The Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering is a private, nonprofit, public-service institution patterned after the National Academy of Sciences. The Academy identifies and studies issues and technological advances that are or should be of concern to the people of Connecticut, and provides unbiased, expert advice on science- and technology-related issues to state government and other Connecticut institutions. It is comprised of distinguished scientists and engineers from Connecticut's academic, industrial, and institutional communities. Membership is limited by the Academy's Bylaws to 400 members.
In the News
- CASE Releases Winter Highway Maintenance Study [November 3, 2015]
- Jackson Laboratory's Edison Liu is Keynote at 40th Annual Meeting of the Academy [May 11, 2015]
- CASE to Honor Connecticut’s Top Student Scientists: Young Scientists and Engineers Take Spotlight at Annual Awards Dinner [May 4, 2015]
- Connecticut Students to be Awarded Gerber Medal of Excellence [April 29, 2015]
- Wisner to Receive Distinguished Service Award from CASE [April 28, 2015]
- CT Technology Council President Elected to Honorary Membership in Academy [April 27, 2015]
- Joan A. Steitz to Receive 2015 Connecticut Medal of Science [April 22, 2015]
- CASE Releases Study on Shared Clean Energy Facilities [March 3, 2015]
- Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering Elects 23 New Members in 2015 [March 2, 2015]
- Call for Connecticut Medal of Science Nominations — Due Date: March 13, 2015 [January 12, 2015]
Bulletin of the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering
The Academy publishes the Bulletin of the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, a quarterly publication that is available in both print and electronic format. Click here to subscribe.
Reports and Studies
In the latest issue of the Bulletin:
Preparing for Pandemics: Ebola Tests State's Policies and Protocols
Amidst news of the end of Ebola in Liberia during May 2015, a patient was admitted on May 12, 2015, to UConn Health’s John Dempsey Hospital to rule out this potentially life-threatening disease. He had worked in an Ebola Treatment Unit in Liberia before the country was declared “Ebola free,” and was within the known incubation period for this infection. The patient was eventually determined to be Ebola free—his symptoms were due to a malarial infection.
The patient’s hospital admission set in motion a protocol devised by UConn Health that was carried out in conjunction with other Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) efforts that have been perfected since they were first developed in October 2014. The DPH monitors returning travelers at risk for Ebola Virus Disease and also has plans to deal with other potential infectious hazards that could impact the state. Connecticut’s Ebola response is not the first time the state has created a response plan to a potentially serious contagious disease.
Connecticut issued an organized response to a possible influenza pandemic in October 1997 when the DPH received a grant of $12,310 from the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to pilot the first iteration of the federal pandemic influenza planning guide for state and local health officials. In February 2006, the DPH issued a Pandemic Influenza Response Plan. The plan outlined descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of the DPH in an influenza pandemic, including instructions for local and regional public health and health care providers.
Click here to subscribe to the Bulletin in print or electronic format.
Executive summaries of all recent reports issued by the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering are available online. Most recent reports, including the three latest ones listed below, are also available in their entirety online in PDF format (please note that some files are large and may take a few minutes to download, depending on your connection speed). Hard copies of recent reports may be ordered for a fee.
The Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) conducted a study entitled Winter Highway Maintenance Operations: Connecticut, on behalf of the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT). The study was conducted in response to Section 6 of Public Act 14-199 that directed the Commissioner of Transportation to conduct an analysis of the corrosive effects of chemical road treatments on 1) state snow and ice equipment vehicles, 2) state bridges, highways and other infrastructure, and 3) the environment; The analysis shall determine the cost of corrosion created by road treatments, and shall include an evaluation of alternative techniques and products, such as, but not limited to, rust inhibitors, with a comparison of cost and effectiveness.
The study found that chloride-based deicing chemicals should be expected to be the standard for the foreseeable future and CTDOT should continue to use sodium chloride as the primary deicing chemical. Furthermore, although corrosion inhibitors are available for use with deicers, literature reviewed did not find evidence of their effectiveness in the field. It is important to note that vehicle washing is the best defense to reduce/prevent corrosion and the public should be educated on the need to wash vehicles, including the undercarriage.
