US Army Corps of Engineers

Transcription

1 US Army Corps of Engineers Update on MILCON Transformation Modular Building Institute s 2007 Government & Military Construction Conference 28 June 2007 Mr. J. Joseph Tyler, PE Deputy Director of Military Programs U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

2 MILCON & BRAC Projected Funding $14 $12 $10 $8 DOD BRAC DOD MILCON AIR FORCE BRAC AF MILCON Billions $6 $4 $2 Projected Funding FY06-11 = $54.8B $0 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 GROW THE FORCE ARMY BRAC ARMY BRAC IGPBS ARMY MILCON

3 Army Program (incl. BRAC) by MSC FY07 / FY08-13 POM $871.2m/$3947.2m $909.45m/$3521.6m Alaska (Anchorage) Far East (Korea) Japan Pacific Ocean $420m/$3546m Honolulu Seattle Portland Sacramento San Francisco South Pacific Los Angeles $62m/$615m Albuquerque Northwestern Omaha Kansas City Fort Worth Tulsa Little Rock Southwestern Great Lakes & Ohio River Cincinnati Louisville Atlanta Savannah Mobile North Atlantic New $960m/$ m York Baltimore Norfolk South Atlantic Europe (Germany) LEGEND: LEGEND: Division/Regional HQ location Division/Regional HQ location Division boundary Division boundary District location District location District boundary District boundary State boundary State boundary Note: $ m/$ m $839.43m/$ m Total Army (less Grow the Force): $5,014.2 m/ $25,268.8m ($30,282.2m) Grow the Force: $250m/$7,507m ($7,757m) DOD/AF: $2,460.9m/$12,285m ($14,745.9m) Other: $1,279.1m/$7,230m ($8,509m) Total Programs: $9004.2m/$52,290.8m (FY07-FY13 =$61,294.1)

4 MILCON/BRAC Program Quarterly Execution 4 $ Billions st 2nd 3rd 4th FY Quarter FY 06 Awards FY 07 Awards

5 Private Industry Partnerships 34,000 Corps Employees Construction Contractors: Unlimited Capability Architect-Engineer Firms (5,000 employees) Perform over 65% of planning and design Perform 100% of Civil Works and Military Construction ~300K daily Sponsors, Federal Agencies, Associations

6 Execution Thru MILCON Transformation How Allow type I -V construction Awarding Army Standard Facilities from eight (8) Centers of Standardization Working from Design-Build toward Adapt-Build Encourage pre-manufactured solutions Use performance type contracts Drive consistency: Process and facilities Capitalize on continuous building concepts Objectives Reduce costs by 15% Reduce time by 30% Meet Army sustainability goals LEED Silver, EPAC 2005, lower lifecycle costs Deliver full project scope within Programmed Amount Provide a complete Brigade Combat Team complex in months ($ million) Achieve Small Business goals Quality Facilities for the Soldier and Family

7 FY2006 Pilot Program - Resource Effectiveness / Lessons Learned 15 percent cost savings w/100 percent scope can be achieved as in the award of the following projects Aviation Barracks, Ft Campbell Permanent Party Barracks, Ft Knox Division HQ & Sustainment Brigade HQ, Ft Riley Unaccompanied Enlisted Personnel Housing and Tactical Vehicle Maintenance Facilities, Ft Bliss Company Operations Facility and Barracks, Fort Carson Use of Model RFP can make a difference in achieving full scope (Consistency in acquisition across the Corps) Continue to change culture: Corps, Garrisons and the Contractors Continue to capture Lessons-Learned and adapt as we go Need for reconciliation of standard design and the IDGs Must establish robust site and program integration capability Barracks at Ft. Knox Barracks at Ft Campbell

8 Army Program By Product Line $1,000,000 $900,000 $800,000 $700,000 $600,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100,000 Barracks CDC & Youth Centers Company Operations Facilities Tactical Equipment Maint. Facilities Headquarters Buildings Dining Facilities $0 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

9 Fort Carson

10 Conceptual Designs for Ft Bliss

11 Fort Bliss TEMF and Barracks Initial Site Construction 01 May 2007 TEMF

12

13 MT Report Card - Northwestern Division Use of MT Principles: 57% of projects in FY06 / 73% of projects in FY07 COS Involvement in Project Life Cycle: 29% of projects in FY06 / 73% in FY07 Cost Avoidance (after 15% in primary facility cost in PA) 4% in FY06 / 26% in FY07 Full Scope Awards: 57% in FY06 / 73% in FY07 Use of Pre-engineered Solutions: 14% in FY06 / 45% in FY07 Use of Standard Designs: 43% in FY06 / 82% in FY07 Small Business Participation: 14% in FY06 / 27% in FY07

14 Challenges and Uncertainties Operating under Continuing Resolution Appropriations delays in the FY 07 MILCON budget resulted in compressed timelines and construction challenges Difficult execution in balancing need for fast construction of facilities, real estate issues and environmental permitting requirements Army Modular Force Acceleration Earlier deadlines Dependency on standardization Decisions on what & when to standardize Army Force Growth Proposal Requires additional facilities beyond BRAC and regular MILCON (Approximately $10 Billion from )

15