VALUE ENGINEERING

PROGRAM

~ Updated February 2013 ~

CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BUREAU OF ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION
Office of Construction - Quality Assurance Section
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FHWA/CT DOT Endorsement Letter 3

Introduction 4

Value Engineering Program Overview 5

Project Selection 5

VE Analysis Levels 7

Timing 8

Analysis Team 8

Suggested Analysis Procedures 9

Draft and Final Report 12

VE During Construction 13

Program Monitoring and Reporting 13

Appendix A: VE Analysis Requirements Checklist 14

Appendix B: Sample Letter to FHWA 15

Appendix C: FHWA Annual Report Information 16

Appendix D: VE Analysis Request Form 17

Appendix E: VECP Request Form and Checklist 19

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Introduction
Value Engineering (VE) is a systematic process using a team from a variety of disciplines to
improve the value of a project through the analysis of its functions. The functional values of
Transportation projects are usually determined through initial planning and scoping process leaving the
improved value of a project to be realized through the VE process. The VE process incorporates, to the
extent possible, the values of design, construction, maintenance, contractors, state, local and federal
approval agencies, other stakeholders, and the public.

The US Department of Transportation (USDOT) directs all administrations within USDOT to

establish and assign responsibilities for the use of VE within its direct construction and grant programs.
The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) receives federal aid or grants for projects from
agencies under USDOT which have the following criteria:

Federal Highway Administration Highway projects on the NHS of $50 million or more
(FHWA) Bridge projects on the NHS of $40 million or more
Major projects on or off the NHS of $500 million or more
Federal Transit Administration Major Projects - FTA requires VE on major capital projects, and
(FTA) encourages the application of VE techniques to all construction
projects. A major capital project is usually identified during the
grant review process. This may include bus maintenance and
storage facilities over $2 Million.
Federal Railroad Administration Construction projects of sufficient size to offer reasonable
(FRA) opportunities for cost reductions
Federal Aviation Administration Unusually large and/or complex projects are possible candidates
(FAA) for VE analysis.

Projects meeting the selection criteria as stated above must have a documented VE analysis
performed in a timely manner. Failure to conduct a required VE analysis as stipulated by federal
requirements may result in delays in authorization of construction funds and could also jeopardize the
eligibility of the entire project for federal reimbursement.
CTDOT will communicate with the appropriate Federal funding agency to identify and
implement VE analyses on additional projects with characteristics or factors that may offer significant
value. Factors may include more than one alternative, complexity, fast track scheduling, controversial
components, innovation, traffic impacts or scope creep.
Design project characteristics or factors may include but not be limited to cost effective and
efficient modes of transportation, material availability, constructability and mitigation of environmental
issues.
The oversight of the Value Engineering program is administered by the Office of Construction -
Quality Assurance Section (OOC/QA). The Supervising Engineer for the Quality Assurance Section is
designated at the Department’s Value Engineering Program Coordinator. The VE Program Coordinator
is responsible for monitoring, assessing and reporting on the various projects in conjunction with the
Design Project Manager for which VE Analyses are planned and/or conducted.
This document will serve as a guideline to maintain the Value Engineering Program within the
CTDOT. As such, the document itself will be subject to revision and maintenance as needed. Any
modifications/updates to this document should be coordinated by the VE Program Coordinator in

4
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

cooperation with the various Design Project Managers. This update incorporates the 23 CFR Part 627
Final Rulemaking on Value Engineering for the FHWA, effective April 16, 2012, and 2012 MAP-21
Authorization Law, effective October 1, 2012. And the document now includes guidance from other
Federal agencies, including 49 CFR Part 633 pertaining to FRA and Advisory Circular No. 150/5300-
15A pertaining to FAA. The update also addresses administrative changes and additions made by the
Department.

Value Engineering Program Overview

The OOC/QA Section will administer a Value Engineering Program wherein certain projects in
design will be systematically reviewed for potential value and quality improvements. A Value
Engineering Team will meet for a period ranging from one day to one week and present their
recommendations to the Department’s designer(s) for evaluation and, if acceptable, implementation.

