Tom Brockbank, PE

1
CENTERS OF STANDARDIZATION SAS PROGRAM
OVERVIEW 1 July 2009
Tom Brockbank, PE Engineering Division, Design
Branch Chief, COS Section
Mike Sydow, PE Programs and Project Management
Division Assistant Chief, Programs Project
Management Division
2
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.
• 
  DASA IH, Nov 2004

3
The USACE Solution

• MILCON Transformation (MT)
• Implementation began during FY-06
• Focused on industry standards and practices
• Initially predicated on use D-B acquisition
  process
• Transition to use of Adapt-Build Models in FY-09
  and beyond
• Centers of Standardization (CoS)
• Transition to become mandatory Corps design and
  contracting centers
• Use MT process to arrive at Continuous Build
  Program for assigned facilities
• Achieve standardized facilities
• Select contractor pool building the same facility
  over and over
• Consistent engineering / construction /
  acquisition application
• Build a long-term relationship with select
  contractors

4
Execution Goals

• Turning dirt in the year of appropriation
• Occupancy within 18 months of NTP
• Build a quality facility within the 1391 Program
  Amounts
• Ability to lower unit costs (15 reduction
  incorporated at time of programming)
• Ability to absorb detrimental market conditions
• Achieve Army sustainability energy reduction
  goals
• Continue to meet Army/DoD Small Business
  requirements

5
Centers of Standardization

• Ft. Worth District/SWD (7)
• Unaccompanied Enlisted Personnel Housing
• Basic Training Complex/One Station Unit Trainee
• Advanced individual Training Complex
• Reception Barracks
• Warriors In Transition (WIT)
• General Purpose Warehouse
• Central Issue Warehouse
• Norfolk District/NAD (7)
• General Instructional Facility
• Classroom 21
• Enlisted personnel Dining Facility
• Mil. Entrance Processing Stations
• Family Housing RFP
• Information Systems Facility
• Criminal Investigation Facility

• Savannah District/SAD (6)
• Brigade Operations Complex
• Tactical Equipment Maintenance
• Company Operations Facility
• Battalion HQ
• Brigade HQ
• Command Control Facility (C2F)
• (Shared responsibility w/SAM)
• Division HQ
• Corps HQ

6
Centers of Standardization

• Huntsville Center (15)
• Physical Fitness
• Outdoor Sports Facility
• Child Development (2)
• Youth Activity Centers
• Consolidated Fire, Safety and Security Facility
• Fire Station
• Army Community Service Center
• Bowling Center RFP
• Hazard Material Storage
• Range and Training Lands
• Close Combat Tactical Trainer
• Mil. Ops. Urban Terrain Facility
• Training Ranges
• Battle Cmd Training Ctr.
• Training Support Ctr.
• Medical Facilities

• Louisville District/LRD (2)
• Army Reserve Centers
• Operational Readiness Training Complex
• Omaha District/NWD (2)
• Religious Facilities
• Access Control Points
• Honolulu District/POD (2) OCONUS
• Unaccompanied Officers Quarters
• Transient Officers Quarters
• Mobile District/SAD (2)
• Aviation Vertical Construction
• Command Control Facility (C2F) (Shared
  responsibility w/SAS)
• Numbered Army/Army Service Component Command
  (ASCC) HQ
• Army Command (ACOM) HQ

7
Three Phases of MT Transition

Phase 3 FY09-11 MILCON

• Fully develop Adapt-Build /
• BIM Model
• Move toward Adapt-Build D-B-B
• contracts / task orders using
• standardized designs

Phase 2 FY08 MILCON Program

• Stand-up COSs and program
• COS Awards facility IDIQ contracts using RFP
  Wizard
• for regional MATOCs
• Gather / incorporate best practices