The study concluded that ensuring the safety and mobility of the traveling public requires the most effective winter highway maintenance practices possible. Accomplishing this is a shared responsibility among stakeholders. To achieve comprehensive and sustainable success competing factors must be considered including: safety, cost, corrosion, operating practices, materials and equipment, environmental and economic impacts, and communication with the general public, stakeholders, and government leaders. Balancing these factors presents a challenge that can be met through ongoing monitoring and continuous improvement based on evolving best practices. Also, it was noted that CTDOT engages in an ongoing process of monitoring current practices, identifying areas for improvement, and instituting improvements based on best practices.
Further, analysis of winter season injury crash data showed that CTDOT’s anti-icing strategy the reduced number of injury crashes during winter weather events. The report includes recommendations for consideration by CTDOT and Connecticut’s municipalities related to deicing chemicals and application techniques, infrastructure, vehicles, the environment, and outreach and education.
[Full Report / 5.5 MB]
This study provides an overview of shared clean energy facilities (SCEFs) and issues regarding their development and use in Connecticut. Key goals of Connecticut’s energy policy include increasing the amount of electricity generated from clean energy resources and diversifying the state’s energy supply mix. The CASE Study Committee, which included various energy experts from engineers to economists and attorneys, concluded that based on the success of the state’s residential solar PV program and Connecticut’s relatively high electricity rates, it is expected that a Shared Clean Energy Facility Program will be of interest to ratepayers seeking to reduce their electricity expense, while helping to achieve these goals.
Further, implementation of a Connecticut Shared Clean Energy Facility Program requires adoption of legislation and program rules. The program should allow for multiple business models to maximize opportunities for facility development, competition, and choice for all interested participants. Furthermore, a value of clean energy analysis should be conducted to assure rate fairness for all business interests and classes of ratepayers including low-income populations.
Additionally, transforming the energy landscape for the 21st century requires that several broader issues be addressed to achieve a cleaner, safer, and more reliable system related to the anticipated increase in distributed generation, including: fairness in overall rate design to achieve the greatest value from clean distributed energy resource generation — with a goal of reducing the overall cost of electricity; development of utility business models to adapt to the evolving operating environment; and technology challenges to assure that the intended benefits of distributed generation are achieved.
[Full Report / 2 MB]
Public Act No. 12-155, An Act Concerning Phosphorous Reduction in State Waters, sets forth a process for making recommendations regarding a statewide strategy to reduce phosphorus loading in inland, non-tidal waters to comply with US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards.
The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) established working groups and a coordinating committee to address the issues mandated by this legislation. Three working groups were charged with formulating recommendations for the purpose of policy development: Working Group #1: Statewide Response to Phosphorus Non-point Pollution; Working Group #2: Methods to Measure Phosphorus and Make Future Projections; and Working Group #3: Municipal Options for Coming into Compliance with Water Quality Standards. The overarching Coordinating Committee comprises the co-chairs of the three working groups with oversight by a DEEP deputy commissioner and a representative from a Connecticut town. The Coordinating Committee was tasked with guiding the project, with responsibility for overall direction and timing, and addressing cross-cutting issues.
At the request of DEEP, the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) was engaged to conduct a study of specified tasks regarding the science involved and to makerecommendations for the development of methods to measure phosphorus and make future projections for the consideration of Working Group #2.
The overall objective of this study was to meet the legislative intent of Public Act 12-155, which was to conduct an evaluation and develop recommendations to determine the scientificmethods with which to measure the impacts of phosphorus pollution in inland, non-tidal waters. At the start of the study process, the CASE Research Team and Study Committee, in consultation with DEEP and Working Group #2, considered which inland waters should be included in the study. Most states, including Connecticut, already have numeric standards for nutrients for lakes and reservoirs, and therefore it was decided that these standards are sufficient and do not need to be revisited.
[Full Report / 2.7 MB]
The objectives of this study, which was conducted for the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT), included examining energy consumption of the facilities comprising the three major rail yards on the New Haven Rail Line as well as platform stations and identifying energy efficiency and cost saving opportunities for rail operations and facilities. The study focused on identifying opportunities and options to improve energy efficiency and reliability, and recommended solutions for reducing energy costs and reliance on fossil fuels that take into account the needs of Connecticut’s rail operations and facilities.
