Water Resource Construction Costs Could Be Reduced if Value Engineering Were Applied to More Designs and Applied Earlier in the Design Process
RCED-83-127
Published: May 11, 1983. Publicly Released: May 11, 1983.
Skip to Highlights
Highlights
GAO evaluated the effectiveness of the Corps of Engineers' in-house value engineering (VE) program to identify whether opportunities exist to increase VE savings on water project construction.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of the Army | The Secretary of the Army should direct the Chief of Engineers to require that: (1) only water project designs with estimated construction costs exceeding $1 million be considered for VE review unless district management determines that resources are available to review designs of lower cost projects or, in their opinion, circumstances warrant the expenditure of resources for such reviews; and (2) such reviews be done early in the design process, when General Design Memorandums and/or Feature Design Memorandums are approved. |
Closed – Implemented
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of the Army | The Secretary of the Army should direct the Chief of Engineers to provide guidance to field offices on how they can more effectively use resources to review designs for VE savings. The guidance should provide field offices alternatives which, taken either singly or in combination, could result in VE being applied to more designs. Alternatives that should be considered for inclusion in the guidance are reassigning existing staff to do VE workshops and identifying and using VE expertise in other districts when workload permits. |
Closed – Implemented
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
Full Report
Office of Public Affairs
Topics
Construction costsCost analysisEvaluation criteriaProgram evaluationValue engineeringWater conservationEngineersConstructionEngineeringMilitary forces