1. 1 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ Army and Corps Transformation Mr. Donald Basham Chief, Engineering & Construction Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 15 November 2005 SAME Kentuckiana Post

2. 2 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 Tokyo/Yokohama Akizuki/Kure Zama/Sagamihara Okinawa PACIFIC Aberdeen + 2,176 Ft Belvoir + 11,858 Ft Leavenworth +203 Ft Meade + 5,361 Ft Lee + 8,375 Ft Eustis -1,082 Picatinny +693 Ft Bragg / Pope AFB + 8,291 Ft Sam Houston +9399 Redstone + 1,655 Ft Knox +1,541 Ft Campbell +4,619 Rock Island -1,263 Net loss Net gain: 1 to 1000 Net gain: 1001 to 5,000 Net gain: greater than 5,000 Ft Sill + 3,334 Ft Rucker + 1,888 Ft Jackson + 615 Ft Benning + 10,156 Ft Leonard Wood +1,665 West Point +264 The Challenge … Permanent facilities faster, better, less expensive and greener LEGEND Detroit Arsenal - 647 142,000 people restationing Ft Stewart + 1,921 Hunter Army Airfield + 2,041 Fort Drum +4,142 Ft Irwin +1,292 Ft Polk + 1,006 Ft Wainwright +2,001 Ft Lewis +9,038 Ft Bliss +18,602 Ft Carson +9,638 Ft Richardson +3,652 Ft Riley +9,300 Schofield Bks +3,098 Ft Hood + 6,315 Ft Huachuca -336

3. 3 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 The Execution Challenge IGPBS Army Modular Forces BRAC 05 MILITARY WORKLOAD Multiple ‘Peaking’ Programs w/Critical Facilities Needs $30-40B of Facilities for Restationing of 142,000 Temp Bldgs GWOT Spt Katrina Recovery FY06FY11

4. 4 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 5 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 6 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 7 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 8 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 9 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 10 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 11 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 12 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 13 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 14 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 15 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 16 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ 14 Oct 05 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. 17 ~ Our Army at War – Relevant and Ready ~ Questions