experience performing wetland andecological surveys for state and federal gov-ernment agencies, as well as for private firmsand individuals. His experience includesmapping of wetlands and vegetative com-munities, monitoring nesting and hatchingsuccess of endangered species, and conduct-ing research of several wildlife species andtheir related habitat. Mr. Huetter has con-ducted wetland/stream delineations and per-mitting throughout the Southeast UnitedStates. In addition, he has prepared wetlandand stream mitigation plans as well as super-vising wetland creation and restoration proj-ects, implementing stream and riparianrestoration mitigation, and monitoring wet-land and stream mitigation sites. v

ing rooms, and collaboration spaces.  Heeryis also designing mechanical/electrical/plumb-ing improvements for the entire building—emergency power, building automation con-trols, and low-voltage power.

Phase-one construction is scheduled forcompletion by December 2012.  Future plansfor the building entail renovations to the re-maining floors to house similar GSU officeand meeting space.

“Georgia State is an urban campus, sowe are working in an occupied building inthe heart of downtown Atlanta,” said SteveHart, who is directing Heery’s design effortson the project. “We look forward to the chal-lenge of repurposing and rebranding this of-fice tower into a fully integrated academicfacility for GSU.”

Heery International is an architecture, in-terior design, engineering, program manage-ment, and construction management firmwith offices nationwide. As an affiliated com-pany of Parsons Brinckerhoff, one of theworld’s leading professional services compa-nies, Heery now operates as that firm’s U.S.buildings division. v

David Huetter

32 The GeorGia enGineer

WTS Transportation Association OffersDiscount to Public SectorWTS International, the association for theadvancement of women in the transporta-tion industry, has just announced that pub-lic sector transportation employees can jointhe premiere career growth and networkingorganization for half price for one year. Themembership drive, valid for the month ofOctober 2012, was created with a dual pur-pose: in recognition of public sector profes-sionals and their contribution to theindustry, and to move WTS forward on itsmission to bring more diverse leadership tothe transportation industry.

“The economy is affecting all industries,both public and private sectors. Thoughbudgets are tight, investments in workforcedevelopment should not be sacrificed, sowe’re offering this discount in an attempt tohelp the public sector network and find pro-fessional development through WTS,” saidMarcia Ferranto, WTS International Presi-dent and CEO.

The public sector includes everythingfrom city engineers and planners to depart-ment of transportation individuals to countyand village employees. As an internationaltransportation organization, WTS strives tosupport, promote, and advance women in allfacets of transportation. “Reaching out toour public professionals and encouraging

them to join and become active membersprovides them the opportunity to benefitfrom WTS networking and professional de-velopment events, scholarship programs, andmentoring activities,” said Ferranto.

The WTS International membershipdrive for public sector transportation em-ployees grants a half priced membership tothe association for one year for applicationsprocessed Oct. 1 through October 31, 2012.For more information, visit www.WTSinter-national.org or email membership@wtsin-

ternational.org.WTS International, headquartered in Wash-

ington, DC, is committed to advancing women intransportation through expanding existing scholar-ship opportunities to women pursuing transportationrelated degrees, providing and promoting more edu-cational opportunities and career development to ad-vance women in transportation, and initiating,sponsoring, and publishing research related toadvancing women in transportation. More in-formation can be found at www.WTSinterna-tional.org. v

33OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

Merrick & Company Achieves SignificantCertificationMerrick & Company’s (www.merrick.com)Aurora, Colorado, Nuclear Services & Tech-nology operations (NST) group just receivedcertification to the International Organiza-tion for Standardization (ISO) 9001: 2008Quality Management System requirements.

The ISO program is the source of inter-nationally recognized quality, environmen-tal, and other management standards forbusiness, government, and society. In otherwords, Merrick’s ISO 9001:2008 certifica-tion applies to the processes that influenceproduct or service quality, customer satisfac-tion, and continuous improvement. In

achieving this level of certification, Merrick’squality management system, a highly effi-cient and robust program, was independ-ently audited by an accredited registrar andconfirmed as being in conformity with thisISO standard.

“Merrick’s NST group has been incor-porating and utilizing most ISO 9001 re-quirements in their Quality AssuranceProgram for over 15 year. ISO’s 9001 qualitymanagement system requirements were al-ways seen as a valuable enhancement formeeting the demanding U.S. Department ofEnergy and Nuclear Regulatory CommissionQuality Assurance requirements on NST’sprojects. Achieving ISO 9001:2008 certifi-cation is further conferment that Merrick’sNST group and their Quality Assurance Pro-gram are ready and able to meet the needs ofU.S. clientele,” said Greg Morris, Director ofQuality Assurance at Merrick. “This is a sig-nificant step in Merrick’s efforts with work

outside the U.S., as this quality standard isalso internationally recognized,” added JohnBuckle, Vice President Nuclear Services &Technology, of Merrick.

“A big thank you to members of Mer-rick’s Quality Assurance department as theywere instrumental with their leadership andguidance in achieving the certification,”said Buckle.

With this, Merrick’s Aurora NST oper-ations group will claim the ISO 9001:2008certification only to work controlled throughNST Aurora, within the scope of projectmanagement, engineering, design, fabrica-tion oversight, and consulting services for theNuclear Power Production, Nuclear Material

Processing, and Nuclear Research industries.More information about Merrick & Com-pany’s Nuclear group can be found at (Mer-rick NUCLEAR) v

Thomas Hellwig Joins Parsons BrinckerhoffThomas Hellwig has been named a SeniorAviation Program Manager in the Atlanta of-fice of Parsons Brinckerhoff, a global infra-structure strategic consulting, engineering,and program/construction management or-ganization.