The VE analysis will have the following objectives:

• Increase value
• Maintain function
• Minimize life cycle costs
• Encourage innovation
• Highlight potential cost reduction on transportation improvement projects
• Produce a higher quality, more efficient transportation project

Project Selection
Value Engineering analyses may be warranted at the planning and design stages of the project.
This may be first evident at Project Scoping when the Department’s design team estimates that the
preliminary total project costs, including Environmental studies, Preliminary Engineering, Final Design,
ROW, Utilities, and Construction costs of the project, will exceed the identified cost criteria (see below).
At any time prior to final processing (FDP) that the total project costs are estimated to exceed the
identified cost criteria, the Design Project Manager is to notify OOC/QA that a VE analysis should be
implemented. (See Appendix D for a copy of the VE Analysis Request Form.)

The minimum criteria for a VE analysis are as follows:

FHWA:
Federal-aid highway projects on the NHS: $50 Million or more estimated total project cost
Federal-aid bridge projects on the NHS: $40 Million or more estimated total project cost
Federal-aid projects not on the NHS: $500 Million or more estimated total project cost

When deciding whether to conduct a VE Analysis, the designers should consider the complexity of
the project including whether the project contains critical constraints, difficult technical issues,
expensive or unique solutions, external influences, or complicated functional requirements. The types of
projects that usually provide the highest potential for value improvements are:
• Projects with alternate solutions which vary the scope and cost
• New alignment or by-pass sections
• Widening existing highways for capacity improvements
• Major structures

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

• Interchanges on multi-lane facilities

• Projects with extensive or expensive environmental or geotechnical requirements
• Difficult materials requirements or inferior material sources
• Major reconstruction of existing highways
• Projects with major traffic control
• Projects with multiple stages

FTA:
It is recommended that the Design Project Manager overseeing FTA funded projects coordinate
with the FTA Liaison during the Selection Phase for a major capital project. The objective of this
phase is to select the project to be studied and assemble the VE team. Some projects involve large sums
of money but are relatively straight forward with little opportunity for alternatives. Other projects may
involve expensive environmental commitments that may preclude value engineering judgments.
Therefore open communication between the Project Manager and the FTA Liaison is extremely
important during the Selection Phase.
Major capital project is defined as:
A project under FTA based on criteria defined in 49 CFR, Part 633, as follows:

1) Involves the construction of a new fixed guideway or extension of an existing fixed guideway;

2) Involves the rehabilitation or modernization of an existing fixed guideway with a total project cost in
excess of $100 million; or

3) The Administrator determines is a major capital project because the project management oversight
program will benefit specifically the agency or the recipient. Typically, this means a project that:

i) Generally is expected to have a total project cost in excess of $100 million or more to construct;

ii) Is not exclusively for the routine acquisition, maintenance, or rehabilitation of vehicles or other
rolling stock;

iii) Involves new technology;

iv) Is of a unique nature for the recipient; or

v) Involves a recipient whose past experience indicates to the agency the appropriateness of the
extension of this program.

Other FTA Projects: Grantees are encouraged to conduct VE on all construction projects including bus
maintenance and storage facilities whose costs are estimated to exceed $2 million, and on revenue
railcar acquisition and rehabilitation

FAA:
Airport Improvement Program grant funded projects or those receiving revenue from the
Passenger Facility Charge Program are VE candidates, as are unusually large and/or complex
FRA projects of sufficient size to offer reasonable opportunities for cost reduction.

6
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Selected FAA projects might include one or more of the following features:
• Terminal buildings
• Security systems with many interactive devices and redundancies
• Bridges
• Large-scale paving projects and/or those with complex drainage patterns and structures
• Foundation or embankment conditions requiring preconsolidation
• Large retaining walls
• Installation of lighting and navigational aid (NAVAID) systems

Airport paving projects may or may not benefit from VE analysis, depending on the complexity
of the project. There is a point of diminishing returns that will be reached when the cost to perform a VE
study exceeds the overall life cycle cost savings. It is imperative the project characteristics that would
require a VE study be determined at the outset. VE studies should only be undertaken when there is a
good possibility of obtaining substantial life cycle savings or improved design.

For all types of funding, it is important to note, Design Project Managers play a major role in
identifying candidate projects for VE analyses, and are ultimately responsible for ensuring that any VE
analysis is conducted as required. Whenever a VE analysis is required, the project’s budget and
schedule should be adjusted by the Design Project Manager to reflect the additional resources necessary
to complete the analysis.

