The global market for construction aggregates is expected to rise 5.2 percent per year through 2015 to 48.3 billion metric tons. This represents a slower rate of growth than during the 2005-2010 period, reflecting a moderation in aggregates-intensive nonbuilding construction activity. Nevertheless, demand for construction aggregates will still post solid gains from 2010 to 2015.

The Asia/Pacific region will register the largest increases in product sales, as construction activity will rise rapidly, particularly in China and India. China alone will account for half of all new aggregates demand worldwide during the 2010-2015 period.

As in 2010, sand will continue to make up the largest portion of global sales, followed closely by crushed stone and then gravel. Owing to more restrictive land use and environmental regulations, as well as the depletion of natural aggregates reserves, sales of recycled, secondary and other aggregates will climb at an above-average pace during the 2010-2015 period.

However, despite projected growth of 7.1 percent per year over this span, these products will continue to play a small role in world markets due to quality concerns and limitations in the availability of feed material.

[1]The mass may be smaller and the velocity may be slower than desired, but the rock is rolling in the right direction.

Momentum is sometimes hard to define. In sports, it may be a crucial play that changes the outcome of the game. In business, however, it might be something as simple as a sale that leads to an unexpected customer base. Often, it may seem like a small pebble, but once it starts rolling downhillgaining mass and velocity along the way its impact can be significant.

[2]Movement alone, however, is not enough. Just look at the results of our forecast studies during the last eight years, and its clear that not all momentum is good momentum. For example, consider the industrys historical response to business conditions. When answering our first forecast in 2004, 84.5 percent of respondents indicated positive business results

(excellent, very good, or good). For a three-year window between 2008 and 2010, however, those numbers plummeted with an [3]all-time low in 2009 when just one in three respondents (34 percent) reported favorable business ratings. Those numbers increased slightly in 2010, but 2011 respondents gave the most favorable business ratings (43.4 percent positive) since 2007.

Another favorable indication is the accuracy demonstrated in yearly predictions and the subsequent results. With the exception of those predicting a fair year, responses from last years [4]forecast results versus this years actual results are all within 5 percent, and most forecast discrepancies erred toward being overly pessimistic.

• Excellent: 1.6 percent forecast; 5.7 percent actual (+4.1 percent difference);

• Very Good: 12 percent forecast; 13.2 percent actual (+1.2 percent difference);

• Good: 24.8 percent forecast; 24.5 percent actual (-0.3 percent difference);

[5]• Fair: 44.0 percent forecast; 34.9 percent actual (-9.1 percent difference); and

• Poor: 17.6 percent forecast; 21.7 percent actual (+4.1 percent difference).

From a regional perspective, producers in the Northeast were the most likely to report positive results with nearly six in 10 (58.3 percent) indicating positive business results in 2011, while approximately two-thirds (67.5 percent) of those in the South reported fair or poor results.

Small producers (under 500,000 tons per year) were the most likely to indicate positive business [6]results, with the level of optimism diminishing in a direct correlation to increasing tonnage until hitting the large end of the spectrum with producers of more than 5 million tons per year. This group was slightly more inclined to report favorably, with one in three reporting favorable results, compared to three in four reporting fair or poor business results in the next largest production category (3 to 5 million tons per year).

In terms of operators experiencing changes in production quantities throughout 2011, an equal [7]number said theyd increased and decreased production. Its worth noting that, of those reporting an increase, the average increase was 25 percent higher production. Among those indicating a decrease, the average decrease was 19 percent. The largest gains were had among producers of crushed stone and sand and gravel (30.8 percent reported an increase) and among those in the North Central region (43.5 percent indicated higher production levels).

So whats next?

While gains appear evident within pockets of the industry, several years of inertia are challenging [8]to reverse. Looking forward in 2012, small improvements are being predicted in most categories. Comparing forecast projections from 2012 to those from 2011, 6.6 percent expect an excellent year (+5 percent), 12.3 percent expect a very good year (+0.3 percent), and 26.4 percent expect a good year (+1.6 percent). In terms of negative expectations, 35.8 percent expect a fair year (-8.2 percent), while 18.9 percent expect a poor year (+1.3 percent) in 2012.