In his new position, Mr. Hellwig willpursue new aviation program managementassignments as well as manage aviation proj-ects throughout the US.

Mr. Hellwig has more than 26 years ofexperience in the aviation industry, includ-ing aviation planning; design; program/con-struction management; project management;and business management. Prior to joining

Parsons Brinckerhoff, he served as Vice Pres-ident, Aviation for a Nashville-based archi-tecture and engineering firm, where hemanaged the design of the new internationalterminal at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Inter-national Airport. He also served in theUnited States Army as a medevac helicoptercrew chief during the Gulf War in 1991.

Mr. Hellwig received an M.A. degree inbusiness administration from the Universityof Florida and a B.S. in mechanical engi-neering from the University of Connecticut. Parsons Brinckerhoff is a leader in develop-ing and operating infrastructure around theworld, with 14,000 employees dedicated tomeeting the needs of clients and communi-ties in the Americas, Europe, Africa, theMiddle East, Asia, and Australia-Pacific re-gions. The firm offers skills and resources instrategic consulting, planning, engineering,program/construction management, and op-erations for transportation, power, mining,water/wastewater, and community develop-ment projects. v

Michelle McGlaun Joins T. WayneOwens & AssociatesT. Wayne Owens & Associates, PC, ispleased to announce the addition of MichelleMcGlaun, CPA, to the team, specializing infinancial audits and overhead audits forA/E/C firms.

As Audit Manager for her previous CPAfirm, Michelle developed a deep level of ex-perience with financial statement audits andinternal controls, as well as auditing ‘Sched-ules of Indirect Cost’ for FAR compliance.

ThomasHellwig

34 The GeorGia enGineer

Michelle is adept at working with stateDOTs on behalf of her clients. Her experi-ence in a corporate environment with Sar-banes Oxley, budgeting, forecasting,compensation planning, and software con-versions helps her relate to the challenges ofrunning a business.

Michelle sees her role with each clientas advocate, teacher, and collaborator. Herapproach to audits is to partner with herclient to figure out solutions that work forboth the audit requirements and for theclient’s business, all with minimum affect onthe client’s productivity. Her experience withmany best practices gives Michelle the van-tage point to show her clients how to tweakand improve their current process, create ef-ficiencies—and, ultimately, strengthen theirbusiness.

Michelle received her Bachelor of Busi-ness Administration in Accounting fromClayton College and State University. Sheis a Certified Public Accountant and is in-volved with several organizations, includingthe American Institute of Certified PublicAccountants, the Georgia Society of Certi-fied Public Accountants, and the Associa-tion of Certified Fraud Examiners. She alsoserves the role of treasurer on the board ofdirectors for the Clayton Chamber of Com-merce.v

Steven Sveda Joins HeerySteven Sveda has been named Director ofElectrical Engineering at Heery International.

In his new position, Mr. Sveda will leadthe electrical engineering department in

Heery’s Atlanta office, responsible for over-all department staffing, technical compe-tency, quality control, and businessdevelopment.

Mr. Sveda has over 35 years of engi-neering experience. He has managed majorprojects for the General Services Adminis-tration, Social Security Administration,National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-tration, US Army Corps of Engineers, andthe US Air Force, as well as numeroushealth care, aviation, education, and com-mercial projects. His portfolio includes theelectrical engineering design on a numberof technologically advanced projects, in-cluding laboratories for systems integra-tion, research facilities, and communi-cations centers.

Prior to joining Heery, Mr. Sveda servedas a senior manager for a number of archi-

tectural engineering and consulting engi-neering organizations located in the Midwestand Mid-Atlantic regions.

A LEED (Leadership in Energy and En-vironmental Design) accredited professionaland professional engineer in over a dozenstates, Mr. Sveda received a bachelor of ar-chitectural engineering degree from Pennsyl-vania State University and a master ofbusiness administration from George Wash-ington University. He is certified by the Na-tional Council of Examiners for Engineeringand Surveying and is a member of the Na-tional Fire Protection Association and the USGreen Building Council. He is a past exec-

utive committee member of the Urban LandInstitute (Baltimore chapter) and past mem-ber of the board of directors of the Engi-neering Society of Baltimore.v

Rosser Appoints New Board MembersRosser International Inc. has appointed fi-nancial comptroller Brenda Miller to theboard of directors and named Ray Ashe assecretary of the corporation.

Ms. Miller has served in a number of ac-counting roles at Rosser during her 22 yearsat the firm. She began as an accounts payableadministrator and has moved into increas-ingly responsible positions. She is a graduateof Syracuse University with a Bachelor’s inAccounting. She also has a degree in Admin-istration from Clayton State University.

Michelle McGlaun

Steven Sveda

Brenda Miller

Ray Ashe

Ray Ashe is a Vice President with Rosserand the firm’s Director of Architecture. Hehas served on the board for ten years and hasbeen with the firm since 1984. Ray has beenresponsible for many of the firm’s projects,including the University of West Georgia’sNew Coliseum; the Petersen Events Centerat the University of Pittsburgh; several sportsprojects at Georgia State University; andPapa John’s Cardinal Stadium at the Univer-sity of Louisville. v

35OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

hile funding fortransportation inmuch of Georgia isat a crossroads, res-idents in 46 coun-ties across Georgia’s

midsection have no doubt about funding formany of their projects. That’s because in July,voters in three regions—Central SavannahRiver Area, Heart of Georgia Altamaha, andRiver Valley —passed a ten-year one percentspecial transportation sales tax to fund theirtransportation projects. With total estimatedrevenues of $1.8 billion over the ten years,these regions will fund 871 projects. Withtheir approval of the referendum, theseGeorgians determined that the benefits fortheir roads are worth the costs.

