CEMP-ET

Engineer Pamphlet

1110-3-6

Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

EP 1110-3-6

14 August 1992

Engineering and Design

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF

ENGINEERS (USACE) TECHNOLOGY

TRANSFER SYSTEMS

Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is 

unlimited.
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EP 1110-3-6

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

CEMP-ET Washington, DC 20314-1000

Pamphlet

No. 1110-3-6 14 August 1992

Engineering and Design

UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

(USACE) TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER SYSTEMS

1. Purpose. This pamphlet identifies various methods for design

and construction technology transfer available to USACE and other

Army agencies. Technology transfer within USACE is defined as a

system of processes, both formal and informal, that provides a

structured approach for developing, submitting, and achieving

modifications and additions to technical criteria, standards, and

policy. Further, this pamphlet provides references and rationale

for both formal and informal modes of technology transfer. Policy

and procedures for the formal modes of technology transfer are

governed by the documents referenced below.

2. Applicability. This pamphlet is applicable to HQUSACE/OCE

elements, major subordinate commands, districts, laboratories and

field operating activities (FOA) having responsibility for the

design and construction of military facilities. This pamphlet

neither establishes nor modifies existing policy related to

technology transfer within USACE or other Army agencies.

3. References.

a. 15 USC 3710a et seq..

b. 33 USC 2313.

c. AR 5-17.

d. ER 37-345-10.

e. ER 70-3-9.

f. ER 415-1-13.

g. ER 415-3-11

h. ER 1110-3-109.

i. ER 1110-345-100.

j. ER 1110-345-720.
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

2

k. EP 11-1-3.

l. EP 11-1-4.

m. EP 70-1-3.

4. General. Authority to establish and modify technical USACE

and Army design and construction criteria, standards, policy, and

associated documents promulgated by Headquarters USACE (HQUSACE)

is coordinated through the HQUSACE technical proponent. As with

all other activities, funding for various aspects of technology

transfer is addressed through the general accounting principles

and policies established in ER 37-345-10, Accounting and

Reporting, Military Activities.

a. Primarily, HQUSACE technical documents are developed and

implemented to indicate policy, criteria, standards, and guidance

for design and construction of facilities. These technical

documents are in the form of Department of the Army (DA)

Technical Manuals (TMs), Corps of Engineers Guide Specifications

(CEGS), Architectural and Engineering Instructions (AEI) issued

by HQUSACE, DA Standard Facility Designs, and Engineering

Technical Letters (ETLs). These documents are generally developed

in coordination with USACE MSCs, District Commands, Centers of

Expertise, and the private sector.

b. Except when otherwise directed, the use of such

technical documents is mandatory for design and construction of

Army projects, but is applicable to Air Force, Navy, "HTRW" and

"work for others" projects when so indicated. However, for some

types of projects, such as commercially financed facilities

(CFF), individual project planning, justification, and approval

documentation may specifically exempt a given project from the

mandatory use of some or all USACE technical documents.

5. Methods of Technology Transfer. There are a number of

methods by which technology can be formally or informally

transferred within the Army and USACE. Formal methods

established by DA or HQUSACE to encourage participation in those

processes by HQUSACE, MSC, district commands, and others are

summarized below:

a. ENG FORM 3078. Recommended Change to Engineering

Documents. ENG FORM 3078 is a major engineering feedback program

vehicle. It is used to recommend changes to documents

promulgated by HQUSACE, such as TMs, guide specifications,

standard and definitive drawings, design guides, and other
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

3

criteria documents for military construction (see ER 37-345-10,

Design Policy for Military Construction, and ER 1110-345-100,

Specifications). It identifies the document recommended for

change, showing the chain of command for submission; and it

provides problem and recommended solution statements , and

various comments and recommendations of USACE elements in the

approval process. Form may be submitted by any USACE element

through their chain of command to HQUSACE (CEMP-EA). The

submitter should send an advance copy of the completed ENG FORM

to HQUSACE (CEMP-EA) concurrent with submission to the Major

Subordinate Command (division office). In the evaluation

process, each intermediate reviewing echelon is required to

provide an independent evaluation and recommendation on ENG FORM

3078A to the next higher echelon within USACE.