Sand and gravel producers are the most concerned looking forward. Nearly nine in 10 (88.9 [9]percent) expect a fair or poor year in 2012. Those working in the Northeast and North Central regions are the most optimistic with 66.6 and 52.2 percent, respectively, calling for positive business results. In terms of size, small operators are the most hopeful, with 68.4 percent of those producing up to 500,000 tons per year and 53.3 percent of those producing 500,001 to 1 million tons per year calling for positive results.

In terms of production quantities, sand and gravel producers are the most upbeat. Twice as many anticipate an increase in production compared to those who expect tonnage to decline.

[10]Consistency is key from a regional perspective. The majority of operators in all four regions expect production quantities to remain about the same. That said, operators in the North Central region were the most optimistic with 34.8 percent anticipating an increase compared to 13.0 percent calling for a decrease. Producers in the South are still skittish on demand; they were the only region with more respondents anticipating a decline (20.9 percent) than an increase (16.3 percent).

Personnel matters

In 2011, employment levels were slightly more stable throughout much of the aggregate industry. [11]Overall, 27.4 percent (9.6 percent fewer than in 2010) of respondents said the work force decreased throughout the year, while 20.8 percent said their work force grew.

Crushed stone and sand & gravel operators were the most likely to report having a smaller work force (41.0 percent), while sand and gravel operators were most inclined to boost their numbers (33.3 percent). Crushed stone only operators had the most stable work force segment with 58.3 percent indicating the size of their work force was about the same as during the previous year.

[12]From a regional perspective, the Souths declining production levels were reflected in its staffing; 46.5 percent of operators there reported work force declines. The most growth was seen in the North Central region where 26.1 percent of respondents operations grew their numbers.

By worker category, other hourly labor was the category to experience both the highest increase (13.2 percent) and the highest decrease (27.4 percent). The number of women in the workplace grew, as it was the only category to report more work force expansion (10.4 percent) than contraction (6.6 percent).

Industry challenges

Competition for sales has dominated operator concerns during the last four years. While the number who ranked it as a major concern diminished this year (25.5 percent), nearly 60 percent more called it a minor problem. Taken as a combined total, almost 85 percent noted it as a challenge 25 percent more than the next most widespread problem.

When asked how they were dealing with this issue, many respondents indicated that they have lowered prices to seal the deal, including break-even pricing. Some vertically integrated operators noted using package deals to streamline costs. Others say they are analyzing markets, implementing long-term strategic planning, and exploring new and growing markets. Customer service, customer contact, and a focus on quality are among the business strategies being employed to maintain customer loyalty.

Other concerns, such as regulatory compliance and aggregates availability, are increasingly important to this years respondents, but the dominance of competitive sales indicates that the aggregate industry while in a better place than recent years remains intensely focused on each job and each customer.

Improvements may be modest and regional, but they do, indeed, appear to be real. If these results and those forecast for 2012 bear out, then the aggregate industry needs to ensure that objects in motion stay in motion. From there, its a matter of increasing mass and velocity.

The projects team also includes The McGregor Co., Polis Builders Ltd. and Goldman Sachs Urban Investment Group (UIG). Locally based KTGY Group, Inc. is the executive architect for the project, which was designed by Los Angeles architect Michael Maltzan. KTGY has already completed construction drawings and the general contractor, Bernards, has commenced predevelopment work onsite. The project is anticipated to be completed by December 2014.

The fully entitled and permitted project, situated on land owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), spans several blocks on Santa Fe Avenue between First and Fourth streets. When complete, One Santa Fe will include 438 apartments and 78,620 sq ft of office and retail space, along with nearly 50,000 sq ft of public outdoor space.

CJUFs preferred equity investment closed the financing gap for the four-acre project. The residential portion is being financed by tax-exempt bonds issued by the California Housing Finance Agency and guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, a loan from the city of Los Angeles Housing Department, and Low Income Housing Tax Credit equity provided by UIG. The commercial component is being financed by a loan from the city of Los Angeles; New Markets Tax Credit allocations provided by Clearinghouse CDFI, Genesis LA Economic Growth Corp. and the Los Angeles Development Fund; and New Markets Tax Credit equity provided by UIG.

