Army and Corps Transformation

1. SAME Kentuckiana Post Army and Corps Transformation Mr. Donald Basham Chief, Engineering & Construction Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 15 November 2005

2. The Challenge … Permanent facilities faster, better, less expensive and greener 142,000 people restationing Ft Lewis +9,038 Fort Drum +4,142 West Point +264 Picatinny +693 Detroit Arsenal - 647 Aberdeen + 2,176 Rock Island -1,263 Ft Meade + 5,361 Ft Belvoir + 11,858 Ft Riley +9,300 Ft Eustis -1,082 Ft Leavenworth +203 Ft Carson +9,638 Ft Knox +1,541 Ft Leonard Wood +1,665 Ft Lee + 8,375 Ft Bragg / Pope AFB + 8,291 Ft Campbell +4,619 Ft Irwin +1,292 Ft Sill + 3,334 Ft Jackson + 615 Redstone + 1,655 Hunter Army Airfield + 2,041 Ft Huachuca -336 Ft Benning + 10,156 PACIFIC Ft Hood + 6,315 Ft Stewart + 1,921 Ft Bliss +18,602 Ft Rucker + 1,888 Ft Polk + 1,006 Ft Wainwright +2,001 Ft Sam Houston +9399 LEGEND Ft Richardson +3,652 Net loss Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa Net gain: 1 to 1000 Net gain: 1001 to 5,000 Net gain: greater than 5,000 Schofield Bks +3,098

3. $30-40B of Facilities for Restationing of 142,000 The Execution Challenge Multiple ‘Peaking’ Programs w/Critical Facilities Needs BRAC 05 IGPBS MILITARY WORKLOAD Katrina Recovery Army Modular Forces Temp Bldgs GWOT Spt FY06 FY11

4. Direction from Army Secretariat Develop a strategy and implementation plan to support the major permanent restationing initiatives that the Army will execute. Overall objective is to provide the ability to establish, reuse/re-purpose facilities with minimum lead-time, leverage private industry standards and practices, and to reduce acquisition/lifecycle costs … Nov 2004

5. Why MILCON Transformation? • Current business practices do not support the Army’s requirement of getting quality facilities in the timeframe needed • Program-wide funding shortfall will most likely occur in the status-quo scenario

6. MILCON Transformation Is… • ACSIM provides centralized decision making on what gets built • The Corps changes the way it executes Army MILCON • Execution of Army MILCON as a continuous building program • Standardization of facilities and processes • Expanded use of manufactured building solutions • Partnering within the Army and with industry “Quality facilities delivered in less time at lower cost”

7. Centralized Decision Making by ACSIM • Defines facility requirements and standards • Programs total mission requirements of BCT on one DD 1391 • Dictates standardization for similar facility types “ Direction from the customer …ACSIM”

8. Execution as a Continuous Building Program • Program entire Brigade Combat Team (BCT) requirements as one project • Gain efficiency thru experience of many similar facilities • Greater cost predictability • Speed of delivery • Continuous facilities improvement (process, product collaboration and building systems) • Gaining economies of scale “Reduction in cost and time”

9. Standardization of Processes (Across the Army) • Consistent and Uniform RFPs • Streamline the acquisition time • Facilitate the proposal process • Consistent engineering/construction applications • Standardization in the evaluation/selection criteria • Streamline review and submittal process • Expand the use of types of construction • (Type I thru Type V construction) • Maximize use of Industry Standards • International Building Code • Focus on end result; not “how to” “Consistency is vital to successful program execution”

10. Standardization of Facilities • Prototype models for standard facility types • Mission • Community • Others • Transition from design/build to “Adapt/Build” • Centers of Standardization for Facility Types • Transition to Corps design centers • Maintain prototype models • Award regional ID/IQs for design, D/B and construction contracts • Incorporate Lessons-Learned “Continual improvement of prototypes”

11. Expanded Use of Manufactured Solutions • Manufactured Solutions Community includes: • Pre-engineered • Modular • Tilt-up/panel • Expanded list of construction solutions • Acquisition Alternatives: • Contract directly for certain facility types • Creation of preferred provider lists • Multiple Basic Ordering Agreements (BOA) “Viable alternative to conventional construction”

12. Partnering • Internal to the Army • Ensure execution actions are in sync with Army needs • Ensure sufficient master planning competency within the Army • Ensure consistent DD 1391s • Ensure all real estate actions are addressed • Ensure NEPA is addressed in a timely manner • With the Private Sector • Adopt industry best practices • Develop trust thru long-term relationships • Repeat Business Based on: Quality/Schedule/Cost

13. What’s Happening Now • Model RFP • Vetted by industry and USACE • Pilot test on Ft. Campbell MFAB project • Team assistance visit for Ft Bliss efforts • FY07 MCA Design Releases • Early to Mid Oct 05 (Limited releases) • CONUS MCA will be directed to use MT Concepts • Fast-track D-B • Expand construction types (1 thru 5) • Model RFP (where applicable) • DIRNET special instructions • Centers of Standardization Reorganization • Recommendation being reviewed by CECW-E • Upon approval, PMP for restructured

14. Utilization of Approved Army Facility Standards • No MT influenced facility standard has been approved by AFSC for implementation • FY06 MCA will be based on PresBud SOW and unit cost • FY07 MCA will be based on approved facility SOW and MT unit costs • BRAC2005 projects will be based on approved facility SOW and MT unit costs

15. Milestones • Model RFP: • Corporate resolution of comments on model RFP – 1st week of Nov 05 • FY2006 Version issued for implementation - Nov 05 • Revision for FY2007 implementation – Aug 06 • Centers of Standardization (COS) Restructuring: • Recommendation to DMP – Oct 05 • Development of PgMP – Dec 05 • Operation as Design Centers – NLT Sep 06 • Design Authorizations: • FY07 MCA – Oct 05/Dec 05 • Directed to utilize MT concepts to maximum extent in CONUS • BRAC 2005 – Once it becomes law • Directed to utilize MT concepts to maximum extent in CONUS

16. Milestones (cont.) • Draft Annex C (MILCON Transformation) of FY06 MILCON Execution OPLAN – Oct 05 • Workshop: IDS/IDG and its’ effect on MT - Nov 05 • Workshop: Constr. Management for MT – Dec 05(?) • Announcement of next FYDP – Dec 05/Jan 06 • Determination of need for regional contracts - Jan 06 • New Army design standards for Bn/Bde HQ, TEMF and C&C facilities submitted to AFSC for approval – Apr 06 • Update model RFP based on approval of above standard facility SOW – May/Jun 06 • Initial regional contracts in place – Sep 06(?)

17. Questions