TIA project delivery. On-time. On-budget.Georgia DOT project delivery is quick andefficient. In fact, our performance is amongthe best in the country. And—despite ourhaving one of the lowest per capita budgetsin the nation—Georgia highways andbridges rank at the top as well.

Transportation referendum projects areno exception. They will be delivered on-timeand on-budget.

From 84 projects in the Augusta regionto 753 local maintenance and 11 regionalprojects in the Heart of Georgia to 23 proj-ects in the Columbus region—full disclo-sure and absolute transparency will be thestandard.

Georgia DOT is responsible for ulti-mate project delivery. A clear implementa-tion process is in place and plans areunderway to finalize intergovernmentalagreements and strategies with RegionalCommission members for efficient projectdelivery.

A GDOT Transportation InvestmentAct (TIA) office has been established underthe direction of TIA Administrator Mike

Dover. A liaison will be selected for each re-gion. GDOT is procuring a TIA programmanagement consultant to focus on budget-ing, scheduling, and day-to-day administra-tion of TIA projects for the three regions.Information on budgets, project work status,schedules, and monies spent will be providedthrough updated reports, as well as a dedi-cated Web site. GDOT will work with theDepartment of Revenue, who handles thetax collection, and Georgia State Financingand Investment Commission (GSFIC), whoholds and disburses the funds. Annual au-dits will be conducted and a regional Citi-zens Review Panel will make certain thatprojects are done as the law intends. Projectswill be delivered by local governments, acontractor or by GDOT.

TIA projects are designed and con-structed to budget and are ‘pay as you go’ —they will be constructed as funds are avail-

able. Collection of funds begins January 1,2013, with funds distribution and projectconstruction likely starting spring 2013.

After the Referendum ~ What’s next for Georgia Transportation?

By Keith Golden, P.E. | Georgia DOT Commissioner

W

Recurring Traffic Congestion

36 The GeorGia enGineer

While most TIA projects do not involvefederal funds, the State Transportation Boardhas adopted a resolution encouraging the useof Disadvantaged Business Enterprises(DBEs) for TIA-funded projects.

As the agency with responsibility overthe TIA program, Georgia DOT is commit-ted to a streamlined delivery process withstrict attention to budgets and schedules, andtransparency and accountability.

We must keep seeking solutions to easecongestion and improve our statewide trans-portation network. GDOT will continue towork with Governor Deal to develop long-term, sustainable funding and to strategicallymake new investments.

Addressing safety and congestion relief -key projects move ahead statewide, Managed lanes are an essential part of Geor-gia’s future. Plans continue for the Northwest

Corridor Express (NWC) along InterstateHighways 75 and 575 in Cobb and Chero-kee counties. The 30-mile NWC is a publicprivate partnership (P3) with the private sec-tor financing 10-20 percent of the $750-$850 million design/build cost. It featurestwo new reversible lanes along the west sideof I-75 between I-285 and I-575; one newreversible lane in the I-75 center median toHickory Grove Road; and a similar new I-575 lane will extend to Sixes Road. A vari-able-rate toll, based on traffic volume, will

be assessed for lane access. A shortlist ofteams will provide ‘best value’ bids in June2013, with construction to begin mid-2014,and completion in 2018.

GDOT continues addressing conges-tion relief and safety on GA 400, one of themost heavily traveled corridors in the state.In Fulton county, operational improvementshave maximized existing pavement. InForsyth and Dawson counties, we’re resur-facing the roadway and extending Georgia’sIntelligent Transportation System (ITS).Right of way acquisition has begun for a con-tinuous flow intersection at GA 53 in Daw-son County. In metro Atlanta, interchangereconstruction progresses at I-85, with com-pletion anticipated by Dec. 31, 2013. In ad-dition, budget, goals, and concepts are beingevaluated for construction of an interchangeat I-285 - the Governor has identified this asa top priority.

On I-285, resurfacing and deep-millingten miles at the top end from Paces FerryRoad in Cobb county to Ashford-Dun-woody Road in DeKalb County is ongoing.

On I-85 in Gwinnett county, construc-tion of a diverging diamond interchange(DDI) has begun at Pleasant Hill Road, withanother planned at Jimmy Carter Boulevard.

Across the state, essential interchangeand intersection improvements, widening,lane construction, resurfacing, and bridge re-pairs are in the works. v

Deep Milling Before Resurfacing

TIA-approved Regions

37OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

ASHE Georgia HappeningsBy Jenny Jenkins

It has been a busy time for the ASHE Geor-gia Section!

Georgia InRoads Users’ GroupAs the number of transportation projectsbeing completed using InRoads began in-creasing, the design software utilized byGDOT, it was determined that instructionalsessions would be beneficial to area consult-ants. GDOT and ASHE have coordinatedto develop an InRoads Users’ Group for con-sultants. The group is led by a volunteergroup of consultants with experience withthe software. A series of eight sessions hasbeen developed and is being taught by thevolunteers. The sessions, which include hor-izontal and vertical alignment manipulation,cross sections and corridor modeling, earth-work, right-of-way, and advanced templates,began in July and are held once a month.

ASHE would like to sincerely thank thegroup of volunteers that are generously con-tributing their time and knowledge: JakeMitchell (Parsons Brinkerhoff ), NathanLaird (Lowe Engineers), Rustavius Ford(Florence and Hutchinson), Eric Rickert(Gresham Smith and Partners), MindySanders (Hatch Mott MacDonald), RickStrickland (TY Lin), Arwin Lopez (Pond &Co.), and Darren Wilton (McGee Partners),as well as GDOT personnel that have madethemselves available during the sessions.Others that have our thanks for facilitatingthe sessions are Dan Bodycomb (AECOM)and Nikki Reutlinger (Atkins).