Construction spending in the U.S. rose in December at the fastest pace in four months, reflecting broad- based gains that signal the industry is stabilizing.

Building outlays increased 1.5 percent, the biggest gain since August, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. The median estimate of 51 economists in a Bloomberg survey called for a 0.5 percent rise.

A housing market that is gaining some steam as builders begin apartment projects may breathe life into the industry thats struggled since triggering the recession in 2007. At the same time, decreased spending by the government may temper progress in construction as a whole.

There are certainly bright spots for the construction outlook, Michelle Meyer, a senior U.S. economist at Bank of America Corp. in New York, said before the report. Multifamily construction will continue to improve given the ongoing shift from owning to renting and the lack of supply in the market. It will still be a very slow healing process.

Estimates (CNSTTMOM) in the Bloomberg survey ranged from a drop of 0.6 percent to an increase of 1.5 percent. The Commerce Department revised the November reading down to a 0.4 percent gain from a previously estimated increase of 1.2 percent.

A report today from ADP Employer Services showed companies added 170,000 workers to payrolls in January, reflecting job gains in services and at small businesses. The increase followed a 292,000 gain the prior month.

Construction outlays were down 2 percent in December from the same time in 2010, before adjusting for seasonal variations.

Private Construction

Private construction spending rose 2.1 percent in December from the prior month, the biggest gain since May. The increase brought the value up to $529.7 billion at an annual rate, the highest level since December 2009.

Homebuilding outlays increased 0.8 percent, including a 0.2 percent increase in home improvement. Non-residential building climbed 3.3 percent.

Spending on public construction advanced 0.5 percent, the report said. Federal construction spending increased 0.3 percent.

The homebuilding industry is trying to recover from record- low traffic last year. About 302,000 new homes were sold in the U.S. in 2011, the worst year in data dating to 1963, Commerce Department figures showed Jan. 26.

Housing starts fared better, growing by 3.4 percent last year to the highest level since 2008. The strength came from work on multifamily dwellings, which jumped as more Americans opted to rent rather than own. Conversely, single-family home construction in 2011 was the weakest in records going back to 1959.

Housing Starts

The market may be beginning to stabilize. Builders broke ground on 470,000 single-family houses at an annual rate in December, the most since April 2010, the Commerce Department said Jan. 19. Residential construction added 0.23 percentage point to gross domestic product in the fourth quarter, the largest contribution since the April-June period of 2010.

Home sales and construction will improve in 2012, adding modestly to economic growth, according to a Fannie Mae forecast last month. Sales of new and existing homes are likely to increase 3.5 percent, and housing starts are projected to rise 16 percent, the groups chief economist said Jan. 13.

Homebuilder sentiment has also ticked up. The National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo sentiment index rose in January to the highest level since June 2007 as sales and buyer traffic improved.

Although macroeconomic and housing conditions remain soft, we are cautiously optimistic for the remainder for 2012, Donald Tomnitz, chief executive officer of Fort Worth, Texas-based D.R. Horton Inc., said in a Jan. 27 conference call. Simply put, our business feels more positive.

The largest U.S homebuilder by volume reported net home orders that rose to 3,794 in final three months of 2011 from 3,363 a year earlier.

by Matt Wetzel

Introduction

Hazardous material spills can take a hefty toll on all involved parties. Cleanup bills, legal liabilities and frustration for affected property owners only scratch the surface of problems commonly associated with spills. With the potential for facility downtime and personnel injury, it is in the industries best interest to be involved in and oversee the cleanup of these incidents.

By understanding our responsibilities regarding the release of hazardous materials and knowing how to react when an incident occurs, we can minimize the required cleanup effort and the subsequent cost associated with the incident. While it is impossible to eliminate spills altogether, instances can be minimized and cleanups can be simplified if the right steps are taken. What follows are the mandated reactionary steps to be taken in the event of a hazardous substance release.

Who’s Responsible?

The responsibility and liability for these efforts lie with the owner of the hazardous material and/or the entity responsible for the release. While insurance providers may also be involved in the loss, they are not directly responsible or accountable for the cleanup of the spill.

What Are We Dealing With?

Hazardous substances or materials are specifically defined under many environmental statutes by the federal government. But most chemical substances that may pose a health risk to life when exposed are deemed hazardous substances.