The study concluded that CTDOT should assign a staff person to serve as an energy manager tasked with leading energy efficiency and conservation efforts for all rail facilities/stations and incorporating theimportance of these efforts into the culture of the department. Under the energy manager’s leadership, CTDOT should implement a comprehensive process to exploit energy efficiencyand reliability opportunities for rail facilities/stations; this process should include conducting periodic energy audits of facilities, developing an energy management plan, and incorporating the findings into an asset management plan. Project planning, engineering and design, andconstruction, as well as rail operations that are conducted at the facilities/stations should be integrated into this process. Importantly, initiatives and projects should be evaluated with results integrated into future planning.
[Full Report / 5 MB]
In 1998, 46 states entered into an agreement with the four largest tobacco companies to settle lawsuits related to Medicaid reimbursement and tobacco-related healthcare costs. As part of the settlement, the states made a commitment to use funds from the settlement to address tobacco-related health issues and to support tobacco prevention and cessation programs.
The original settlement provided Connecticut with an initial upfront settlement payment of $45 million and average annual payments in perpetuity of $141 million. Connecticut established the Connecticut Tobacco Settlement Fund to receive settlement payments.
The Connecticut Tobacco Settlement Fund provides funding for the Connecticut Biomedical Research Grant-in-Aid Program (“Connecticut Biomedical Research Program”) through the Biomedical Research Trust Fund. The program is administered by the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH).
On behalf of DPH, the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) was asked to conduct this study for the purpose of determining accomplishments achieved as a result of the research funded through the Connecticut Biomedical Research Program. This study is intended to provide information and recommendations to help decision makers understand the results and products of the program and guide its future activities. For this study, CASE assembled a committee of experts in biomedical research, the healthcare industry, and an academy member to oversee project research, develop conclusions based on the research findings and review th draft study report.
[Full Report / 5 MB]
At the request of the Connecticut General Assembly, the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) in accordance with legislation adopted in the 2012 legislative session, Public Act 12-1 and Public Act 12-104, was asked to conduct a Disparity Study of the state’s Small and Minority Business Set-Aside Program (“Set-Aside Program”). Public Act 12-1 provided an overview of the initial scope of work to be included in the study, and Public Act 12-104 provided initial project funding.
Initial research identified that the state’s executive branch agencies and other branches of state government that are responsible for awarding state contracts and overseeing the Set-Aside Program do not for the most part collect subcontractor contracting data, including payment information. In addition, a review of the legal issues and case law, including presentations to the CASE Study Committee by experts on matters of race-based and gender-based programs, identified that subcontractor data and financial information is a critical component of conducting any valid disparity study. Unless quality data are collected and available at a level of detail necessary for analysis, the results of the disparity study could be challenged, and if such challenge were successful, the whole purpose of conducting the study would be negated.
The study concluded that the most effective statewide programs have a centralized structure with support from the governor and key political leaders, and advocate for MBEs and WBEs by implementing consistent programs, developing policies, overseeing and enforcing compliance, and educating stakeholders. Once the comprehensive data needed for conducting the statistical analysis are collected, the disparity study can be completed and used to inform overall spending goals for the MBE and WBE Program. Based on the results of periodic statistical analyses, if a statistically significant disparity exists, then a presumption of systemic discrimination implies the need for a legislatively mandated MBE and WBE Program, which should be implemented taking into account all of the relevant legal requirements.
[Full Report / 1MB] [Executive Summary]
On behalf of the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) in accordance with Section 7(f) of Public Act 12-148: An Act Enhancing Emergency Preparedness and Response, the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) performed a peer review of reports prepared for DEEP by Connecticut Light and Power Company (CL&P) and the UConn Schools of Engineering and Business on methods of providing reliable electric services to critical facilities.
