2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/2009-gn-pamphlet-18aug09 1/30

U.S. Army

Corps of EngineersWashington, D.C. 20314

2009

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Table of Contents

Value Engineering Cost Avoidance and Savings ............................................... 3

History, Mission and Policy ................................................................................ 4

Training in Value Engineering ............................................................................ 5

Value Engineering Job Plan ............................................................................... 6

Contractor Participation ..................................................................................... 8

Military Construction Projects ............................................................................ 9

Civil Works Projects ......................................................................................... 15

Work for Other Projects ................................................................................... 25

Contractor Participation ................................................................................... 28

2

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


ON THE COVERCommand & General Staff College, Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas.

See page 10 for details.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

$ in

Millions

1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Fiscal Year

Cumulative Value Engineering Cost Avoidance and Savings

The USACE VM/VE Program has been a leader in applying the ValueEngineering Methodology to construction projects since 1964, solidlydemonstrating Corps cost effectiveness. The program has resulted inconstruction of over $5.3 billion in additional facilities, without additional fundsrequests. It has also assured added quality within available resources. Corps ofEngineer sponsored workshops have documented cost savings and avoidanceover recent years from $140 million to almost $500 million per year.

The Corps has recently used Value Management/Value Engineering:programmatically to create and implement transformation in how the Corpsexecutes all Military Programs workload; to shorten schedules significantly, and

provide quality projects with reduced budgets; to ensure full project coordinationwith all stakeholders; to assist in preparing project scopes, negotiatingenvironmental contracts, planning optimization, and project review; to provideplanning assistance to states/communities; and to assist in program reviews.The results shown above are simply documented, auditable byproducts, used tobuild and/or enhance authorized projects or reduce reprogramming actions.

3

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


History, Mission and Policy

History:

The concept of Value Engineering (VE) was first developed by Mr.Lawrence D. Miles, an engineer for General Electric Company. He created thistechnique in response to critical material shortages during World War II. Mr.Miles recognized that proper analysis of a product’s function often led toimproved performance and cost savings as alternative materials ormanufacturing methods were discovered and employed. This formal, organizedstudy of functions to satisfy the user’s needs at the lowest life cycle costs throughapplied creativity has saved money and/or improved quality for companies andgovernment ever since.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has been actively applyingValue Engineering to its work since 1964. The Corps’ program includes VEstudies, construction contractor Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECP),and a formal training program. All Corps designs and construction have seendramatic improvements in quality and cost effectiveness as a result of VE.

Mission:

The Corps is responsible for billions of dollars worth of annual design and

construction, and has a deep commitment to assure that the public receivesmaximum value for these funds. VE documents the Corps’ cost effectiveness andhelps ensure optimum expenditure.

Policy:

Corps policy is to perform VE on all design and construction programs,and is based on the Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 432), the WaterResources Development Act of 1986, the Office of Management and BudgetCircular A-131 and Department of Defense strategic plans.

4

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Training in Value

The Corps of Engineers makes a concentrated effort to provide itsemployees the knowledge and experience of VE methodology. To that end, theCorps developed a 40-hour construction-oriented VE workshop in 1968. Sincethat time over 7,000 Corps employees have received this VE training, along withmany employees from other Federal agencies.

The workshop has been revised many times over the years to keep itcurrent. Several different government agencies, including the Department ofEnergy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Defense Nuclear Agency, theCoast Guard and the Navy have utilized the Corps’ workshop to train theiremployees. Private contractors and designers have also attended.

The workshop format covers requirements, policies and proceduresnecessary to enable the participants to perform effectively as a VE study teammember. Through lectures and practical application sessions, the courseprovides the history of VE and its development in the Corps. Team dynamics,human relations, and creative thinking are also presented. These topics helpstudents become valuable assets to their organizations by teaching them to useVE techniques in their everyday job situations.

Approximately half of the training is devoted to workshop sessions inwhich all participants gain experience in performing a VE study on actual

construction projects. Each student is assigned to a team at the beginning of theworkshop based on experience and work history. The team is responsible forusing the knowledge gained during the lectures to complete their VE study.Gathering information, brainstorming alternatives, analyzing ideas, developingproposals, and making an oral presentation of the recommendations are a part ofa completed workshop experience. The concept of working with other people in acooperative manner to develop solutions is a key aspect of the training.