Follow the discussion on LinkedInunder ‘Georgia Inroads Users.’

Annual Bowling TournamentThe annual ASHE Georgia Bowling Tour-

nament was held on August 21. There were160 players and 40 teams competing in fourdivisions: Interstate, Highway, Local Roads,and Driveway. Each team bowled threegames, at which point the top two teamsfrom each division went on to compete forthe division title.

Interstate Division Champs: Fresh Princesof Bowl-Air (Gresham Smith)—Scott Shel-ton, Josh Williams, Brian O’Connor, KentBlack

Highway Division Champs: Bowling forQuittin’ Time (Columbia Engineering) –John McGuire, Dara Ay, Paul Cook, CraigWall

Local Roads Division Champs: LittleLebowski Urban Achievers (GDOT) – ChrisRudd, John Karnowski (sub for BradleyEhrman), Sam Woods, David Norwood

Driveway Division Champs: It’s Not aGolf Score (TY Lin) – Matt Allendorf,David Gjertson, Luke Wemette, ChristineMartinez-Dingle

Top Female Winners: Christine Martinez-Dingle (TY Lin), Score=469Kelli Weigle (THC), Score = 442

Top Male Winners: Peter Hortman (URS),Score=660Jim Baxter (Terracon), Score=526

Over $2300 was raised for the BabsAbubakari Memorial Scholarship! Wewould like to sincerely thank our generoussponsors:

Turkey Level – Edwards Pitman, AECOM,United Consulting, Southeastern Engineer-ing, TY Lin

Strike Level – THC, Inc., Gresham Smithand Partners, ARCADIS

Spare Level – Pond & Company, Heathand Lineback, Terracon Consultants,STV/Ralph Whitehead, Hatch Mott Mac-Donald, Wolverton & Associates, ECSSoutheast

AsHeNews

Ron Osterloh, P.E., PresidentAmerican Society of Highway Engineers / Georgia Section

Officer InstallationsOfficer installations were held in June, andthree new board members were added. The2012-2013 ASHE Georgia Section officersare:

President ~ Ron Osterloh, Pond & Com-panyFirst Vice President ~ Michael Bywaletz,Gresham Smith and PartnersSecond Vice President ~ Brian O’Connor,Gresham Smith and PartnersSecretary ~ Karyn Matthews, GDOTTreasurer ~ Richard Meehan, Lowe Engi-neersPast President and Regional Rep ~ TimMatthews, GDOTDirector ~ Shawn Fleet, Heath and LinebackNational Director ~ Nikki Reutlinger,Atkins

ChairsNominating Committee Chair ~ TimMatthews, GDOTProgram Chair ~ Rob Dell-Ross, City ofRoswellMembership Chair ~ Scott Jordan, CobbCountyScholarship Chair ~ Sarah Worachek, Gre-sham Smith and PartnersASHE Student Chapter Liason ~ KevinRiggs, Gresham Smith and PartnersTechnical Chairs ~ Dan Bodycomb,AECOM; Chris Rudd, GDOTCommunications Chair ~ Jenny Jenkins,McGee PartnersSocial Chair ~ Elizabeth Scales, ThompsonEngineeringGolf Tournament Chair ~ Ashley Chan,HNTBWeb site Chairs ~ Mindy Sanders, HatchMott MacDonald; Pervez Iqbal, HNTB

ACEC/G is the Advocate for the Businessof Engineering in Georgia In the last issue I alerted you that ACEC/Gis implementing a dramatic reorganizationtriggered by the desire to improve the rele-vance of the association for the memberfirms in three areas, Legislative Advocacy,Business Development, and Firm Opera-tions. The ACEC/G board decided that todo this effectively, we needed to have ourown staff. In August, Michael ‘Sully’ Sulli-van became our Executive Director, GwenBrandon joined us as Director of Operation,and Kathy Belcher will manage programs.Tom Leslie claims to be working for us onlypart-time but continues to be a great posi-tive influence on ACEC/G and all aspects ofengineering in Georgia.

Michael Sullivan comes to us from theAnderson, Tate, & Carr law firm. In hispractice and in his extensive civic activities,he has been heavily involved with the issuesand causes important to us in the business ofengineering. As an attorney, he has special-ized in land use and zoning issues and hasworked as a registered lobbyist. As a high-en-ergy volunteer, he has served on multipleboards (Council for Quality Growth, StateBoard of the Technical College System,Georgia Chamber of Commerce). He servesas chairman of the board of the GwinnettWater and Sewer Authority and on the Geor-gia Higher Education Funding Commission.That wide range of experience and involve-ment gives him a good understanding of allthe practice areas of ACEC/G members.Michael has given us permission to call him‘Sully.’ I am sure you will enjoy getting toknow Sully in the coming months.

ACEC/G is the advocate for the busi-ness of engineering in Georgia. The mem-

bers of our association are consulting engi-neering firms working together to promoteour issues, find new business opportunities,and learn how to operate our firms more suc-cessfully. Like most engineering-oriented as-sociations, our meetings and activities areheavily populated by professional engineers.However, also in attendance are firm leadersand associate members from other disciplinesand specialties. Even though we often findourselves at the lunch table with competitors,the mood has always been collegial, not cut-throat, even now in a bad economy. I havefound that some of the most valuable refer-rals, teaming opportunities, business strate-gies, and problem solutions have come fromthose conversations. As in our forums, sem-inars, programs, and legislative initiatives,when you are not ‘seated at the table,’ youwill miss some great opportunities.

The board’s motivation for the reorgan-ization came from our realization that a morerobust organization would be needed in re-sponse to the current economic climate and

resulting new culture of business. Just ascompetition for engineering work is tougherwith project opportunities few in number,competition for member participation istougher when there are other associations,activities, and expenses competing for over-head dollars. We concluded that everythingwe do needs to pass the test of RELE-VANCE.