Phase 1 FY06 07 MILCON Program

• Invite Construction Industry feedback, pilot
  projects
• Identify and begin Stand-up of facility Centers
  of Standardization (COS)
• Geographic Districts award contracts using the
  USACE D-B Model RFP template.
• Use industry standards, codes and processes
• Contains non-prescriptive bubble diagrams,
  performance reqmts of facility standards
• Uses standardized award and post-award
  construction processes and activities

8
Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach

• WHAT IS A-B
• HOW IS IT PRODUCED
• HOW IS IT DELIVERED
• WHY IS A-B REQUIRED

9
Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach

• WHAT IS A-B A-B is the next step in the
  evolution of the MILCON Transformation initiative
  to achieve standardized facilities. It draws
  upon design solutions from both private and
  public sectors to arrive at a design model that
  can be repetitively constructed with minimal
  adaptation in a given geographical location.

10
Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach

• HOW IS IT PRODUCED SAS adapt-build models are
  predicated on design products received from
  successful D-B proposers for CoS contracts
  awarded during FY-08. These models consist of a
  100 complete design package for a typical
  (sample) application of each assigned facility
  type (TEMF, COF, and Bn/Bde HQ). These sample
  designs will include a BIM product, 2-D
  construction drawings, and UFGS formatted
  specifications.

11
Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach

• HOW IS IT DELIVERED
• For FY-09, begin using D-B solicitations with a
  sample adapt-build model attached as an
  appendix, and allow D-B proposers to adjust
  technical elements of the design as necessary to
  meet site specific requirements.
• In FY-10, the CoS or local Geographic District
  will begin developing 100 site specific designs
  predicated on the adapt-build models prior to
  construction advertisement, and solicit as D-B-B
  task orders against the CoS MATOCs.
  Approximately 1/3 of program will solicited in
  this manner, with 2/3 still executed as D-B task
  orders with a sample A-B model solution included
  as a reference.
• In FY-11, all solicitations for standardized
  facilities will be predicated on the A-B process
  with 100 site specific designs provided at
  construction advertisement.

12
Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach

• WHY IS A-B REQUIRED
• To achieve repetitively built, standardized
  facilities
• Minimize re-design effort and associated costs
  for these repetitively built facilities

13
MILCON Transformation Design Evolution
14
SAS CoS Program Summary

15
CoS Regional Acquisition Map
Three 8(a) NWR MATOC
NER
NWR
Tobyhanna Army Depot
Scranton AAP
Carlisle Barracks
Letterkenny AD
Aberdeen Proving Ground
Ft Detrick
Ft. AP Hill
Adelphi Lab Ctr
Fort Eustis
Parks RTFA
Fort Monroe
Fort Lee
Fort Story
Moffett Field RFTA (USAR)
Radford AAP
Ft. Meade
Walter Reed
Fort McNair
Fort Myer
Fort Belvoir
SWR
Fort Bragg
MOT Sunny Point
Fort Jackson
Fort Gordon
Fort McPherson
Fort Benning
Fort Gillem
Fort Rucker
Fort Stewart/Hunter AAF
SER
Mississippi AAP
USAG Miami
Three UR Western Region MATOC
Fort Buchanan
Two Eastern Region MATOC HubZone, 8(a)
16
SAS CoS Facilities
FY09 1T, 1C FY11 2T, 1C, 1H FY12 1T, 1C,
1H FY13 2T, 3C, 1H
NWR
Fort Lewis
NER
FY08 1T
FY08 1T FY09 3T,3C, 3H FY10 1T, 1C, 1H FY11
2T, 3C, 3H FY12 3T, 4C, 3H FY13 1C, 1H
FY09 2T, 3C, 2H FY10 1T, 2C, 2H FY11 1T,
1C, 1H FY12 1C, 1H
Fort Drum
FY08 1T, 1C, 1H FY09 2T, 2C, 2H FY10 1T,
2C, 2H FY11 1T, 1C, 1H FY13 1C, 1H
FY12 4T FY13 1T, 4C, 1H
FY09 1C FY13 1T
West Point
FY13 1C, 1H
Fort Eustis
Fort Belvoir
Fort Leavenworth
Fort Lee
Fort Story
Fort Carson
FY09 1C
FY08 1C, 1H FY10 2T, 1C FY11 4T, 6C, 5H
Fort Leonardwood
FY08 1C, 1H FY13 2T
Presidio of Monterey
FY08 1C, 2H FY09 2C FY10 1C, 1H FY11
1T,2C, 1H FY12 2T FY13 1T, 3C, 2H
Fort Bragg
Fort Knox
Fort Campbell
Fort Irwin
Fort Jackson
Fort Sill
SWR
FY08 1C, 1H FY12 1T, 1C, 1H FY13 1T, 1C, 1H
White Sands Missile Range
McAlester AAP
FY08 1C FY11 1T, 1C, 1H
HAAF
Fort Stewart
Fort Benning
Fort Polk
Fort Bliss
FY08 1H FY09 1 C, 1H FY10 1 C, 1H FY11
1C, 1H FY12 1C, 1H FY13 1T, 1C, 1H
Fort Hood
FY08 1T, 1H FY09 2T, 3C, 1H FY10 6T, 5C,
2H FY11 1T, 1C, 1H FY12 2T, 1C, 1H FY13 1T,
1C, 1H
Fort Sam Houston
FY08 2H FY09 1C, 1H FY11 1T, 2C, 1H FY12
1C, 1H FY13 1T
FY08 1T, 1C
FY09 1C FY12 1C, 1H FY13 1T
FY09 1T, 1C FY10 2T, 1C FY11 2T, 3C, 2H
SER
17
Approved COS Acquisition Plan
18
Pending CoS Acquisition Plan Strategy
REQUESTING APPROXIMATELY 2.9B TOTAL CAPACITY
19
CoS Challenges