The Corps’ 40-hour workshops have been instrumental in accomplishingits goal of providing the highest quality product for the lowest life cycle cost. Formore information about Corps VE training, contact Judy Armstrong at the USACE

Learning Center 256-895-7419.

5

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

The Corps of Engineers uses the Project Management Business Process(PMBP) as its delivery method for all projects. Each project has a project

manager (PM) who leads the Project Delivery Team (PDT).

The Value Engineer is a member of the Project Delivery Team and as a teammember provides advice to the team on how to best apply value managementprincipals to the project. The value engineer then works with the team in theapplication of the selected technique.

VE Job PlanValue Methodology is a systematic process that follows the Job Plan. The JobPlan consists of the following sequential phases:

Phase 1 - Information PhaseProject information is gathered and reviewed to ensure that all teammembers completely understand the current state of the project andconstraints that influence project decisions. At this stage questions suchas “What is it?”, “What does it do?” and “What does it cost?” areanswered. It is critical that correct information be obtained at this timeotherwise alternatives developed later will not suitably accomplish therequired functions. A site visit should be performed in the informationphase if at all possible.

Phase 2 - Function Analysis PhaseThe team identifies the project functions using the two-word active verb/measurable noun descriptors. This phase will help the team answer thequestion “What must it do?” During this phase the team may utilize theFunction Analysis System Technique (FAST) Diagram method todetermine relationships between the functions as well as the value andvalidity of the functions.

Phase 3 - Creative PhaseDuring this phase the value study team brainstorms alternative methods ofachieving the project’s requirement functions. At this point, other ideasthat could perform the basic function(s) are suggested for furtherconsideration thus the team answers the question “What else can perform

6

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


this function?” Because criticism can discourage participation, decreasethe identification of alternatives, and inhibit the creative endeavor, all ideasare captured but are not evaluated at this time. The flow of ideageneration is important at this time as one team member may spur thegeneration of an idea from another team member. Also, one team member

may build upon the idea of another team member, a technique known as“piggybacking”.

Phase 4 - Evaluation PhaseIn this phase the study team reduces the quantity of ideas generated inthe creative phase to a short list of ideas with greatest potential to improvethe function of the project. In some cases ideas are refined and/or newsuggestions are developed. The retained alternatives are ranked in orderof feasibility and cost while unsuitable ones are recorded but not furtherdeveloped.

Phase 5 - Development Phase At this point, the best alternatives are developed into formal writtenproposals. Alternatives are explored sufficiently to demonstrate technicalviability, provide reasonably accurate cost estimates to answer thequestion, “What is the cost of the alternative?” determine advantages anddisadvantages, and facilitate design documentation and construction. Thework under consideration, before and after conditions, and advantagesand disadvantages must be addressed in a clear, concise, and factualmanner. Identifying follow up actions should address potentialimplementation problems.

Phase 6 - Presentation PhaseThis phase consists of presenting the developed proposals in a formalpresentation to decision makers. It is the value study team’s opportunity to“sell” the proposals to the decision makers, stakeholders, customers anddesign team.

Implementation: During implementation, approved value proposals obtainedfrom the six-phase job plan are converted into actions. This is the most criticalactivity after the job plan is complete. If implementation is not successful thenthere is no value improvement and the study will have proven unproductive. Thecollection of proposals recommended during the value study must be developedinto plans and specifications by project managers and designers in order toachieve value improvement. Delays must be minimized and misconceptions mustbe eliminated to ensure realization of the improvements brought about by thevalue process. Proper scheduling and follow-up discussions are critical toimplementation success.

7

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Contractor Participation

Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECP):

Through their experience, contractors often have ideas on how toconstruct a project component differently than required by the contract. Forexample, a particular idea may focus on other methods of construction, differentmaterials, or alternative component arrangements. To gain the benefit of theirexperience, the Corps strongly encourages contractor participation in its VEprogram. The contractor increases its profit and the government reduces itscost.