When a hazardous substance is released to the environment, or poses a substantial threat to the environment, a release has occurred. The Environment includes surface water, groundwater, drinking water supply, land surface, subsurface strata, ambient air, dry gullies and storm sewers that discharge to surface waters.

If the release is equal to or exceeds the reportable quantity for that substance as set forth under the Code of Federal Regulations, the release must be properly reported (see Spill Reporting). In many states, petroleum products are regulated with a reportable quantity, typically established at 25 gallons or a quantity sufficient to place a sheen on water. Asbestos-containing materials are regulated if material containing greater than 1% asbestos is disturbed (in some states, it is regulated if it contains greater than 0.1%). The responsible party is the owner of the hazardous substance that has been released, and may include the person responsible for the spill. This title cannot be transferred to another entity, nor can it be eliminated, ever.

Releases of hazardous substances can happen in either fixed facilities or during transports. Most spills are released to soil and soak in before reaching surface water or are released within the confines of a facility. More than half of all spills are fuel spills resulting from ruptured fuel tanks during truck wrecks. These situations are relatively simple to cleanup.

Hazardous substances that are released to surface waters, sewer systems, drinking water supplies, or that impact groundwater require specialized equipment and expertise. Cleanup efforts for such instances can be quite costly and may be subject to penalties under the Clean Water Act. These penalties can cost as much as $25,000 per day of violation.

Spill Reporting

When a release occurs, there are a number of reporting and notification requirements that must be followed by the responsible party. These requirements tend to be confusing, and often overlap. Parties should consider their situation and make the following phone call(s):

All Hazardous Substance Releases
In every case, the responsible party must immediately notify the National Response Center (NRC) at (800) 424-8802.

Asbestos Releases
Asbestos releases require immediate notification of respective state agencies in nearly all states. Most states also require asbestos release notification to local 911.

Fuel Storage Tank Releases
For above ground and underground releases, including those from dispensers, calls must be made to state oil inspectors or fire marshals.

Pipeline Releases
Notify the Pipeline Safety Commission, also at (800) 424-8802.

In many situations, if a reportable quantity has been released, several of these entities must be redundantly contacted. These reports typically require written follow-up within 24 hours. This action initiates a process that alerts potential receptors and the surrounding population, and may initiate regulatory response efforts. This reporting also initiates a process that will ultimately trace the cleanup to final closure.

Cleanup Requirements

Hazardous material release incidents are regulated by the federal and state government under many environmental statutes, as well as worker protection statutes. The enforcement and oversight of the cleanup is usually delegated to the Designated Emergency Response Authority (DERA) for the spill. The DERA may be the state highway patrol, local fire department, sheriff, state health department or the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), depending upon the location and complexity.

Cleanup of uncontrolled release of hazardous substances are further regulated under OSHA. OSHA mandates that workers that provide these services are properly trained, are medically fit to wear respiratory protections and are properly equipped for and knowledgeable in the hazards present. Training requirements are specified in detail, as well as the site controls requirements.

Spills generally require complete removal of all contamination, regardless of quantity spilled. If complete removal is not reasonably feasible, risk-based cleanup standards may be sought through the regulators. It should be noted, however, that establishing and gaining approval for risk-based cleanup standards is typically very expensive, and often outweigh the cleanup costs of complex removal methods. After cleanup, demonstration of appropriate removal is required, normally through comprehensive sampling and laboratory analysis of the area of contamination.

Certain spilled materials are not directly regulated by environmental cleanup statutes or may be specifically regulated to allow less than complete removal. However, cleanup may be dictated by other statutes. Various statutes allow less than complete removal of hazardous substances that have been released. Common examples include petroleum products (RAC Guidelines) and Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs, TSCA Guidelines). Beyond cleanup to satisfy regulatory requirements, many releases are being cleaned up to exceed these requirements simply to reduce potential liabilities regarding worker or personnel exposure. These substances may be cleaned up to other non-mandated standards to avoid these liabilities, such as the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) or American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygenists (ACGIH) for indoor air quality. This is common in manufacturing facilities where non-hazardous substances may have been released within their plant and worker exposure to the substance may still be of concern.