OOC/QA personnel will track and monitor all potential projects due for VE analyses using a
variety of tools including the Department’s “Working Schedule of Federal-Aid Obligations” compiled
by the Office of Capital Services and the plan review process. OOC/QA maintains a list of potential
projects meeting the criteria for Value Engineering analyses, adding or removing projects as estimates
go through refinements.

OOC/QA shall ensure that a listing of all federally funded highway or bridge projects planned
for VE analyses is forwarded to FHWA, as requested, on a semi-annual basis (1st of January and July).

VE Analysis Levels
A systematic and structured action plan is required for conducting and documenting the results of
a quality VE Analysis. To accomplish this, the Department has established two (2) levels of Value
Engineering analyses: Level A and Level B. Through the implementation of these two (2) Levels, the
Department is able to reduce the costs of conducting the VE analyses on certain project by crafting a VE
analysis that is proportional to the complexity of the project. The level of VE analysis will be chosen by
the VE Program Coordinator, in coordination with the Design Project Manager, based on the scope and
complexity of the individual project to be analyzed.

The Level A VE Analysis is the most comprehensive type of VE analysis and should be
considered for complex projects, new construction, capacity improvements, and major reconstruction.
This level will typically be led by task-based VE consultant engineers with particular expertise relating
to the type of project under analysis. A Level A VE Analysis will generally require one week to
complete the Information Phase thru Presentation Phase efforts as detailed later in this document.

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

The Level B VE Analysis is intended to be conducted on “maintenance” type projects (i.e.,

pavement preservation and guiderail upgrade projects) and replaced-in-kind work where no additional
capacity is gained. These projects typically include fewer work items/operations but the work is more
repetitive in nature and applied over a longer length of roadway. For these projects, the Department has
found that the Level B VE analysis provides a more economical approach to conducting the required VE
analysis while still obtaining the benefits of the multi-disciplined analysis. A Level B analysis will
typically be completed by in-house staff and will require a period of 1-2 days to complete the
Information Phase thru Presentation Phase efforts as detailed later in this document.

Later sections of this document contain more specific information about the personnel and
procedures to be utilized in Level A versus Level B analyses.

Timing
The timing of when to conduct the VE analysis is important. Per federal regulations, a required
VE analysis must be completed and all approved recommendations incorporated prior to completing the
final design. The Department has completed VE analyses at various times in the project schedule.
Many projects have gone all the way to final design before a VE analysis is done. When a VE analysis
is done at that late of a stage, it is costly and difficult to implement any recommendations from the VE
analysis. VE is considered more effective and influential on performance, quality, and cost of a project
when done relatively early in the project schedule.

The Department’s policy is to conduct a required VE analysis on a project when the 30% plans
(Preliminary Design) are available. Due to the potential for the VE analysis to recommend significant
changes to the project’s design, the VE analysis and the Final VE Report should be completed prior to
the Department’s formal Design Approval.

Analysis Team
The Value Engineering Analysis Team, either Level A or Level B, must be totally independent
of the design team and will typically consist of a Team Leader and five to seven other members with
expertise in various specialties related to the project. OOC/QA will coordinate with the Design Project
Manager to determine the engineering disciplines that should be represented on the VE Analysis Team.
When necessary or appropriate the OOC/QA may also utilize a consultant engineering firm specifically
contracted by the Department for VE services to assemble the Team. For each VE effort initiated,
OOC/QA shall ensure the Federal funding agency is offered the opportunity to attend and participate.

To ensure a productive and focused VE effort, the Team Leader should be a Certified Value
Specialist (CVS), certified by SAVE International, or a Professional Engineer registered in the State of
Connecticut, with a minimum of ten years of experience and appropriately trained in leading Value
Engineering analyses. For a Level A analysis the Team Leader should be a CVS who has experience
with VE analyses. Level B analyses can be led by either a CVS or a CT registered Professional
Engineer trained in leading Value Engineering analyses.