In the future, to be relevant to firms inthe engineering business, ACEC/G mustmeet the needs of those business’ leaders insuch a way that they are convinced that join-ing and staying involved will lead to bettersuccess for their firm, not because joining isa philanthropic or professional obligation.Firms will join because they need the thingsACEC/G can provide for the business, notbecause it’s the right thing to do. Consistentwith this philosophy, the board is about toroll-out its new Value Proposition, a clearpresentation of what ACEC/G’s focus will bein serving its members.

The Value Proposition will be the meas-

38 The GeorGia enGineer

Edgar G. Williams, PEPresident ACEC/G

ACeCNews

39OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

uring stick we use for evaluating current andproposed programs and activities ofACEC/G. As I noted in the opening sen-tence of this article, to be considered rele-vant, any initiative must be relevant to theneeds of member firms in three key areas:Legislative Advocacy, Business Development,and Firm Operations.

Legislative Advocacy will be advancedon the national level with support and guid-ance from ACEC National. The impact onCongress of our pooled individual contribu-tions to the National PAC, along with theskillfully-packaged information the Wash-ington staff provides on our behalf is sub-stantial, with far better effect than we couldexpect with small individual contributions.Likewise, state PAC contributions give cred-ibility to our issues and prove our unity. Ad-vocacy also includes efforts to monitor andinfluence regulatory policies and professionalpractice issues that sometimes arise at thestate level.

ACEC/G programs, networking events,forums, monthly meetings, conferences, andforums often result in Business Developmentopportunities for member firms, but onlywhen they are attended. Developers, indus-tries, agencies, and institutions that are ourpotential clients will be analyzed for partici-

pation in events that will provide network-ing opportunities for member firms. Thiswill sometimes provide early intelligence onupcoming work opportunities and long-termprospects. Also it is important to rememberthat due to the complexity of many projects,teaming is necessary to cover all the special-ties of service. This means that fellow mem-bers can often be the source of significantbusiness opportunities.

The third leg of the tripod is Firm Op-erations. Engineering firms of all sizes havea vested interest in improving their opera-tional efficiency by learning and adopting‘best practices.’ This type of knowledge canbe acquired cost-effectively through wellplanned ACEC/G sponsored programs, sem-inars, webinars, and workshops. Keep inmind that we want to keep the focus on top-ics that relate primarily to business opera-tions and not venture too far intoprofessional technical continuing educationthat might be better provided by one of oursister associations. Our associate membersare an under-utilized source of informationand assistance for firm operations and ourPrograms and Membership Committees areattempting to find ways to improve the in-teraction with associate members. Stafftraining in those areas not emphasized in en-

gineering schools, like finance, human re-sources, business development, and othersoft-skills is available now through the Fu-ture Leaders Program. One of the bestsources of information on firm operations isnetworking with leaders from other firms. Ihave found that useful information on firmoperations is readily shared through net-working with fellow firm leaders at mem-bership meetings and other ACEC/G events.

We all find it difficult to find sufficienttime and sufficient money to do all the lob-bying, prospecting for work, and researchingthe business operational tools and emergingtrends that would help our businesses growand prosper. This is especially challenging ina tough economy. Therefore, I encourage allcurrent members and potential members touse ACEC/G membership to leverage yourtime and money for better results in theBusiness of Consulting Engineering. v

40 The GeorGia enGineer

AsCeNews

Lisa S. Woods, P.E., PresidentAmerican Society of Civil Engineers, Georgia Section | e-mail: lisa.woods@jacobs.com | www.ascega.org

PresidentLisa S. Woods, P.E.JACOBSlisa.woods@jacobs.com

President-Elect Katherine McLeod Gurd, P.E.AECOMKatherine.Gurd@aecom.com

Vice President Rebecca Shelton, P.E.Gwinnett County DWRrebecca.shelton@gwinnettcounty.com

Treasurer Dan Agramonte, P.E.O'BRIEN & GEREdaniel.agramonte@obg.com

External Director Keith Cole, P.E.keith.cole@mindspring.com

Internal Director Christina Vulova, P.E.URS Corporationchristina.vulova@urs.com

Secretary Ernie Pollitzer, MS P.E.Sierra Piedmontepollitzer@bellsouth.net

Technical Director Richard Morales, M.Sc., P.E. LB Foster Piling RMorales@LBFoster.com

Younger Member DirectorJulie Secrist, P.E.Lowe EngineersJulie.Secrist@loweengineers.com

Savannah Branch Director C. J. Chance

NE Georgia Branch Director Matthew Tanner, P.E.Breedlove Land Planning Inc. mtanner@landplanning.net

South Metro Branch DirectorGreg A. Wombough, P.E.Universal Engineering Sciencesgwombough@universalengineering.com

Past-PresidentJames R. Wallace, Sc.D., P.E.AMEC (retired)jrwhaw@comcast.net

www.ascega.org

ASCE/GEORGIA SECTION 2012 - 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Greetings!"I am, and ever will be, a white socks, pocketprotector, nerdy engineer," he said in Febru-ary 2000 in one of his rare public appear-ances. Who uttered this quote? Maybe thisone will give you a hint - "that's one smallstep for man, one giant leap for mankind.''You guessed it—the late Neil Armstrong.Now, I certainly would never claim to havevery much in common with the first man onthe moon—one of the greatest American he-roes, and by all accounts, one of the mosthumble men—but I do get to say that I’malso a nerdy engineer!

And with that, I’d like to say how hon-ored I am to be your 2012-2013 ASCE

Georgia Section President. We thank JimWallace for his service as president last year,and congratulate him on his promotion topast president this year!