Mitigation and Cleanup Measures

Released hazardous substances often destroy property and adversely affect the health of the people exposed. Wastes that are generated as a result of cleanup are quite costly to dispose, and typically carry a potential liability forever (known as Cradle to Grave Responsibility). Initial stabilization measures should be taken to protect those that may come in contact to contain the material to reduce the spread of the release and to minimize the volume of materials that are polluted.

The first responder normally provides stabilization of a release. This may be the fire department, state patrol or a cleanup contractor. Initial efforts should attempt to control the release by closing valves, plugging leaks, etc. These measures are to be taken only by qualified personnel with suitable protection. Precipitation events, traffic and other means may mobilize spilled materials, which will increase the spill cleanup requirements and subsequent costs. Control efforts should be taken quickly to minimize the spread of material to lakes, waterways and other environmentally sensitive areas, as well as sewer systems, streams, open roadways, or other areas that will accelerate the spread of contamination. These efforts may include diking, plugging, overpacking, transferring, covering or through the use of containment booms like floating dikes.

Upon stabilization, or concurrent with stabilization, the spilled material and all affected areas must be cleaned up. These measures should be timely and may entail:

Removal by excavation of soil and demolition of structures
Decontamination of surfaces by vacuuming, power washing, scarifying or chemical removal
Recovery by pumping, vacuuming, skimming or absorbing liquids from impoundments, roadways, sewer systems or surface waters

The Costs

The costs to clean up hazardous material spills are significant, and lack of experience or proper equipment by the cleanup party can dramatically increase these costs. Determining specific cleanup measures should be a process that considers cost, method effectiveness and satisfaction of regulators and property owners. However, disposal costs of wastes generated, replacement value of damaged items, the cost of suspended service/lost business and other lagging or indirect costs should also be considered when determining cleanup strategies. Too often, these costs are not considered, and less expensive cleanup measures are taken that produce excessive waste disposal costs. In these situations, the final cost of the loss may be significantly greater than necessary.

Waste Management

Disposal of waste will be integral to or follow cleanup efforts and may take several months to arrange and schedule. Waste may be categorized as Hazardous, Industrial, Special, or exempt.

Hazardous Wastes
If so deemed hazardous by federal definition (RCRA), the generator (the owner of the waste) must register with the USEPA and notify them of the generation and disposal activity. This generator status will carry with the generator forever, and can not be transferred to another entity, nor may it be eliminated. Because of this potential future liability, many owners prefer to utilize destructive, more costly treatment/disposal methods such as incineration, rather than non-destructive methods such as landfilling. RCRA hazardous wastes must be fully characterized by federal guidelines, and typically require analytical data. Waste must be shipped under a hazardous waste manifest by a licensed waste transporter and the waste must be treated by a licensed hazardous waste treatment/disposal facility.

Special / Industrial Wastes
Examples of these are diesel fuel contaminated soil and asbestos. These wastes require special handling and permitting to dispose of, but not to the extent (and expense) that RCRA wastes require.

Exempt Wastes
The most common exemption is granted to household hazardous waste. If a waste ordinarily classified as an RCRA hazardous waste is generated by a household, it is exempt from the RCRA requirements. However, spill cleanup requirements are still necessary and it is still very difficult to dispose of these wastes because non-RCRA permitted facilities do not accept these. Many communities (typically county governments) encourage the proper and environmentally conscientious disposal of these items by providing a Household Hazardous Waste Roundup. For free or a nominal fee, residents of a community are eligible to drop off their waste at these facilities. Certain communities have facilities that are open throughout the year, but more commonly, they schedule these as events quarterly or annually. The countys health department will have information on schedules, locations and procedures.

Conclusion

Mitigation and cleanup of spilled hazardous materials can be quite costly and, if not managed properly, can result in greatly elevated cleanup costs, increased liabilities and significant fines. Normally, time is of the essence and remains critical in stabilization of most spills however, careful planning and selection of the best cleanup method is often more cost effective for the final cleanup. Costs and liabilities can be greatly reduced by understanding the fundamental elements that drive the cleanup effort and by managing these efforts with individuals who are qualified and possess direct experience with spill cleanup.