The other team members shall have diverse areas of expertise with concentration on the major
challenges/problem areas anticipated within the project (traffic, structures, soils, paving, etc.) and

8
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

general knowledge in design, construction, rights-of-way, maintenance and/or traffic operations. Level
A team members will typically be staff from a consultant engineer firm specifically contracted by the
Department to conduct VE services. Level B team members may be in-house or VE consultant
engineers or a combination of the two. Due to the unique and multidisciplined approach of the VE
process, the Department recognizes the inherent benefits achieved by having in-house engineering staff
participate on a VE Team. Through their roles on the VE team, participants are able to expand their
knowledge base of other units’ operations and their areas of concern. Based on these benefits the
Department encourages the use of in-house staff on VE Teams whenever feasible and appropriate.

The project designers (Department and/or consultant), will also participate in the VE as required
to provide plans, special provisions and estimates, as well as to present the project overview and/or
conduct project site field reviews. The project designers will be expected to attend the initial session
(Information Phase) and final session (Presentation Phase). The designers will also be expected to be
available, throughout the time the VE Team is meeting, by telephone, email or in person to answer
specific design questions.

The OOC/QA Section will coordinate the activities of the VE analysis team, including providing
manuals and reference materials, providing access to a conference room with any needed electronic
equipment, arranging for site visits and any other materials that may be considered necessary. OOC/QA
will be responsible for scheduling the location(s) and necessary personnel, both Department and
Consultant, to conduct the VE analysis. Level B analyses will most likely occur at the DOT Newington
Headquarters building. Some Level A analyses may be held at a consulting engineer’s office within the
state.
A Value Engineering Analysis Requirements Checklist is included in Appendix A.

Suggested Analysis Procedures

A: VE Job Plan FHWA
1. Selection Phase: The VE Analysis Team will use the following VE Job Plan to complete the VE
analysis. Due to the limited resources available for the Level B type studies, many of the phases
within the VE Job Plan must be completed in a short period of time. The VE Analysis Team, and
supporting personnel, must stay focused on each task, utilize technologies available to streamline data
collection, and rely upon the VE Team Leader to move effectively through each phase in a timely
manner. Specific opportunities for streamlining the Level B VE analysis are presented below.

2. Information Phase: Gather project information including project commitments and constraints.
Includes presentation by design team. Consideration of the overall project intent, its location,
existing conditions, scope of improvements, project purpose and need statements, etc. Begin to
understand the design philosophy used.
• For Level A – This phase includes a site visit to project site
• For Level B – Instead of site visit, VE Team can use Google Maps, Department’s Digital
Highway, and other electronic media to review the location/existing conditions.

3. Function Analysis Phase: Analyze the project to understand the required functions. Investigate the
background information, technical input, reports (such as traffic, soils, hydraulic, environmental,
accidents) and field data, function analysis, team focus, and objectives.

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

4. Creative Phase: Generate ideas on ways to accomplish the required functions which improve the
project’s performance, enhance its quality, and lower project costs. Be creative and brainstorm
alternative proposals and solutions.
• For Level B – This phase can occur rapidly with minimal discussion of each idea.
5. Evaluation Phase: Evaluate and select feasible ideas for development.

• For Level A - Consideration of life cycle costs, detailed analysis of alternates, and
documentation of logic should be comprehensive.
• For Level B – Brief discussions of pros and cons of various alternates can be used to select
feasible ideas.

6. Development Phase: Develop the selected alternatives into fully supported recommendations.
Includes development of technical and economic supporting documentation.

• For Level B – Documentation can be simplified to capture effectiveness of ideas for

implementation and costs associated with them. Break-up team into small teams or individuals
to develop support documentation.

7. Presentation Phase: Present the VE recommendations to the project stakeholders.

• For Level A – This phase can include a PowerPoint presentation and/or oral presentation. All
the recommendations, along with documentation of the entire VE analysis process, shall also be
presented in a comprehensive written report following the completion of the analysis.
• For Level B – This phase can be limited to an informal oral presentation to the design team of
the developed recommended ideas.

8. Resolution Phase: Evaluate, resolve, document and implement all approved recommendations. The
draft report should be submitted within two weeks of the VE Presentation Phase for a Level A
analysis and about 2-3 days for a Level B analysis.

B: VE Job Plan FAA

1. Selection Phase. The objective of this phase is to select the project to be studied and assemble the
VE team. This phase is one of the most difficult aspects of VE. Not every project requires a VE
study. Some projects involve large sums of money but are relatively straight forward with little
opportunity for alternatives. Other projects may involve expensive environmental commitments that
may preclude value engineering judgments.

