Introduction
The U.S. Army recently opened the Terry L. Wilson Battle Command Training Center (BCTC) at Fort Wainwright, Alaska. The development process began shortly after 9/11. The programming, design, and construction methodologies for this $42 million, 115,000-square-foot facility were as innovative as the war-fighting techniques curriculum for which it was built. Both were driven by the same requirement: deploy fully-trained Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT) infantry units by the end of 2004, within 36 months. The successful completion and use of the project beyond its expectations justifies sharing some of the lessons learned for approaching complex development projects with multiple stakeholders and aggressive schedules.

Background
This is the first facility of its kind. It is devoted to training forces to make them capable of utilizing the newly developed Stryker vehicle with next-generation technology used to share critical battlefield information. Each vehicle is outfitted with global positioning devices to continuously transmit its status. Multiple data systems display integrated and updated intelligence about the location, strength, and recent activities of enemy forces as well as friendly forces. With instantaneous communication of battlefield conditions, commanders direct maneuvers for execution by multiple units made up of multiple vehicles supporting a common objective.

As the first prototype vehicles were rolling off the production line for testing and refinement by the first and second Stryker Brigades at Fort Polk and Fort Lewis, tactical specialists were brainstorming and designing the training curriculum. Progressive scenarios were used to develop full situational competency for the brigade within three to six months of beginning training. A decision was made that two more units would be stationed in Hawaii and Alaska under the command of the U.S. Army Pacific. Soon after, representatives of the various stakeholder organizations assembled under the leadership of the Alaska District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to develop a strategy. Given three to six months for commissioning, move-in, and set-up for the first trainees, the new facility needed to be complete at the beginning of 2004, within 24 months.

Preliminary Schedule
The following preliminary schedule was discussed for planning purposes:
·Design-Build Team Award Jul 02
·100% Design Complete 31 Oct 02
·Start Construction Jan 03
·Beneficial Occupancy Date Jan 04

Although the initial thinking was that a design-build acquisition strategy could expedite the July 02 award, based on less than 100% complete design documents, several problems were inherent with the schedule. These had to be addressed at the outset and included:
1. How to develop design criteria for facilities to support a training doctrine for soldiers to use on a new-generation fighting vehicle that would not exist for another six months.
2. How to mitigate the potential impacts of weather-related risks for a project that would start and end in successive winter seasons in Fairbanks, where -45� F is the norm.
3. Whether it was possible to do work on-site during summer 2002, before September, when winter begins.
4. Assuming pending congressional approval once a budget and scope was defined, whether a request for proposal (RFP) could be ready by mid-April to allow six weeks for proposal development followed by four weeks for government evaluation and award.

Problem-Solving Approach
Early-on, the focus on integration of various team elements necessary for flawless mission execution on the battle field drove the approach taken for programming, design, and construction. The Alaska District's standard business practice of utilizing charrette processes for project definition and design development seemed well-suited for the project. The processes flow as follows.

A Certified Value Specialist (CVS) facilitates workshop to integrate the various stakeholders' viewpoints about project requirements to develop a partnering agreement. The function analysis technique used by the CVS eliminates jargon and provides clarity for disparate disciplines and backgrounds. It fosters a shared understanding of the project elements that results in enhanced communication and commitment to execute the project as agreed.

Project Development Schedule
The following schedule was used to facilitate information gathering and schedule adherence:
·Planning and Programming Charrette 10-21 Feb 02
·Value-Based Design Charrette 18-22 Mar 02
·Design-Build RFP Complete 15 Apr 02
·Receive Design-Build Proposals Jun 02
·Design-Build Award Jul 02
·100% Design Complete 31 Oct 02
·Start Construction Jan 03
·Beneficial Occupancy Date Jan 04

Initial assumptions would be validated in a programming charrette to prepare a scope description and budget for congressional approval. After the basic scope and budget were approved, a Value-Based Design Charrette (VBDC) would be held. The VBDC combines a value engineering study with a design charrette and integrates sustainable elements and life-cycle cost considerations. The VBDC workshop would kick-off with the development of a baseline design solution and detailed cost estimate for the project. The function analysis technique relates higher-order objectives ("why") to lower-order deign solutions ("how"). It leads to brainstorming amongst the various subject area experts to identify alternatives that improve value (the ratio of function over cost). Once the alternatives are developed, they are reviewed by the group and implementation decisions are made via consensus. The baseline design is then revised to reflect the accepted alternatives. The workshop culminates with partnering agreement approval that authorizes the team to move forward with the optimized design solution.