• The largest construction program in the Armys
  history has resulted in a substantial workload
  increase, combined with adopting new business
  processes.
• Variability of program is forcing changes to the
  acquisition strategy. Amendment pending to CoS
  acquisition plan to add capacity for FY10.
• Impacts of the economy on industry.
• Cost of doing business (labor, commodity prices,
  credit)
• Ability to secure bonding, especially for Small
  Business
• Meeting Small Business Goals.

20
What Is USACE Doing to Respond

• Leverage internal resources throughout USACE to
  ensure that execution schedules are met. SAS
  delegated authority to Geographic Districts to
  award CoS Task Order Awards.
• More coordination between districts to minimize
  the number of concurrent RFPs being issued to
  same MATOC pool.
• Provide industry advance notice of planned RFP
  issuance for new and established contracts.
• Standardization of Installation Design Guide and
  Area Development Guide requirements (WIZARD,
  Paragraph 6).
• Conduct Regional Industry Days.

21

• Questions???

22
Back-up Slides
23
Army Expectations for Standardization

• Secretariat / VCSA Must have consistent
  delivery of Army facilities.
• Soldiers should have facilities w/same
  capabilities and features regardless of where
  they are
• Why do I pay for the design of a barracks over
  and over again? DASA(IH)
• Why dont my facilities look and act the same
  from one placeto another? VCSA

• Functional Proponent Facilities must meet
  functional and operational needs.
• Functional operational requirements reflect
  Current Future Force needs
• How do I ensure what is built will support
  emerging initiatives and programs? DCS, G-4
• What facility capabilities or limitations do we
  need to consider for FCS? DCS, G-8 FCS
  Training Supportability IPT

24
7 Keys to MILCON Transformation

• 1. Greater emphasis on master planning
• 2. HQDA and Army functional proponent determines
  mandatory requirements for each facility type
• 3. Standardization of facilities processes
• 4. Change how we execute
• 5. Continuous building program
• 6. Use of manufactured/pre-engineered components
• 7. Teaming with customers and industry