Reports reviewed by the CASE Peer Review Committee (PRC) included the following:
- Analysis of Selective Hardening Options: Introduction and Executive Summary to Analysis Reports by CL&P, December 11, 2013 (see Appendix A) (Note: This version was used for the development of findings by the PRC. The original version of this report, Analysis of Selective Hardening Options: Introduction to Project Reports, dated May 31, 2013, was used by the PRC in the development of questions for CL&P/UConn. It is noted that as a result of the CL&P/UConn Briefing for the PRC, CL&P revised this report to include an Executive Summary.)
- Reliability of Selective Hardening Options by the UConn School of Engineering (Principal Authors: Peng Zang, Gengfeng Li, and Peter Luh), May 31, 2013
- Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Selective Hardening Options by the UConn School of Engineering (Principal Authors: Sung Yeul Park and Sung Min Park), May 31, 2013
- Benefit-Cost Analysis of Selective Hardening Options by the UConn School of Business (Principal Authors: Michel Rakotomavo and Albert Tzu-Wen Lin), May 31, 2013
CL&P and UConn School of Engineering briefed the PRC on the reports and responded to the questions submitted by the PRC. The PRC submitted additional questions following the briefing. CL&P and the UConn Schools of Engineering and Business responded to the questions and comments submitted by the PRC by either modifying their reports or submitting a separate written response to questions raised by the PRC (see Appendix B: CL&P Response to Questions from Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering; and Appendix C: PRC Questions/Comments on CL&P/UConn Reports with Mapping of CL&P/UConn Responses (Appendix B) Noted). This additional information was taken into consideration in development of the peer review report.
The PRC provided comments and findings for use in the development of the peer review report. Additionally, at DEEP’s request, the CASE Project Management Team conducted an initial scan of best practices for providing reliable power to critical facilities and identified possible funding sources for microgrid projects.
The PRC provided comments on the draft peer report, which was finalized on January 3, 2014.
[Full Report / 1.8 MB]
“Analyzing the Economic Impacts of Transportation Projects” was conducted on behalf of the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) by the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE). The main goal of the study is to explore methods, approaches and analytical software tools for analyzing economic activity that results from large-scale transportation investments in Connecticut. The transportation system and users of transportation infrastructure interact with the economy in complex ways, causing economic impacts. Therefore, in order to effectively analyze the economic impact of transportation projects, the study committee concluded that ConnDOT should consider the following:
- Establishing the role of economic impact analysis in the state’s strategic transportation planning process.
- Adopting an objective, independent and consistent process for conducting economic impact analyses that incorporates the state’s regional, economic and political considerations.
- Building capacity of ConnDOT staff including their understanding of economic impact analysis and the tools used to conduct such analyses for use in the strategic planning process and to support and manage analysts that conduct the analyses.
- Utilizing analysts well versed in the principles of transportation planning/
engineering and economic theory, and knowledgeable about the interrelations between the two for the purpose of ensuring validity of the results.
- Establishing a partnership with an organization or consultant with the capacity to conduct economic analyses to achieve consistency in analyses over time.
- Selecting an economic analysis software model to analyze the economic impact of transportation projects. Of the models considered in this study, currently REMI TranSight and TREDIS are recommended for ConnDOT’s consideration.
- Customizing and communicating the results of the analyses in meaningful terms for various audiences (e.g., decision makers, stakeholders and the public).
[Full Report / 5.9MB] [Executive Summary]
The use of Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) is a relatively new process in the United States that is designed to ensure that often overlooked or unanticipated health impacts are considered in proposed policies, programs, projects or plans. HIAs offer practical recommendations to minimize negative health risks and maximize health benefits, while addresing differential health impacts on vulnerable groups of people. They have been used by decision makers at the federal, state and local levels in a variety of sectors, including agriculture and food, built environment, education, housing, labor and employment, natural resources and energy, and transportation.
The purpose of this study is to provide the Connecticut General Assembly, state agencies, local health departments, regional health districts, and interested parties with information about HIAs for the purpose of assessing their value for use in Connecticut.