Next, the design team works with the agencies involved in preparing a design-build request for proposal (RFP) for consideration by pre-qualified contractors that have teamed with architects and engineers. These design-build teams have been selected for multiple-award task order contracts (MATOCs) with sufficient bonding capacity to complete various military construction (MILCON) program projects offered by the district.

Planning Charrette (10-21 Feb 02)
Olympic Associates Company (OAC) facilitated the three-step planning charrette for developing the programs for the two new facilities in Hawaii and Alaska. The designers for Hawaii were an in-house team from the USACE Honolulu District. The designers for Alaska were from the RIM/KPB Joint Venture in Anchorage. These design and project definition teams from each location visited existing heavy-armor training facilities and met with the trainers at Fort Hood, Texas, followed by Fort Lewis, Washington. The result was a shared understanding by the Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, and Fort Wainwright, Alaska, teams of the facilities required for current state-of-the-art digital simulation training. Individuals are trained on fundamental techniques that build to group strategic exercises. The two teams returned to Hawaii and Alaska and met with local subject area experts to refine and finalize the program and budget for each location.

VBDC (18-22 Mar 02)
After the program was approved, OAC continued the facilitation process with the Alaska team in a five-day combined design charrette and value engineering study. With the fresh understanding of the design criteria for training facilities gained just a month before from the programming effort, the team developed a more detailed design solution and estimated construction cost. Implemented value engineering alternatives worth $2.6 million in savings resulted in increases in the sustainability features of the project and mitigated the impact of starting construction during the sub-arctic Alaskan winter.

Sustainable Construction and Life-Cycle Cost Considerations
The USACE's SPiRiT rating system is applied every project it undertakes. It is nearly identical to the LEED Rating SystemT. The VBDC process inherently incorporates sustainable enhancement of projects. All five sustainable categories were applied to the BCTC project, including sustainable site selection, water efficiency, energy usage and atmosphere impacts, materials and resource conservation, and indoor environmental quality. While emphasizing function within first-cost expenditures, VBDC project optimization also incorporates life-cycle costs in its examination of overall project costs. The VBDC ties long-term maintenance costs and resource usage to sustainable project elements.

Post-VBDC Schedule
·Planning and Programming Charrette 10-21 Feb 02
·Value-Based Design Charrette 18-22 Mar 02
·Award 100% Design Contract Mod Apr 02
·100% Design Complete 31 Oct 02
·Construction Contract Award 31 Dec 02
·Start Construction Jan 03
·Beneficial Occupancy Date Jan 04

The preliminary construction schedule that had the project ready for occupancy a year too late was revised by switching to a drilled-steel-pile foundation system that was less weather-dependent than spread-concrete footings and afforded the ability to get building enclosed and heated sooner. Modifying the RIM/KPB Joint Venture Architects contract so they could complete the 100% design replaced "down-time" that would have been taken up with the design-build source selection process. Expedited over-the-shoulder, desk-top reviews by the Government kept the project momentum at the highest level possible and allowed the construction contract award by the end of 2002.

Construction Collaboration (Jan 03-04)
The Alaska District continued RIM/KPB Joint Venture's full-time involvement to further expedite the schedule after awarding the construction contract to Waterson Davis JV. Waterson Davis JV joined the core team of U.S. Army Garrison Alaska (USAGAK), USACE Alaska District and RIM/KPB Joint Venture Architects to work together to deliver the project using the project delivery team concept. Key personnel that had begun their involvement during the early stages of project definition maintained their commitment in order to see the execution of the vision developed during the earlier charrettes.

Occupancy
Now that this facility has been in operation for more than a year as the keystone of the Fort Wainwright Stryker Brigade, one of the unexpected developments has been the total acceptance and pride that military families have for it. The generous spaces with their durable, high quality finishes, lighting, and other systems celebrate contemporary architecture. Features include translucent conference room walls adjoining lobby spaces on the first and second floors. The building is now the favorite venue at Fort Wainwright for special meetings and receptions.

Lessons Learned
VBDCs define project requirements and obtain agreement between the decision makers regarding project approach in short timeframes. VBDCs combine the tools of value engineering, design charrettes, and partnering processes in a creative environment. The process focuses the project team on balancing goals and objectives with available resources to meet the mission of a project. Initiating VBDCs as project objectives are determined facilitates early agreement on project functions and sets a clear target for all further project development.