About the Author
Matt Wetzel, Senior Vice President of Operations, BELFOR Environmental, Inc., www.belfor.com. He can be reached at (800) 930-0011.

When you need Sport Field Materials for your next project, contact Western Materials.

• Sand Materials
• Baseball Diamond Mix
• Infield Mix
• Path Mix
• Track & Field Fines
• Track & Field Medium
• Golf Course Sand
• Silica Silver Sand
• Equestrian Sand
• Playground Sand
• Blended Wash
• Plaster Sand
• Nursery Sand
• Decomposed Granite
• Brown Dg
• Tan Dg
• Gold Dg
• Gold Dg Stabilized

That pushed national home prices back to their mid-2002 levels.

But while some metro areas posted declines of nearly 3 percent or more from the previous quarter, the Los Angeles region’s home price index dipped only 0.3 percent.

The L.A. area also saw the second smallest year-over-year decline – just 1.7 percent.

“I think the floor in Los Angeles and Orange counties has been established for quite some time,” said James Joseph, owner of Century 21 Ambassador and Coldwell Banker Ambassador in Whittier. “I think
we’re seeing prices rise already, but not the double-digit craziness like before when we had subprime loans and third-party variables.”

Prices fell in 18 of the 20 designated metro regions, pushing the National Home Price Index down 4.2 percent during the first quarter after falling by 3.6 percent in the fourth quarter of 2010.

Hammered by foreclosures, a glut of unsold homes and the reluctance or inability of many to buy, the national index hit a new recession low. The first-quarter data was down 5.1 percent from the same period a year earlier.

“This month’s report is marked by the confirmation of a double-dip in home prices across much of the nation,” David M. Blitzer, chairman of the index committee at S&P
Advertisement
Indices, said in a statement. “Home prices continue on their downward spiral with no relief in sight.”

In March, 12 cities – Atlanta, Charlotte, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Las Vegas, Miami, Minneapolis, New York, Phoenix, Portland and Tampa – fell to their lowest levels as measured by the current housing cycle.

Joseph said local prices have been constrained by the inability of buyers to purchase a home. Scores of people have lost their jobs while others have had their hours
AP INTERACTIVE

National gauge of the housing market
cut and aren’t earning enough to handle a mortgage loan.

“There is a real issue here,” he said. “Buyers can’t stretch like they used to and they are being limited by the lenders. If you call up a lender on your own it’s problematic. But if you call a Realtor, we know who is loaning now … who is saying `yes.’ There are fewer lenders doing that than there used to be.”

Joseph also noted that 30 to 40 percent of home buyers these days are investors.

Of the 20 metro areas studied in the Case-Shiller report, Minneapolis fared the worst, with its home price index falling 3.7 percent during the first quarter of 2011. Its year-over-year decline of 10 percent was also the biggest annual drop in home prices.

But others cities also saw significant declines.

Phoenix posted an annual decline of 8.4 percent, Chicago and Portland’s home price index fell 7.6 percent year over year, and Seattle’s dropped 7.5 percent.

The only cities to post positive first-quarter improvements compared with the fourth quarter of 2010 were Seattle (up 0.1 percent) and Washington, D.C. (up 1.1 percent).

“Nationwide, we’re still seeing a lot of distressed properties, and a lot of consumers have gone back into their foxholes,” said Steve Johnson, who heads the Southern California region of Metrostudy, a real estate information and consulting firm. “They have not committed to the market.”

Distressed properties – either bank-owned or short sales – are typically priced well below market value, Johnson said, and that continues to push overall market prices down in many areas.

Johnson said the L.A. area has fared better than most for obvious reasons.

“In the L.A.-proper area we have about 4 million people employed,” he said. “So the sheer numbers of people and the fact that the area is almost built out in regard to new product makes for a real competitiveness. Consumers go after any distressed properties that become available. I don’t think L.A. is going to double dip.”

Figures from the California Association of Realtors show that Los Angeles County’s median home price for April was $290,120, up from $282,170 the previous month and $289,710 a year earlier.

kevin.smith@sgvn.com
626-962-8811, ext. 2701

Read more: Nation’s housing market still hurting – Whittier Daily News http://www.whittierdailynews.com/news/ci_18178150#ixzz1O9dlD5k8