The avenue provided for contracts is called the Value Engineering ChangeProposal (VECP) clause. Mandated for use in all contracts exceeding $100,000

(and optional in contracts less than $100,000), the VECP clause specifiesrequirements for contractors to submit alternatives to required construction work.The VECP must satisfy the required function, at an equal or better quality, and ata reduced cost.

The VECP program is an incentive-based process. The contract costreduction, called the Instant Contract Savings, on VECPs accepted andimplemented by the Corps is shared with the contractor. This provides thecontractor with a fair payment price for the work performed, plus a “bonus,” ofsorts, in the form of an additional payment for the savings associated with theVECP.

Contractor participation through VECPs remains a cornerstone of theCorps’ VE program. It has proven to be an excellent means of partnering with acontractor and obtaining the highest value for the Federal construction dollar. Tofacilitate contractors in the development of VECPs, the Corps provides its VECPpamphlet, EP-11-4.

8

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering studies have added value to all types of militaryconstruction projects ensuring added quality within available resources.Value Engineering studies on design build request for proposals (RFP)identify overly prescriptive conditions and contracting wording whichcause a contractor to bid unnecessarily higher.

For the traditional design-bid-build type of procurements value engineeringstudies on the design have resulted in cost avoidance used to increase quality

M i l i t a r

y C o n s t r u

c t i o n

or reduce unexpected cost overages.

Value Engineering provides many services during the design charrette• Development of agenda• Development of parametric and baseline cost estimate• Facilitation and administration of the charrette• Identification of funding shortfalls• Creative Value Engineering Brainstorming Session

• Charrette Report Development• Outbriefing

Examples are given in this section.

Lewis and Clark Center, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas ................................ 10Human Performance Wing, Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio ......................... 11

Center of Standardization, Battalion/Brigade Headquarters .................... 12Groundwater Treatment Plant, Hawthorne, Nevada ................................ 13General Instructional Building, Presidio of Monterey, CA ........................ 14

9

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Kansas City District Lewis and Clark Center

Command & General Staff College, Ft. Leavenworth, KS

Project Descrip tion:The hillside location will make theCommand and General Staff Collegebuilding the crown jewel and focal pointof the CGSC campus. From itsprestigious site on the southern hillside,it will be on prominent display,overlooking the Missouri River valleyand welcoming visitors entering FortLeavenworth through the ShermanGate.

Featured Proposals• The significant proposal was to

relocate the building.

Estimated Project Cost: $150 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 7Total VE Cost Avoidance: $19 mill ion

10

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Louisville DistrictHuman Performance Wing

Wright Patterson AFB

Project Description:Eight new Base Realignment andClosure (BRAC) projects will result incollocation of five existing Air Forceand Navy organizations comprisingeducation, research and clinicalelements at WPAFB. The eight projectswere bundled together for the VEstudy.

2008 Department of DefenseSpecial Award for Interagency Effort Louisville District USACE, Air Force andNavy were awarded this honor for theirwork on this project.

Featured Proposals• Establish a Construction "Free Zone",

a contractors work site outside thebase security area

• Extended construction duration to

allow the contractor greater flexibilityin scheduling the work

Estimated Project Cost: $208.7 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 30Total VE Cost Avoidance: $56 mill ion

11

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Savannah / MobileBattalion / Brigade Headquarters

Featured Proposals• Open office area relocated to exterior

resulting in more natural light• Single story classrooms

Project Descript ion:Standard “statement of work” forBattalion/Brigade Headquartersfacilities to be constructed CONUSwide.

Conceptual Isometric from VE Study

Estimated Project Cost: Not project specific –based on a standard design

Total number of proposals approved: 25Total VE Cost Avoidance: $1.5 mill ion

12

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Sacramento DistrictGroundwater Treatment Plant

Hawthorne Army Depot , Nevada

Project Descrip tion:Build a groundwater treatment plantcapable of treating arsenic andfluoride. Project is to includedistribution and storage systemsconnecting to the potable watersystem, a water storage tank, water

cooling tower, and buildinginformation systems.

Featured Proposals• Use filter presses in lieu of

evaporative lagoons• Use existing surface water

treatment plant auxiliaryequipment

Estimated Project Cost: $11 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 6Total VE Cost Avoidance: $0.9 mill ion

13

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Sacramento DistrictGeneral Instructional Building VIPresidio of Monterey, California

Project Descript ion:Construct standard criteria GeneralInstruction Building (GIB). The facilityincludes classrooms, staff and facultyoffices, conference room, multi-purpose training area, cultural rooms,curriculum resource areas and otheracademic support areas.