[Full Report / 6MB] [Executive Summary] [Press Release]
At the request of the Connecticut General Assembly, the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE), in accordance with legislation adopted in the 2012 legislative session, Public Act 12-1 and Public Act 12-104, shall conduct a disparity study of the state’s Small and Minority Business Enterprise Set-Aside Program (“Set-Aside Program”). Public Act 12-1 provides an overview of the scope of work to be included in the study, and Public Act 12-104 provides for the funding of the project.
Findings from the study’s initial research and analysis of Connecticut’s current Set-Aside Program identified that:
- The state’s executive branch agencies and the other branches of state government that are responsible for awarding state contracts and overseeing the Set-Aside Program do not uniformly collect subcontractor contracting data, including payment information.
- A review of the legal issues and case law, including presentations to the CASE Study Committee by experts on matters of race-based and gender-based programs, identified that subcontractor data and financial information is a critical component of conducting a valid disparity study. Additionally, it was noted that unless quality data are collected and available for analysis, the results of the disparity study could be challenged in court, which would negate the purpose of conducting the study.
Therefore, it is recommended that the disparity study be divided into four distinct phases: Phase 1: Connecticut’s Set-Aside Program Review and Analysis, Legal Issues, and Stakeholder Anecdotal Information/Analysis; Phase 2: Diversity Data Management System Specification and Review of Agency Procedures and Practices Related to System Implementation, Best Practices Review and Analysis, and Establishing MBE/WBE Program Requirements; Phase 3: Diversity Data Management System Testing, Econometric Model Acquisition and Testing, Legal Issues Update, Agency Progress and Race-Neutral Measures Implementation Review, and MBE/WBE Company Survey; and Phase 4: Data Analysis and Goal Setting, Anecdotal Information/Analysis, and Final Project Report.
[Full Report* / 3MB][Executive Summary]
* Note: Revised to incorporate clarification of Section 7.2.1 ("Ownership") on page 75.
Stem cell research has the potential for significant benefits to human health. Scientists are exploring the use of stem cells for the growth and development of tissues and organs, developing new drugs and studying genetic diseases.
In 2005, Connecticut joined California and New Jersey as the only states to allocate public funds for stem cell research (Public Act 05-149). The Connecticut Stem Cell Research Program was appropriated $20M for grants-in-aid for embryonic or human adult stem cell research. Additionally, this act allocated a total of $80M to be used over the course of seven years (2008-2015) from the state’s Tobacco Settlement Fund to support additional stem cell research. The stated purpose of the program is to “support the advancement of embryonic and/or human adult stem cell research in Connecticut.” While the political and scientific environments of today are quite changed from when the act was adopted, the need for funding stem cell research has not diminished.
At year six of the Connecticut Stem Cell Research Program, the Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) and Connecticut Innovations (CI) asked the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) to conduct an analysis of the accomplishments of the program, and to report findings and recommendations to DPH and CI.
[Full Report / 1.5 MB][Executive Summary]
The General Assembly tasked the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering (CASE) with studying the workforce alignment system in Connecticut. The impetus for this study was the recognition that on the heels of the Great Recession, the state did not have an effective workforce alignment system to assist residents and businesses in their recovery from the economic downturn. This study was conducted at a time in which the General Assembly and the governor were realigning the workforce system and actively pursuing fundamental structural reforms.
The study’s goal is to identify strategies and mechanisms to assess and evaluate the value and effectiveness of those state programs and resources that have a goal of providing businesses and industries in Connecticut with a skilled workforce (with a focus on fields related to science,technology, engineering and mathematics) that meets the needs and expectations of employers, and at the same time, seeks to ensure that students receive the education they need and expect to successfully work in today’s jobs/careers and in the jobs/careers of the future. This study is not an evaluation of particular programs or industries in Connecticut, but rather, provides guidance to assure that the state continually maintains an agile, flexible workforce system thatcan respond to needs of residents and businesses in a constantly changing environment.
[Full Report / 3.6 MB][Executive Summary]
How to contact CASE
Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering
805 Brook Street, Building 4-CERC
Rocky Hill, CT 06067-3405
*Email: acad at ctcase.org
(*As an anti-spam measure, we ask you to convert this address to the usual firstname.lastname@example.org format.)
This page last updated:
November 4, 2015
Copyright © Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, Incorporated. All rights reserved.