25
CoS Goals

• Goal for end-state Develop standard design to
  an 80 regional solution (spiral development)
• FY-08 Program Develop a basic floor plan for
  use in D/B RFPs. Evolve existing standard
  designs to the 80 solution and utilize in
  adapt-build (D-B) contracts to the maximum extent
  possible.
• FY-09 Program Incorporate best designs from the
  FY-08 model RFP packages and proceed further to
  the 80 solution with eventual goal of a
  site-adapt model.
• 
  (from OPORD, Annex U)

26
CoS Strategy

• Moving away from acquiring facilities one at a
  time
• MCA Program Execution as a continuous building
  program
• Maintain strong support to installations through
  continued geographic district PM and cradle to
  grave project involvement

27
COS Standard Designs

• Warfighter focused priorities on functional and
  operational scope/needs
• Adaptive Open-space designs and construction
  that can be easily modified as missions change.
• Pragmatic - use the best industry practices for
  sound, economic facilities that can be
  constructed in the shortest time period

28
Barracks IDIQ (SWF)
GYM IDIQ (HNC)
Chapel IDIQ (NWO)
Headquarters IDIQ (SAS)
DFAC IDIQ (NAO)
SITE WORK (GEOGRAPHIC DISTRICT)
COF IDIQ (SAS)
TEMF IDIQ (SAS)
29
COS Geographical District Responsibilities

• COS Responsibilities (8 CoS Districts)
• Develop maintain Army Standards (criteria) and
  Standard Designs
• Represent Army in facility design decisions
  related to materiel and operational issues
  (DOTMLPF), i.e. Program Certification, Project
  Definition, Project Development
• Design Consultant for Geographical Districts
• Prepares RFP Statement of Work (SOW) packages for
  assigned facilities
• Award CoS contracts maintain KO authority or
  delegate as deemed appropriate to Geographic
  Districts
• Manage/monitor the Program for facility
  uniformity and consistency
• Incorporate lesson learned
• Geographical District Responsibilities (All
  Districts)
• Retain PM Responsibilities
• Manage / distribute project PD Funds
• Develop project specific requirements site,
  utilities, environmental coordination,
  geotechnical investigation, and topographical
  survey
• Coordinate local installation / DPW requirements
• Manage execution of projects in AOR
• Perform construction supervision (ACO on COS
  facilities)

30
SAS Adapt-Build (A-B) Approach for FY-09

• Adapt-Build Solicitation Language
• An Adapt-Build Model for a TEMFCOFBn/BdeHQ,
  which contains a fully developed design,
  including a Building Information Model (BIM), 2-D
  CADD files, and specifications, can be downloaded
  from the following FTP site ftp//ftp.usace.arm
  y.mil/pub/sas/TEMF/ ftp//ftp.usace.army.mil/pub
  /sas/COF/ ftp//ftp.usace.army.mil/pub/sas/BDE-B
  N_HQ/. This design is provided as a guide that
  exemplifies a technically suitable product and
  incorporates mandatory functional/operational
  requirements for a similar (although perhaps not
  an exact) facility to be constructed under this
  solicitation. It will be left to the offerors'
  discretion if, and how, they will use the sample
  design provided to satisfy the requirements of
  this Request for Proposal. This model is not
  intended to modify or over-ride specific
  requirements of this RFP and, under all
  circumstances, it will be incumbent upon the
  successful offeror to adhere to the site specific
  scope and functional/operational requirements
  specified within the RFP. Neither this statement
  of work, nor the adapt-build model, are intended
  to diminish the offerors responsiblities under
  the clauses titled Responsibility of the
  Contractor for Design, Warranty of Design, and
  Construction Role During Design. The successful
  offeror shall be the designer-of-record and shall
  be responsible for the final design and
  construction product, including but not limited
  to, adherence to the installation architectural
  theme, building code compliance and suitability
  of the engineering systems provided. The
  government assumes no liability for the model
  design provided and, to the extent it is used by
  an offeror, the offeror will be responsible for
  all aspects of the design as designer-of-record.