Featured Proposals• Reassess threat analysis to allow

more flexibility in material• Reduce floor-to-floor height while

maintaining all needed functionsand quality

• Use return air plenums forperimeter spaces


14

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


C i v i l W

o r k s P r o j e c t s

For civil works projects value engineering studies are conducted onplans and specifications. In this section are examples of various typesof projects for which value engineering studies have improved the projects.

Marmet Lock Replacement, Belle, West Virginia ..................................... 16Little Goose Temporary Spillway Weir, Washington ................................ 17The Dalles Spillway Extension, The Dalles, Oregon ................................ 18Elk Creek Lake Fish Passage Corridor, Oregon ...................................... 19Los Angeles County Drainage Area, Los Angeles, CA ............................ 20Santa Ana Pueblo Riparian/Wetland Restoration Project Bernalillo, NM . 21 Portuguese & Bucana Rivers Project, Ponce, Puerto Rico ..................... 22Southeast Louisiana Flood Control (SELA), Harahan, LA ....................... 23Tuttle Creek Dam, Manhattan, Kansas .................................................... 24

15

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Marmet Lock Replacement ProjectMarmet was the busiest lock in thenation in 2005 and 2006 according toboth hardware operations and lockagesutilizing twin lock chambers measuring56'x360' which were opened foroperation in 1934. The project includesconstruction of an additional 110’x 800’lock landward of the existing locks whichwill be left in place and used as auxiliarylock chambers. The Corps and theContractor maximized the use of ValueEngineering (VE) and the ValueEngineering Change Proposal Program(VECP) to achieve $3.9 million of costavoidance and $2.0 million in VECPsavings for a combined total of $5.9million in savings. The project earned the2006 DoD VE Achievement Award in thespecial category.

Featured Proposals• Use rock from

existing dike andexcavation to buildnew dike –$1,752,000

• Construct deflectordike with stone fromexisting dike or rockexcavation. Core ofnew dike can beconstructed fromexcavated rock andcapped with stonefrom existingdeflector dike (whichis to be removedunder this contract).

Value EngineeringHuntington District

Marmet Lock Replacement ProjectBelle, West Virginia


(includes $2 mill ion in VECP’s)

16

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Walla Walla Distr ictLit tle Goose Temporary Spi llway Weir (TSW)

Project Description:The Little Goose Lock and Dam arelocated on the Lower Snake River inWashington State. TSW are installed ina spillway bay as a surface bypass, aninnovation designed to attract andsafely pass downstream migrating

juvenile salmon and steelhead (smolts)upstream to below the dams. TheTSW are test structures used to verifyattraction and fish conditionperformance as surrogate systemsprior to installation of permanentstructures.

Featured Proposals• Re-use existing stoplogs instead of

constructing new stoplogs• Relocate the prototype test from bay 2

to bay 1• Combine with another contract to

decrease contract preparation andcontractor mobilization costs

Estimated Project Cost: $6.3 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 1Total VE Cost Avoidance: $2.1M

17

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Portland Distric tThe Dalles Spillway Extension

The Dalles, Oregon

Project Descript ion:The Spillway Extension project goalsare to increase the overall juvenilesalmon survival by reducing thecurrent predation impacts and inaddition repairing an uplifted area ofthe spillway apron.

Featured Proposals• Reduce height of the spill wall• Use chord segment instead of arcs• Use tendons in lieu of rock bolts• Reduce concrete strength in

localized areas• Use grouting instead of secant piles• Cast anchor ducts in precast cells• Improve concrete quality by

reducing amount of tremie concrete

Estimated Project Cost: $38.5 MillionTotal number of proposals approved: 8 (7-Qualitative Improvement)Total VE Cost Avoidance: $3.7 mill ion

18

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Portland Distric tElk Creek Lake Fish Passage Corr idor

Oregon

Project Descrip tion:This project provides passivepassage for anadromous fishincluding Endangered SpeciesCoho salmon and winter andsummer steelhead.