b. The Army Suggestion Program. This program is sponsored

by DA under the auspices of AR 5-17, The Army Ideas of Excellence

Program. The intent of this program is to encourage DA employees

to recommend improvements in the manner by which the Army does

business. Incentives provided by DA for employees to make

recommendations for improvements suitable for implementation

through this program are listed in AR 5-17. The program permits

DA employees to address technical as well as procedural areas of

Army operations. Where the use of the suggestion program is

considered suitable for the area of concern, the use of DA FORM

1045 (for submitting a suggestion) and DA FORM 2440 (for

evaluating a suggestion) are prescribed by that AR. Note that

there may be an economic incentive for both the suggestor and the

Government to achieve such savings, depending upon the criteria

established for such a determination in AR 5-17. As with ENG

FORM 3078, intermediate reviewing echelons must provide

independent evaluations and recommendations to the next higher

echelon on DA FORM 2440.

c. Research and Development (R&D). Improvements are often

made to USACE technical policy, standards, criteria, and guidance

through the R&D process. ER 70-3-9, Management and Execution of

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Military Research, Development,

Test, and Evaluation (RDTE) Program, provides details on the

responsibilities of all USACE elements in the research and

development arena. Efforts through this process can be initiated

by individuals or user groups, either within or outside USACE,

e.g., MACOM or installation personnel. The process begins with

the determination of the need for an improvement that requires

research and possibly development of a new method, material, or

procedure related to design, construction, or operations and

maintenance of Army facilities. An annual R&D programming

process is sponsored by
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

4

HQUSACE, involving HQUSACE technical proponents and Research and

Development Directorate personnel, plus laboratory staff members,

in conjunction with a combination of USACE MSC and District

Command, Major Army Command (MACOM), and Army Installation

personnel. This process provides a means for recommending and

confirming the need for new research, and the establishment of a

priority and funding level for each recommended project each

fiscal year. A Mission Area Deficiency Statement (MADS) is

developed to express the need for a research project. Once the

need for a research project is confirmed by laboratory personnel,

working in coordination with the HQUSACE technical proponent and

research directorate personnel, project scope and funding levels

by fiscal year are developed. A technology transfer plan is

developed between the laboratory principal investigator and the

HQUSACE technical proponent to insure that the research product

can be readily absorbed into the USACE criteria and standards

data base once the research is completed. Thus, R&D project

initiators (whether individuals or user groups), technical

proponents and research area personnel can participate in a

cradle-to-grave initiation and development of each research

project. This includes the modification or development of

revised technical policy based upon the results of that research

project. Within the general structure of the USACE R&D program

are the Facilities Engineering Applications Program (FEAP) and

the Construction Productivity Advancement Research (CPAR)

Program. These are briefly described below:

(1) Facilities Engineering Application Program (FEAP): The

purpose of FEAP is to transfer new and emerging technologies from

the research environment directly to users at installations. FEAP

provides for the demonstration of such technologies in the field

to determine whether or not they will work as well in the

operating environment as predicted by research results. Field

results are used to determine potential savings in money or

energy, or their effectiveness in attaining a greater efficiency

of operation than technologies already in place. User guides are

developed as a further result of the hands-on field experience

obtained through FEAP, with the overall goal of permitting

installation users to use the technologies being demonstrated.

FEAP demonstrations are conducted in seven areas, i.e.,

buildings, corrosion, energy, environmental quality, management,

natural resources, and pavements and railroads.

(2) Construction Productivity Advancement Research (CPAR)

Program: The CPAR program resulted from the Water Resources

Development Act of 1988, 33 USC 2313, Section 7; and the

Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980, as amended by 
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

5

15 USC 3710a wt seq. The CPAR program provides a joint-venture

R&D arena, where USACE and the private sector combine resources

to enter into a cost-shared R&D partnership. The private sector

partners can be representatives of the construction industry,

professional societies, state and local governments, academe, and

any other organization interested in construction productivity

and competitiveness. Projects proposed for the CPAR program must

address issues that fall within USACE mission responsibilities,

reflecting needs in four primary areas of USACE interest, i.e.,

planning and design improvement, improved construction site

productivity, advanced materials, and methods of transferring new

or emerging technology into construction industry operations for

commercialization.

d. Installation Support One-Stop R&D Service. The total

range of technology addressed by the USACE R&D community has been

divided into selected research areas. Information concerning

research either completed or being performed in each such area is

available from a point of contact (POC) specifically designated

for that purpose. EP 70-1-3, Installation Support One-Stop R&D

Service, was developed to make that list of POCs available to

those interested in one or more specific research areas. That EP

provides the reader with listings of the research areas addressed

and the name, telephone number, and organizational element of the

POCs for those areas. Those interested in determining what has

or is being addressed in each research area, needing assistance

in applying research results to specific problem areas, or

believing that there is a need for R&D in a specific area need

only telephone the POC to obtain information on that subject.