Centennial CelebrationAs we come to the close of our centennial ac-tivities, I’m sad that the year is almost over,but most of us are also saying ‘boy, was thata lot of work!’

The Georgia Section of the AmericanSociety of Civil Engineers has been proudthis year to celebrate 100 years of Civil En-gineering Excellence in Georgia (1912-2012). Our profession has come a long waysince 1912. It is remarkable to see how civil

engineers have helped shape the structuralfoundation of Georgia through railroads andhighways designed to connect the inlandareas to the coast. The advancements inwater treatment and stormwater manage-ment show us how civil engineers touch thelives of everyone in the state.

Civil engineers have an important job—to build and enhance the quality of life foreveryone. Civil engineers in Georgia havebeen doing this for the last 100 years, andour work has made a considerable impact onour state. Our profession has built roads,bridges, and airports for public transporta-tion, we ensure that our homes and officeshave adequate power supply, and we also

41OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

provide water and environmental manage-ment strategies to protect the quality andquantity of our rich natural resources for thenext 100 years.

Our members have played a major rolein many of the engineering achievementsthat have taken place in our state. We havestrong, loyal members who are committed toadvancing both the industry and their ca-reers. The strength of the Georgia Section isin our members!

The Georgia Section was proud to beable to promote civil engineering in manydifferent ways this year. You may have seensome of our electronic billboards celebratingcivil engineering that were around Atlantaduring Engineers Week in February. We alsopublished a book celebrating 100 years ofcivil engineering excellence in Georgia. Wepublished articles highlighting different as-pects of civil engineering in the Georgia En-gineer magazine throughout the year and wehosted a historic civil engineering walkingtour through downtown Atlanta. Our GAASCE Annual Meeting & Centennial Galawas held September 7th at the Georgia TechHotel and Conference Center where we werepleased to have the ASCE National Presidentin attendance, Andy Herrmann, and wherewe were also able to honor the past presi-dents that were in attendance. We also cre-ated a special centennial logo and bookmarksfor the occasion and produced a centennialdisplay that anchored a booth at the 2012ASCE Annual Civil Engineering Conferencein Montreal.

We were also extremely excited to rollout a new Web site during the centennialyear. Please check out www.ascega.org.

Outlook for 2012-2013This summer, we held three very successfulplanning meetings to approve our budgetand discuss ideas for the coming year. Be onthe lookout for continuing programs andsome new ones! Our 2012-2013 boardmembers are listed here. Please feel free tocontact one of us at any time to join a com-mittee, offer support, or just tell us how we’redoing. All of our board members are plan-ning great things for this year, so please get intouch with them to help out!

We will be continuing many of our pro-

grams from years past including participationin the Transportation Summit, sponsoringSTEM (Science, Technology, Engineering,and Mathematics) schools, developing a Sus-tainability Committee, continuing our stu-dent outreach to college and pre-college agegroups, and supporting our Careers Round-table. And we have a technical group just foryou—please visit our Web site to learn more.We are also working closely with ourbranches in Savannah and Athens and hopeto establish new branches.

I hope to get out and visit all of ourbranches and student chapters this year!! Ispoke at the Southern Polytechnic State Uni-versity (SPSU) student chapter meeting onSeptember 13th and attended the ASCE Na-tional Presidents and Governors Forum in Re-ston, Virginia September 23-24 where Ipresented our centennial activities to the group.

Please join us at one of our sectionmeetings this year! October 5, November 2,December 7, January 4, February 1, March

1, April 5, May 3, and June 7. Please seewww.ascega.org for more information. Newthis year! We will be holding raffles at selectmeetings for items like Falcons tickets, etc.Please bring cash. All proceeds go directly toour scholarship fund. We are also lookingfor items to raffle if you or your companywould like to donate. We always look for-ward to our joint meeting with the Societyof Military Engineers (SAME) and enjoy rec-ognizing our inspiring life members duringthe spring.

I would like to extend a heartfelt thankyou to our sponsors—RWC Hardscapes,Belgard Hardscapes, Jacobs, Hayward Baker,AECOM, and Heath and Lineback. Pleasecontact me if you are interested in becominga sponsor.

In closing, I’m looking forward to myyear as your president. Please e-mail me atany time if you have questions, concerns,suggestions, or would like to volunteer! Takecare! v

Example of Billboard

Downtown Atlanta Historic Walking Tour

42 The GeorGia enGineer

iteNews

John Karnowski, PEGeorgia Section, Institute of Transportation Engineers

Who among us can see the future? I wouldsubmit that despite the plot lines of so manysci-fi movies I love to watch, one cannot seethe future. Most people would agree withthis theory. And don’t send me e-mails abouttime dilation, time perception or such be-cause it just makes me think about physicsat Georgia Tech, and then my head hurts.

Nevertheless, we still try to predict thefuture. My iPhone comes pre-loaded with aweather app that will tell me hour-by-hourthe weather for the coming day and the day-by-day weather for a week. There is an entireTV channel about the weather, and everynews show has an eight-to-ten minute seg-ment explaining why the guy thinks it’s

going to rain. Of course, sometimes they saythere is a 50 percent chance of rain which isthe same odds as flipping a coin. So maybenext time you go out to play golf and want toknow if it is going to rain, flip a coin.

In May 1958, Walt Disney first hostedhis ‘Magic Highway U.S.A.’ episode. It is aclassic show about the history of the trans-portation system and a vision for the future.You can see the entire episode on the sourceof all knowledge, wisdom and insight -Google… hallowed be thy name.