Unusually large and/or complex projects are possible candidates for VE analysis. Complex projects
might include one or more of the following features:

• Terminal buildings
• Security systems with many interactive devices and redundancies
• Bridges
• Large-scale paving projects and/or those with complex drainage patterns and structures
• Foundation or embankment conditions requiring preconsolidation

10
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

• Large retaining walls

• Installation of lighting and navigational aid (NAVAID) systems
Airport paving projects may or may not benefit from VE analysis, depending on the complexity of the
project. There is a point of diminishing returns that will be reached when the cost to perform a VE study
exceeds the overall life cycle cost savings. It is imperative the project characteristics that would require
a VE study be determined at the outset. VE studies should only be undertaken when there is a good
possibility of obtaining substantial life cycle savings or improved design.

• Project Selection. In the selection of the project to be studied consideration should be given
to the size of the project, the amount of life cycle savings feasible, and the cost of the study.
Commonly, the most cost-effective application of VE is against the highest cost components
of a facility or project. Typically, VE programs set a minimum target of 3 to 5 percent and
often more for savings over the cost of the study. The decision to use VE, and its application
to a specific project, should be discussed at the predesign conference.

• VE Team. A team consisting of five to seven persons usually produces the best results. The
team should be structured so there is appropriate expertise to evaluate the major problem
areas anticipated within the project, e.g., building components, lighting, foundations, soils,
drainage, environment, etc.

2. Information Phase. The objectives of this phase are to gather pertinent information, analyze
function and cost, and identify greatest opportunities for life cycle savings. This approach breaks
down the item to its fundamental functions or purpose, such as what is it, what does it do, and how
much does it cost? Data such as that relating to design criteria, plans and specifications, design
restrictions, codes, standards, quantities, operations, and maintenance should be assembled. These
are needed to familiarize the team on the project scope, to establish constraints for function and cost
evaluation, and to isolate the items of major costs.

3. Speculation Phase. The objective of this phase is to identify the maximum number of alternatives
that will perform the intended function. This is sometimes referred to as the “brainstorming phase.”
This phase identifies alternatives for evaluation, development, and refinement. It asks the question,
“what else will do the job and how much does it cost?”

4. Evaluation Phase. The objective of this phase is to evaluate the suggested alternatives, eliminate
unsuitable ideas, and select the most promising alternatives. This is a key element of the process—
the determination of those ideas that will provide the required function(s) with the mandatory degree
of reliability, safety, impact on operations, and other design criteria. Here the question of will it
work is asked, and the total costs are compared along with intangible factors.

5. Development Phase. The objective of this phase is to develop specific details about each promising
alternative and prepare recommendations. A fully developed alternate is often called a value
engineering proposal (VEP).

6. Recommendation and Approval Phase. The objectives of this phase are to recommend VEPs
developed in the study and to obtain the approval of the sponsor for their inclusion in the final
design. Prior to presenting the VEPs to the sponsor, the VE team must make recommendations to
the original design team or the project management team. Recommendations should include the

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

following: results of the function analysis, technical and cost data supporting the alternatives,
problems and costs of implementation, and estimated life cycle savings. At this point, the most
logical and feasible alternatives are selected by mutual agreement between the original design team
and the VE team. The agreed upon alternatives are then recommended to the sponsor for final
approval.

7. Implementation Phase. The objective of this phase is to put the accepted recommendations into
practice. After the VEP has been approved by the sponsor, it is incorporated into the final design
and construction schedule. The responsibility to incorporate and implement the change rests with
the design team or the project management team. Action should be taken to ensure it is fully
coordinated and applied.

8. Audit Phase. The objective of this phase is to ensure the desired results have been attained,
documented, and reported. The results of the VE effort should be incorporated in the engineers’
report showing what VEPs were adopted and the life cycle savings associated with each VEP. The
content and format of the Value Engineering Report will be in accordance with FAA guidance. The
report should be sent to the local FAA Airports District or Regional Office.

Draft and Final Report

To initiate the Resolution or Audit Phase, the VE Analysis Team will prepare and submit to
OOC/QA a draft written report summarizing all the developed recommendations along with all the
supporting documentation utilized to support these recommendations. The draft written report can be
‘rough,’ sometimes including handwritten notes, etc.

