...
To this point in regards Civil Data....yes the data is nearly useless because the data is embedded in the civil objects.....AND
the endstate of most civil projects is GIS of some sort, and MAP, nor ESRI either one can use the data from a civil model directly.
So without a great deal of data extraction, or otherwise the civil model does not feed into the downstream, or is it upstream purpose of BIM as it relates to civil projects.
You're right Michael, and the CAD vendor isn't interested in adding the extra data fields required to create a valid export file that conforms to the BIM/IFC standard so it only exports the fields that it can/is interested in and hence you end up with rubbish/incomplete data. As you say, upstream/downstream wants the "GIS of some sort" and BIM is a way of achieving this but it won't work how it's implemented at this time.
Unless the government agencies enforce some kind of standard with an associated schema it won't happen. Without a schema, the data will most probably be junk. I wouldn't be holding my breath for all the CAD vendors to get their heads together and agree on one either.
I've written an app that works with CAD files to create XML and validate that data with a schema[1] and it works very well. The file I create can be passed to another CAD vendor that has implemented the schema and it just works. They can import my XML file and create a complete drawing with over 70 different asset types with all geometry and data attached, as can I with theirs.
That's how BIM is supposed to work!

[1] The schema was created by a consortium of councils who all wanted a standardised way of receiving a vendor-neutral file format of as designed - as-built asset data as part of their DA documents submission process, they were sick of receiving excel or word doc's or whatever export the CAD system used was exporting.