Featured Proposals• Minimize upstream channel

work• Protect existing roller compacted

concrete on the right bank,through the cut at the blast line

• Replace rip-rap with softer bio-engineering approaches

• Revisit the hydraulic model tominimize cut and fill

Estimated Project Cost: $15.0 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 5 (1-Qualitative Improvement)Total VE Cost Avoidance: $3.2 mill ion

19

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value EngineeringLos Angeles District City District

Los Angeles County Drainage Area (LACDA)Los Angeles, CA

Project Descrip tion:

This project upgrades 26 miles ofchannels within the Los AngelesCounty Drainage Area.

Featured Proposals

• Modify bridge nose piers insteadof raising bridges

• Redesign conflux of Los Angeles and Rio Hondo rivers

• Increase height of earth berms• The major proposal was a

suggestion to use physicalmodeling to determine if thenose piers on the bridges couldbe modified instead of raisingthe bridges. Modeling

demonstrated this alternativesolution would work. Return oninvestment was 70 to 1.


20

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Albuquerque Dis tr ict Santa Ana Pueblo Riparian / Wetland Restoration Project

Bernalillo, New Mexico

AfterBefore

Project Descript ion: The purpose of the Santa Ana PuebloRiparian/Wetland Restoration Project isto develop a five mile greenwaycorridor along the Rio Grande Rivernear Bernalillo, New Mexico.

Featured Proposals• Replace over bank armor rock with a

downstream sheet pile wall• Use vinyl sheet pile in lieu of steel

sheet pile

Estimated Project Cost: $3.5 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 5Total VE Cost Avoidance: $0.9 mill ion

21

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value EngineeringJacksonville District

Portuguese Dam / Portuguese & Bucana Rivers ProjectPonce, Puerto Rico

Renderings of Curved RCCDam Before and After Filling

Featured Proposals• The significant proposal was to develop a

gravity Roller Compacted Concrete (RCC)arch dam to replace the double-curvatureconcrete arch section dam

• The new dam section minimizes stressconcentrations due to seismic loading

• The RCC plan eliminated embeddedcooling, joint work and instrumentationrequired for the arch dam, and eliminatedthe trestle system

• On-site quarry plant was replaced withaggregates from off-site supplier

• Accommodate future 50 foot raise inheight for future water supply. The newdam tracked as nearly as possible originalalignment, minimizing foundation andgrout curtain modifications

Project Description:The project is located in south centralPuerto Rico as one of two multi-purpose reservoirs withimprovements providing flood

protection, water supply andrecreations for Ponce andsurrounding areas. The rock foundeddam features a 1,317 foot crestlength and 220 foot height for 12,325acre-feet of reservoir storage. Flooddamage reduction was estimated at$1.9 billion with the project in place.The design was changed from adouble curvature thin concrete archeddam to a gravity Roller Compacted

Concrete (RCC) arch dam.

Estimated Project Cost: $180.1 mill ion(Dam only awarded for construction March 2008)Total number of proposals approved: 1Total VE Savings: $22 mill ion

22

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

New Orleans District Southeast Louisiana Flood Control (SELA)

Pump to the RiverHarahan, LA

SELA – Pump to the River(Pre VE Plan)The original project base planconsisted of ‘traditional’ downstreamcanal enlargements and pump stationcapacity increase. Cost of this planproved to be in excess of flood controlbenefits produced.

DUNCAN P.S.

ELMWOOD P.S.

S UB URB AN P .S . B ONN AB EL P .S.

CANAL NO. 1

CANAL NO. 2

CANAL NO. 3

CANAL NO. 4

CANAL NO. 5

LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN

AREA OF

MOST FREQUENT

FLOODING

VE PlanThis Planning Phase VE Workshopproposed a new upstream pump stationand force main conveyance to divert flow‘uphill’ (non-traditional practice), to theMississippi River in lieu of downstreamcanal and pump station improvements.This configuration proved to be cost-effective and produced significant netproject benefits and was selected as theNational Economic Development (NED)Plan.

DUNCAN P.S.

ELMWOOD P.S.

SUB URBAN P. S. BON NAB EL P. S.