OOC/QA will distribute the draft report to the Design Project Manager for their review of the
recommendations and for further distribution as appropriate for the project. The reviewers will include,
but not be limited to, the project’s designers, DOT personnel from Consultant Design, Hydraulics and
Drainage, Soils and Foundations, Environmental Planning, Traffic, Construction, Maintenance and the
Federal funding agency. The Design Project Manager shall ensure each recommendation receives an
objective review and the length of time for the review may vary depending on project complexity, but
should be limited to one month. There may be some discussion between the reviewers and the VE team
to resolve any issues that arise regarding the recommendations. The various reviewers will submit their
comments concerning implementation or rejection of the individual VE analysis recommendations to the
Design Project Manager, similar to a plan review process.

Ultimately the Design Project Manager, in consultation with the various Department
Units/Sections involved with the project, will determine which VE recommendations will be developed
into the project, as well as documenting the rationale for not progressing the other VE recommendations.
Due to the potential for significant cost savings and improvements to existing design/construction
practices, VE recommendations should be thoroughly considered for acceptance, even when the
recommendations are considered to be outside normal CTDOT practices.

The Resolution Phase concludes when the Design Project Manager submits a Memorandum to
OOC/QA summarizing their rationale for accepting or rejecting each individual recommendation. The
Design Project Manager shall be responsible for implementing all accepted recommendations into the
projects contract documents as appropriate.

12
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

OOC/QA will then compile the draft written report with the Design Project Manager’s summary
Memorandum to create the Final Value Engineering Report. The Final VE Report will be forwarded by
OOC/QA to the appropriate Federal agency and the design team and the project records.

OOC/QA notifies the Federal agency by letter (See Appendix B for sample letter to FHWA)
outlining all the VE recommendations, and detailing the approved VE recommendations which will be
incorporated into the design of the project, and the estimated cost savings from the approved
recommendations. The recommendations which have been rejected must also be justified in the letter.
The Department shall document the date of the letter and reference the VE analysis completion when
transmitting the PS&E document for approval.

The Office of Construction - Quality Assurance Section will review subsequent project plans to
verify inclusion of approved recommendations and to track information for the Annual Report to the
FHWA.

VE During Construction
The Department has a Value Engineering provision within Division I of its Standard
Specifications for Roads, Bridges and Incidental Construction (Form 816) wherein a Contractor may
propose changes to a project of any size for potential cost savings. Article 1.09.02 outlines the steps
necessary for a Value Engineering Change Proposal (VECP) to be approved by the Department.
Generally, the process is carried out by the Office of Construction with input from the project
Designer(s). (See Appendix E for a copy of the VECP Request Form and checklist.)

The Office of Construction - Quality Assurance Section maintains a database where VECP’s are tracked
for future reference, Lessons Learned information and for inclusion in the yearly report to the FHWA.

Program Monitoring and Reporting

OOC/QA prepares the Annual Report to FHWA outlining the numbers of projects that have
undergone Value Engineering analyses and Value Engineering Change Proposals. The format changes
from year to year but generally requests the information outlined in Appendix C. The Office of
Construction - Quality Assurance Section shall be responsible for all VE data management, including
the annual FHWA reporting form.

Beyond the necessary reporting, the information obtained from the various VE analyses helps all
involved to think about alternative ways to look at problem solving and design methods. The
knowledge and experience of the Department’s various engineering disciplines has been, and will
continue to be, a great resource to be tapped for Value Engineering. Additionally, the cooperative spirit
and contacts made between units will continue to reap rewards in all Department endeavors.

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Appendix A: VE Analysis Requirements Checklist

Project-Related Input* (Analysis Package)
• Design File
• Quantities
• Estimates
• Right of Way Plans
• Geotechnical Reports
• Plan Sheets
• Environmental Documents
• Cross Sections and Profiles
• Land Use, Contour and/or Quadrant Maps
• Accident Data
• Traffic Data
• Large-Scale Aerial Photographs
• Vicinity Map
• Hydraulic Report
• Aerial Photos
• Existing As-Built Plans

Analysis-Related Facilities and Equipment

• Room with a large table and adequate space for the team
• Telephone
• Network computer access (if available)
• Vehicle or vehicles with adequate seating to transport the VE team for a site visit**
• Easel(s) and easel paper pads
• Marking pens
• Computer projector
• Masking and clear tape
• Design Manual
• AASHTO Design Book
• Standard Plan Sheets
• Standard and Supplemental Specifications
• MP Log
• Bridge List
• Scales, straight edges and curves
• Field Tables
• Calculators
• Power strip(s) and extension cords

* Not all information listed may be available to the team, depending on the stage of the project.
** If a site visit is not possible, provide video of the project, access to Google Maps and/or e-Highway.