I love the ending of the show where Dis-ney illustrates the transportation planners’and visionaries’ view of what transportationwould be in the future. It is amazing to see

how some of it has come to pass and whatmight still be on the horizon. From 1958’sperspective, in the future…• Highway lanes will be colored-coded to

mark your paths—blue for downtown,green for uptown, red for the beaches,etc.

• Roadways will be radiated to keep sur-faces clear of rain, ice, and snow

• In hazardous conditions, radar equippedwindshields will guide you safelythrough the fog

• Dashboard safety features will include

Socializing with GDOT Comm. Golden at Annual Meeting

43OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

Board Position Member E-mail PhonePresident John Karnowski jkarnowski@foresitegroupinc.com (770) 368-1399

Vice President Dwayne Tedder dwayne.tedder@urs.com (678) 808-8840

Secretary/Treasurer Jonathan Reid Reid@pbworld.com (404) 769-4058

Past President Mike Holt mholt@worldfiber.com (770) 407-7799

District Representative David Benevelli david.benevelli@transcore.com (770) 246-6257

District Representative Carla Holmes carla_holmes@gspnet.com (678) 518-3654

District Representative Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov (404) 624-7119

Affiliate Director Andrew Antweiler aantweiler@roswellgov.com (678) 639-7540

Committee Chair(s) E-mail Phone2012 Intl Meeting Marsha Bomar marsha.andersonbomar@stantec.com (770) 813-0882

Kenny Voorhies kvoorhies@camsys.com (404) 460-2604

Activities Patrick McAtee PMcatee@ThompsonEngineering.com (404) 574-1985

Annual Report Carla Holmes carla_holmes@gspnet.com (678) 518-3654

Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov (404) 624-7119

Audio/Visual France Campbell france_campbell@gspnet.com (678) 518-3952

Awards/Nominations Mike Holt mholt@worldfiber.com (770) 407-7799

Career Guidance Brendetta Walker bhargro@bellsouth.net (404) 364-5235

Clerk Elizabeth Scales elizabeth.scales@hatchmott.com (770) 200-1735

Comptroller Jim Pohlman pohlmanj@bellsouth.net (770) 972-9709

Engineers Week Steven Sheffield ssheffield@georgiatolls.com (404) 893-6132

Finance Martin Bretherton wbretherton@hntb.com (404) 946-5709

Georgia Engineer Magazine Dan Dobry ddobry@croyengineering.com (770) 971-5407

John Edwards jdedwards4929@bellsouth.net (404) 264-0789

Georgia Tech Liaison Paul DeNard pdenard@dot.ga.gov (404) 635-8278

Historian Charles Bopp charles_bopp@hotmail.com (404) 848-6054

Host Sujith Racha sujith.racha@arcadis-us.com (770) 431-8666

Legislative Affairs Bill Ruhsam bruhsam@maai.net (678) 728-9076

Life Membership Don Gaines dgaines@gcaeng.com (404) 355-4010

Marketing Shannon Fain shannon.fain@stantec.com (770) 813-0882

Membership Sunita Nadella sunita.nadella@parsons.com (678) 969-2304

Monthly Meetings Dwayne Tedder dwayne.tedder@urs.com (678) 808-8840

Newsletter Vern Wilburn vwilburn@wilburnengineering.com (770) 977-8920

Past Presidents Todd Long tlong@dot.ga.gov (404) 631-1021

Public Officials Education Scott Mohler scott_mohler@urscorp.com (678) 808-8811

Scholarship Tim Brandstetter tim.brandstetter@kimley-horn.com (404) 419-8714

Southern Poly Liaison Bryan Sartin bryan_sartin@gspnet.com (678) 518-3884

Summer Seminar Josh Williams josh_williams@gspnet.com (678) 518-3672

Technical Winter Horbal winter.horbal@temple-inc.com (678) 412-5554

Web site Shawn Pope spope@camsys.com (404) 460-2609

Winter Workshop Jody Peace Jody.Peace@arcadis-us.com (770) 431-8666

real time traffic info, safe driving speed,and rear viewing television screens

• Emergency highway response will beairborne and include fire, ambulance,police, and even towing

• We will have giant road builders that cuta swath across the earth to build super-highways quickly and efficiently

• Bridges will be pre-fabricated and putinto place by giant cranes

• Tunneling into rock will be done byatomic reactor units that melt a paththrough the mountain

• We will have cantilevered skyways totraverse mountain passes

44 The GeorGia enGineer

• Cities will become vast urban areaswhere people will commute many milesto work

• On board ‘synchronized scanning maps’will guide you along the way

• Punch cards will be used to automati-cally steer your cars to your destination

• Railway and highway technology will becombined to automate dispatching ofgoods from farm to market

• Freight containers will be stackable andshipped on large sailing vessels

• We will have ‘electro-suspension’ cars

that will allow cars to float above theroadway

• Eventually, we will have tubular high-ways (Note: reference the starting seg-ment to Futurama)

• Highways will be “Magic carpet to newhopes, new dreams, and a better way oflife for the future”

It is kind of amazing how some of thesethings have come to fruition. Still, I think weare a long way off from daily use of flyingcars—with deference to George, Jane, Judy,and Elroy.

I suppose that planning for the future isa responsible act even if you can’t say for sure

what the future will hold. At this time ofyear, many of us are laying out our budgetsfor next year—deciding how much to spendon what. It is always a balancing act of thispriority over that wish list item. Since it takesten years or more to get a new road built,planning out the funding, right-of-way, anddesign plans makes sense. And, many of usare saving for retirement even though wedon’t know when that will be or if our kidswill be still living with us.

Someone much wiser than me oncesaid, “Learn from the past, plan for the fu-ture, but live now.” It was Einstein who fa-mously said, “I never think of the future—itcomes soon enough.” If Einstein didn’tbother with the future, then why should we?