Note that such advice is free of charge, unless travel cost or

assistance in excess of two work days of effort is required. In

such cases, assistance will be provided on a reimbursable basis.

e. Value Engineering. In those instances where contracts

include a Value Engineering clause, the project contractor is

encouraged to submit proposals for alternative methods or

materials used in construction that can result in decreased

construction costs without compromising quality, safety, or other

required performance features of the project.

(1) EP 11-1-3, Value Engineering Officer's Operational

Guide, addresses the functions and responsibilities of USACE

Value Engineering Officers. EP 11-1-4, Value Engineering

Benefits and the Construction Contractor, addresses the value of

the program to the construction industry in general and

descriptive terms, and encourages contractors to assist USACE in

obtaining shared benefits from construction cost savings

resulting from Value Engineering proposals.
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

6

(2) In essence, where the safety, quality of construction,

or other required performance features of the project will not be

compromised by the use of a construction material or method not

reflected as being acceptable within the terms of a specific

contract, the contractor has the opportunity to propose that a

less costly, alternative material or method be substituted for

that specified. Such proposals are evaluated by the appropriate

USACE elements, and, where approved for use in a specific

project, the cost savings resulting from the substitution, less

the contractor's costs to implement the proposal, are divided

equally between the Government and the contractor. As a result,

there is an economic incentive for both the contractor and the

Government to achieve such savings. Coincidentally, where the use

of a less costly material or method can be applied to other

projects on a broader geographic basis, the use of ENG FORM 3078,

cited above, is an excellent vehicle for advising HQUSACE of the

desirability to incorporate such a new or different material or

method into the USACE criteria system, such as in guide

specifications.

f. Design and Construction Evaluation Reporting. ER 415-1-

13, Design and Construction Evaluation (DCE), describes the DCE

management and reporting system in place within USACE.

(1) One basic purpose of the DCE management and reporting

system is to acquire feedback from construction projects that can

result in improvements to USACE technical guidance and

construction management systems. This system uses the evaluation

team approach, where team members normally consist of HQUSACE

engineering and construction discipline staff members, often

supplemented by MSC and DC staff members. The team evaluates the

design, construction, and criteria associated with

a number of ongoing construction projects at various sites within

an MSC's geographic boundaries. The results of each DEC team

efforts are reviewed by, among others, subject matter technical

proponents at HQUSACE.

(2) In the case of the technology used in the design and

construction processes for any given project, the team reports

are analyzed to determine whether or not improvements to

technical guidance documents, such as CEGS, are needed as a

result of the data obtained from the team. Since the technical

proponent has the team report at hand along with access to the

reporting team member for additional details, it is possible to

issue page changes to such documents without undue delay. As a

result, the benefits from the DCE reporting system can be high,

since the team visits are made periodically throughout each

fiscal year, without relying on individual initiatives, as do
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

7

some other methods of obtaining data on improvements to standards

and criteria.

g. Post Completion/Design Criteria Feedback Inspection. ER

415-3-11, Post Completion Inspection and Design Criteria Feedback

Inspection, addresses another team approach used by USACE in

evaluating the quality of design and construction achieved in the

acquisition of facilities.

(1) Post completion inspections (PCI) are used to identify

deficiencies or defects in the design, construction, materials,

equipment, operability, maintainability, or functional adequacy

of a completed facility that are not discernible until the

projects have been subjected to usage. Such inspections normally

occur approximately six months after occupancy of a facility.

(2) Design criteria feedback inspections (DCFI) are

performed for much the same reasons as post completion

inspections, but normally occur after a facility has been

occupied for two or more years, but before original features have

been obscured by alterations or repairs.

(3) Team constituency of PCI and DCFI includes appropriate

HQUSACE, MSC and DC representatives, plus representatives of the

local Director of Installation and Housing, the user, host and

user Major Army Commands, the Engineering and Housing Support

Center, and other concerned parties.