CANAL NO. 1

CANAL NO. 2

CANAL NO. 3

CANAL NO. 4

CANAL NO. 5

LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN

AREA O FMOST FREQUENTFLOODING

PRE-VE PLAN –

CANAL ENLARGEMENT AND

PUMP STATION CAPACITY INCREASE

Estimated Project Cost: $68 mill ionTotal Estimated Present Worth ofProject Benefits Generated from VE Plan: $105 mill ionNet Present Worth of Cost Avoidance(Project Benefits less Cost): $37 mill ion

MISSISSIPPI RIVER

MISSISSIPPI RIVER

VE PROPOSAL-PUMP TO THE RIVER

(NED PLAN)

23

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Kansas City DistrictTuttle Creek Dam

Manhattan, Kansas

Featured Proposals• The revised design replaced

the cutoff wall and theupstream stabilization with aseries of transverse self-hardening cement/bentoniteslurry walls

• Seepage conditions areimproved by burying the relief

well collector ditch andpossibly adding large diameterpumped wells downstream

Project Descrip tion:Stabilize the soil beneath the dam.Given that the earthquake causes thesands beneath the dam to liquefy,one method to address this situationwas to prevent the sands fromliquefying.


24

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering is offered as a service to our customers. In this section areexamples of how other agencies have benefited from value engineering.

W o r k f o r O t h e r s

USDA Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin .................... 26

Riverbank Stabilization at Moccasin Bend, Chattanooga, TN ............. 27

25

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Louisville DistrictUSDA Forest Products Laboratory

Madison, Wisconsin

Project Descrip tion:The Forest ProductsLaboratory is undertaking aprogram to improve thefunctionality of five of itsresearch laboratories and alsoimprove the HVAC systemwithin the main administrativebuilding.

Featured Proposals• Combine EML, composites,

wood preservation, anddurability into one building onthe site to the east of building 1($2,192,000)

• Replace and expand the existingHVAC systems with a newcentralized fan coil system($1,000,000)

U.S. Department of Agriculture projectEstimated Project Cost: $35.8 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 7Total VE Cost Avoidance: $3.2 mill ion

26

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Nashville DistrictRiverbank Stabilization at Moccasin Bend

Chattanooga, Tennessee

Featured Proposals• The selected preferred alternative is

separated into four treatmentsbased on the priority rankings of thearcheological assets along thevarious reaches of the banks of theMoccasin Bend of the TennesseeRiver. Each treatment isdistinguished by the level ofprotection they provide to thearcheological asset below thetreatment.

Project Descript ion:Stabilization of the right descending

riverbank of Moccasin Bend on theTennessee River in order to protect thecultural resources and prevention ofadditional losses of these assets to theriver via erosion and slope failure.

National Park Service projectEstimated Project Cost: $36.9 mill ionTotal number of proposals approved: 4Total VE Cost Avoidance: $23.4 mill ion

27

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


C o n t r a c t o r P a r t i c i p

a t i o n

Rio de Grande Arecibo Flood Damage Reduction Project ............ 29

28

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Jacksonville DistrictRio de Grande Arecibo Flood Damage Reduction Project

Puerto Rico

Project Descript ion:The project provides coastal floodplain

protection with a by-pass diversionchannel from Rio de Arecibo. OriginalPorto Rico Department of Transportationapproval precluded excavation, requiring

jet grouting of poor soils, steel sheetpilewingwalls, and micro-tunneling ofculverts.

Features of VECP Proposals • The VECP solution places six -72”

(1,456 LF) culverts crossing HwyPR-10 by open cut. A temporary 4-lane highway by-pass plan wasaccepted by PR DOT. The simpleropen-cut construction method alsoprovided better quality control withgeo-grid foundation reinforcing,visible joint inspection and testing,and select back-fill of the originalroadbed.

• Care of traffic met emergency

evacuation level of service• Original completion schedule

maintained• Quantitative savings were realized

Estimated Project Cost: $12.8 mill ion (Contract Amount)Total number of proposals approved: 1Total VE Savings: $1.5 mill ion

29

8/12/2019 2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09


Value Engineering

Department of the ArmyHeadquarters

United States ArmyCorps of Engineers

Washington D.C. 20314

Documents

2009 GN Pamphlet 18AUG09