14
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Appendix B: Sample Letter to FHWA

Date__________________

Division Administrator
Federal Highway Administration
628-2 Hebron Avenue, Suite 303
Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033

Dear :

Subject: Value Engineering Analysis

State Project No. ______
FAP No. ____________
Description___________
Town(s) _____________

Enclosed is a copy of the Value Engineering (VE) Report, together with a copy of the responses
to the VE proposals, for the subject project. These documents are the culmination of the VE workshop
conducted ___________ through ________________.

Three (3) recommendations were generated by the VE Team and further developed into
proposals. The advantages, disadvantages, and cost savings of each proposal were evaluated, as follows.
VE Proposal Estimated Comments
VE Proposal
Number Savings

Of the three (3) proposals, the following one (1) proposal will be incorporated into the final contract
documents:

• _______________________________

The potential cost savings of implementing this proposal is estimated to be $ .

If you have any questions concerning this material, please contact ________________ at 860-594-____.

Very truly yours,

Signature
Title
Office of Construction
Quality Assurance Section
Enclosures

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Appendix C: FHWA Annual Report Information

Part 1 - ConnDOT’s Value Engineering Program
VE Policy documented and adopted
VE Coordinator: Office of Construction - Quality Assurance Section
Reporting conducted includes semi-annual spreadsheet sent to District FHWA contact
Tracking and monitoring by OOC/QA
Link to related web site:
www.ct.gov/dot/lib/dot/documents/dconstruction/qa/ve_manual_nov_12.pdf
Practices include OOC/QA sign off on Stewardship checklist and periodic monitoring of the
Funding Obligation List for projects meeting monetary criteria for VE analysis
VE Change Proposals described in Standard Specification Section 1.09.02
Training method used was NHI VE Workshop (most recently conducted September 2009)

Part 2 - Summary of VE Analyses

Total number of VE Analyses completed in last fiscal year, In-House / Consultant (note: fiscal
year is October 1 to September 30)
Number of Analyses anticipated for next fiscal year (In-House / Consultant)
Estimated costs for conducting VE analyses in last fiscal year
Estimated costs of the projects studied
Total number of recommendations proposed by VE analyses and estimated value
Number of recommendations approved and estimated value
Total number of VECP’s submitted in last fiscal year and total value
Number of VECP’s approved and total value

Part 3 - Benefits of VE Analyses and VE Change Proposals

Tabulation of approved VE recommendations and VECP’s according to functional benefit
Categories include Safety, Operations, Environment, Construction and Other

16
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Appendix D - VE Request Form

Value Engineering Request 
Submit To The CT DOT Value Engineering Coordinator  

Date of Request:  _____________ 

Name of Person Requesting:  _________________________   Phone No. ___________________ 

Project No. (s):  ______________Town (s)  ____________________District (s)_________________ 

VE Study Requested by? 

    Design    or       FHWA        FRA      FTA FAA  % Design Complete: ______ 

Project designed by:     State          Consultant (Company name)__________________________ 

Design contact person: _________________________ Phone No. _______________________ 

Project Description:  
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________ 

Type of Project:  (Please check all that apply)       

   Highway Construction           Bridge Construction        Drainage Construction 

 
      Vertical Construction       Paving Preservation         Other (Various, Facility, Rail, Airport, Bus, etc.) 

Projected FDP Date: _______________   

Total estimated cost (include all phases i.e. ROW, Const, and Design):   _______________   

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Value Engineering Request continued

SPECIAL EXPERIENCE – If the VE team will be required to have additional or specialized
experience in certain areas, please provide details below. This may include the need for experience in
mechanical, electrical, plumbing, airports, marine, traffic and or other types of necessary special
requirements, certifications’ or licenses:

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________

Will railroad property be involved? Yes No If yes, which RR?: __________________

Are insurance requirements greater than normal? Yes No

If so, what are they? ____________

Any Additional Comments:

____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

18
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Appendix E - VECP Request Form and Checklist

CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CONSTRUCTION VALUE ENGINEERING
(VE) CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL FORM

PROJECT:____________________________________ DATE: _______/_______/_______

TOWN:_________________, ROUTE:_____________ ORIGINAL BID COST:_______________

CONTRACTOR: ________________________BY:________________ PHONE: (___)- ____-____

1. DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSED CHANGE(S),

ADVANTAGES/ DISADVANATAGES.

2. ESTIMATE OF REDUCTION IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS.

3. PREDICTION OF ANY EFFECTS THE PROPSED CHANGE(S) WILL HAVE ON OTHER

DEPARTMENT COSTS, SUCH AS MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS.

4. EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE READILY DETERMINED BY COSTS (TIME, LENGTH OF

DETOUR, ETC.)

5. ANTICIPATED DATE FOR SUBMITTAL OF DETAILED CHANGE(S) OF REQUIRED ITEMS.

6. DEADLINE FOR ISSUING A CHANGE ORDER TO OBTAIN MAXIMUM COST REDUCTION,

NOTING THE EFFECT ON CONTRACT COMPLETION TIME OR DELIVERY SCHEDULE.

7. DATES OF ANY PREVIOUS OR CONCURRENT SUBMISSIONS OF THE SAME PROPOSAL.

Checklist Attached. _____

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:

2
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

******FOR CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION USE ONLY BELOW THIS LINE******

The VE package is complete and conforms to the VE specifications of the Standard Specifications Form
_______ Supplement Dated _______________.

Comments:

Submitted By: _____________________________________________________________________

PROJECT ENGINEER DATE
........................................................................................................................................................................

APPROVAL- The VE proposal has been reviewed and is approved as noted.

Recommended By: _________________________________________________________________

DISTRICT ENGINEER DATE

Approved By: _____________________________________________________________________

CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATOR DATE

___Full Oversight project- Requires review and approval by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

Concurrence By: ___________________________________________________________________

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION DATE

REJECTION: The VE proposal has been rejected for the following reason(s).

Comments:

By: ________________________________________________ ____________________________

Name / Title DATE

cc: Construction Administrator – Const. Division Chief

District Engineer - Asst. District Engineer
Office of Quality Assurance - CRU
Project Designer
Project Engineer

20
 Value Engineering Program
February 2013 Update

Value Engineering Change Proposal Checklist Date: __________

Project # __________ Description: ________________________________________________

Contractor: ____________________________________ NTP: ____________
Date VECP Received: _____________________ By: _________________________________
Chief Inspector or Project Engineer (circle one)

Brief Description of VECP: ______________________________________________________

Has the contractor provided:

____ A statement that the proposal is submitted as a Value Engineering Proposal?
____ A description of the difference between the existing contract requirements and the proposed
change?
____ A comparative of the advantages and disadvantages, including considerations of service life,
economy of operations, ease of maintenance, desired appearance and safety?
____ When an item’s function or characteristics are being altered, a justification of the effect of the
change on the end item’s performance must be included.
____ A life cycle cost analysis must be included for items involving alteration of function
characteristics. Factors for future worth will be provided by the Department.
____ A complete set of plans and specifications sealed by a licensed Professional Engineer in the
State of Connecticut showing the proposed revisions, if applicable.
___ The proposal incorporates the same design criteria and restrictions relative to the original
contract features and requirements.
____ The revisions are in the department’s change order format consisting of reproducible or pdf
format plans, quantity increases and decreases by item number with associated cost, new items
with estimated quantity and proposed unit cost, and specifications in contract format.
____ A complete analysis of the cost effects of the proposed changes on operations, maintenance,
durability, and other considerations as appropriate.
____ A statement of the time in which the proposal must be executed so as to obtain the maximum cost
reduction. This date must be selected to allow the Department ample time for review and processing.
____ A statement as to the effect the proposal will have on the time for completion of the contract.

The District has reviewed and complied with the following:

____ Proposal applies only to the ongoing contract.
____ Proposal provides savings of more than $200,000 and involves no increase in calendar days.
(Math has been checked by Inspection Staff?)
____ Immediate notification to the Office of Construction when the potential for R.O.W. impacts
exist.