Now I need to go wash my car before it rains.This has been an extremely busy summer forthe Georgia Section. The annual SummerSeminar was held on July 15-18 at The Kingand Price Resort on St Simons Island. Over125 attendees enjoyed ten technical sessionsover the three day conference along with peernetworking and time spent with family andfriends at the pool and beach.

Also, the International ITE’s AnnualMeeting was held in Atlanta this August.Our members helped with the technical ses-sions, site visits, and family functions toshowcase the transportation highlights of themetropolitan region to our internationalbrethren.

And we’ve continued to participate incommunity activities. The GA ITE groupwent out to Dresden Park in Chamblee earlyin the morning on July 28th to clean up thepark and nearby creek. We had 11 membersthat recovered about 465 pounds of trashfrom the creeks and park in a two-hour timespan. Highlights of items removed were afolding chair, a Kroger shopping cart, carpet,carpet padding, a soccer net, a hub cap, san-dals, and TONS of plastic bottles. The sec-ond cleanup trip to the park was conductedon September 29th. v

GA ITE River Cleanup 14, Dresden Park Clean-up

ITE Members Networking at Summer Seminar

45OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

The ITS Georgia 2012 Annual Meeting andExposition, held at Callaway Gardens inearly fall this year, can be called nothing butan unqualified success. More than 130 at-tendees got a briefing on everything trans-portation from the national perspective,from ITS America President Scott Belcher,to ITS applications and future at the state,regional, and local level.

Our attendees got to put their hands onthe latest ITS hardware, available from the24 vendors on hand in the exhibition. A totalof 17 sponsors provided crucial financialsupport, including our three Diamond spon-sors, Control Technologies(www.cttraffic.com), MetroTech (metrotech-partners.com) and Temple Inc. (www.tem-ple-inc.com). Additionally, our five sessions,featuring 22 speakers, provided attendeeswith 7.5 professional development hourscredit.

The annual meeting also provides valu-able time for face-to-face meetings betweenfellow transportation professionals whereproblems are presented and solutions arecreated.

We also take time at the meeting to rec-ognize outstanding individuals and organi-zations who are leaders in the industry. Thisyear’s winners are:• Larry R. Dreihaup Award ~ Todd

Long, GDOT. The ITS Georgia LarryR. Dreihaup Award recognizes an indi-vidual or an organization who has pro-vided leadership, professionalism, anddedication in promoting ITS in thestate of Georgia during the previous12 months.

• Outstanding Public Member AgencyAward ~ GDOT. Leadership in pro-

Scott Mohler, P.E.ITS President

its News

Dreihaup Award winner Todd Long (center) with Marion Waters and John Hibbard

46 The GeorGia enGineer

PresidentScott Mohler, URS Corporation

Immediate Past PresidentMarion Waters, Gresham, Smith andPartners

Vice PresidentTom Sever, Gwinnett DOT

SecretaryKristin Turner, Wolverton and Associates Inc.

TreasurerChristine Simonton, Delcan

DirectorsMark Demidovich GDOT Susie Dunn ARCKenn Fink Kimley-HornEric Graves City of Alpharetta John Hibbard AtkinsCarla Holmes Gresham SmithPatrece Keeter DeKalb CountyKeary Lord Douglas County

DOT Bayne Smith URSGrant Waldrop GDOT

State Chapters RepresentativeKenny Voorhies Cambridge

Systematics Inc.Ex OfficioGreg Morris Federal Highway

AdministrationJamie Pfister Federal Transit

Administration

ITS GEORGIA CHAPTER LEADERSHIP

Our 2012 Sponsors

TempleArcadis

Gresham Smith and PartnersTraficonAtkins

World Fiber TechnologiesSerco

UtilicomSouthern Lighting and Traffic

SystemsURS

Kimley-Horn and AssociatesControl Technologies

TelventDelcan

Cambridge SystematicsStantec

Grice ConsultingSensys Networks

Daktronics

moting ITS and/or ITSGA goals dur-ing the previous 12 months.

• Outstanding Private Member Award ~Atkins Global. Leadership in promot-ing ITS and/or ITSGA goals duringthe previous 12 months.

One of the highlights of this year’s meetingwas to reward a promising transportation stu-dent in the Georgia University System withour third-annual Wayne Shackelford memo-rial scholarship. This year’s winner is Bhar-gava Rama Chilukuri, PE, a doctoralcandidate at Georgia Tech, who is currentlyworking on ramp metering and travel timeestimation improvement projects.

Last, but not least, we announce the re-sults of yearly elections at each meeting.Elected to the board of directors were EricGraves, City of Alpharetta; Winter Horbal,Temple Inc.; Keary Lord, Douglas CountyDepartment of Transportation; MichaelRoberson, Georgia Department of Trans-portation (GDOT); David Smith, DeKalbCounty Department of Transportation(DeKalb); and Prasoon Sinha, ACRADIS.

We are very pleased to be joined by thisgreat group of newly-elected directors and aregrateful for the contributions of our retiringboard members. ITS Georgia has always at-tracted the best leadership and provided a ve-hicle for professional growth and careerdevelopment.

Retiring from the board are Kenn Fink,Kimley-Horn; Patrece Keeter, DeKalb, BayneSmith, GDOT, and John Hibbard, Atkins.

You can see we pack a lot of learning,networking, and business into a short time.So, we hope you can join us next year! v

Use A CompAny

yoU CAn trUst witH yoUr

trAnslAtion projeCt,

because a little mistake

in another language

can have unpleasant results.

“Gort! Klaatu Borada nikto.”

(770) 521-8877

47OCTOBER | NOVEMBER 2012

http://www.haywardbaker.com