(4) PCI and DCFI reports are used by appropriate USACE

subject matter proponents to improve design, construction, and

operations and maintenance guidance promulgated by those

proponents for dissemination throughout the Army.

h. Engineering Improvement Recommendation System (EIRS).

The EIRS is an informal system used to disseminate new or

modified design guidance USACE-wide pending incorporation of such

new or revised guidance in permanent media, such as guide

specifications and technical manuals. The document. used in this

dissemination process is the EIRS Bulletin. EIRS bulletins are

developed by HQUSACE subject matter technical proponents, based

upon descriptive reports and analyses received from other USACE

and Army elements, that indicate a need for improvements in

technical guidance on an expedited basis. EIRS bulletins are

published periodically by HQUSACE, and their frequency of

publication and wide dissemination make them an ideal vehicle for

informing all USACE elements of new guidance in a very timely

manner.
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

8

i. Engineering Bulletins (EB). The Engineering Bulletin

process initiated in July 1990 is an informal publication issued

by HQUSACE (CEMP-E). The EB provides a means for sharing

engineering-related information of general interest to the

engineering community, especially USACE engineering personnel.

Items of interest proposed for inclusion in an EB should be

submitted to the HQUSACE technical proponent, or to HQUSACE

(CEMP-EA), if the technical proponent is unknown.

6. Other Formal and Informal Methods of Technology Transfer. In

addition to the formal methods of technology transfer mentioned

above, which are governed by Department of the Army or HQUSACE

guidance, there are a number of less formal and informal

approaches to achieving technology transfer within USACE.

a. Centers of Expertise. The charter for most centers of

expertise includes the function of acting as the executive agent

for HQUSACE in the development of guidance documents such as

those cited in paragraph 4a, above. In that role, those centers

provide draft versions of TMs, CEGS, and similar documents to

industry as well as various USACE MSCS, District Commands, and

other USACE elements for review and comment during document

development. Centers of expertise are listed in ER 1110-3-109,

Corps-Wide Centers of Expertise Assigned to Divisions and

Districts. Where appropriate, industry forums are held for the

purpose of discussing comments on draft documents provided to

industry. The feedback and comments from all these reviewing

organizations make the transfer of proven new and emerging

technologies a relatively easy process conducted during normal

guidance document development or update activities.

b. Technical Workshops. Periodic technical workshops, such

as those held at annual or biennial technical disciplinary

conferences, provide a forum for USACE field office personnel to

present new and emerging technologies being used or studied by

their organizational element. These workshops also provide a

venue for USACE field personnel to suggest that HQUSACE examine

new technologies within the structure of more formal settings,

such as by inclusion in the formal R&D program.

Feedback and comments from workshop participants provide HQUSACE

with additional information needed to determine technology

transfer directions in future year programs.

c. Professional Society and Symposium Participation. As a

result of attending professional society meetings and symposia,

USACE personnel become familiar with new and emerging

technologies being considered within the private sector. Efforts

being expended within the private sector can be applied to USACE
EP 1110-3-6

14 Aug 92

9

mission and needs. Such participation can save scarce resources

that might otherwise be expended on parallel efforts within

USACE, and permit those resources to be used in other areas where

needed.

7. Technology Transfer Continuity. Important to the success of

all technology transfer systems is the continuity between those

who use the systems and HQUSACE technical proponents. No matter

which transfer mode is used, the proposer of the technology and

the HQUSACE technical proponent are key players. When a new

technology is proposed, the HQUSACE technical proponent applies

expertise and technical judgment, and is involved in the decision

on applicability and transfer method to be used. The technical

proponent at HQUSACE is responsible for ensuring that the

appropriate guidance documents are developed or modified to

reflect new technology as it is approved for adoption. The

processes outlined in this pamphlet and the involvement of the

HQUSACE technical proponent are critical to ensure that USACE

policy, standards, criteria, and guidance remain viable, yet

flexible.

8. Distribution. In addition to the normal distribution

afforded Engineering Pamphlets, this EP should be circulated to

all MSC and District Command individuals involved technically

with design and construction for the Army. This information

should also be shared freely with architect-engineer firms and

others who have dealings that involve design and construction

with USACE elements.

FOR THE COMMANDER: