currently developing a capability road map that will recommend useful projects in the area of infrastructure protection that can be funded over the next few years. The road map is being developed by Booz Allen, Inc., and will be ready in June 1998. Although the TSWG will probably not have an effect on big architectural schemes, it could influence some aspects of infrastructure protection.

Dr. Daddazio described Weidlinger Associates' involvement with UGFs and infrastructure protection as well as the central artery project in Boston. The company has developed analytical methods for hardened underground structures in particular and UGFs in general, for both the military and civilian sectors. Many of Weidlinger's projects in the field of protective structures involve blast-hardening conventional buildings, and Dr. Daddazio outlined some of the differences between the protection afforded by UGFs and modified above-ground structures and suggested that a case could be made for protecting infrastructures in shallow-buried facilities.

He identified cost as a major factor in the decision to locate facilities underground, particularly in a densely populated urban area. These costs include:

• Buried utilities. Municipal electrical and telephone lines are sometimes as shallow as 18 inches, water supplies are typically located below the frost line, and sewers are generally a bit deeper. These utilities must be moved or protected during construction.

• Trenching and backfill. The major costs of putting a distributed system underground are excavation and backfill. The cost curve from a 4-foot trench to an 8-foot trench is not linear (i.e., unit costs increase more rapidly with depth). Other costs include sheet piling and protecting construction workers.

• Safety and maintenance. Stringent Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements, shoring and underpinning of adjacent structures and utilities, and maintenance of existing utilities during excavation and repair all add to the cost of burying a distributed system.

• Geology. The cost of burial can be complicated by geological conditions, such as groundwater and rock.

An above-ground building is a more centralized system. The following measures designed to protect buildings from large vehicle bombs and small external devices can add to the costs:

• Glazing protection. Flying glass is a major cause of injury in an explosion. Putting films or blast net on glass may reduce the danger of flying glass.

Front Matter (R1-R6)

Introduction (1-4)

Welcoming Address (5-6)

Findings of the President (7-11)

Key Issues in Going Underground (12-12)

Infrastructure Protection in the United States: A Norwegian Perspective (13-14)

Panel Discussions, Panel 1: Infrastructure Protection Issues (15-23)

Panel 2: Needs and Requirements of the Infrastructure Community (24-29)

Panel 3: Experience with Underground Facilities: Capabilities, Limitations, and Applications (30-37)

Panel 4: Factors Influencing the Decision-Making Process (38-44)

Breakout Sessions (45-47)

Closing Remarks (48-49)

Appendix A: Speaker Biographies (50-58)

Appendix B: Workshop Agenda (59-61)

Appendix C: Workshop Participants (62-63)