3. creativity phase

1/29/2015

1

TASK FORCE – VALUE ENGINEERING22ND ICID CONGRESS AND 65TH IEC MEETING, GWANGJU SEPTEMBER

14-20 2014

NOR HISHAM BIN MOHD GHAZALI MALAYSIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION & DRAINAGE

SECTION 1

VALUE MANAGEMENT – MALAYSIAN PRACTISE

2

1/29/2015

2

INTRODUCTION

Value Management introduced into the Malaysian Government project implementation framework through Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s

Department Circular No. 3-2009. Designed as a key management tool in the

execution of the 10th Malaysia Plan . Reasons for implementation: to enhance project

optimisation and maximise value This presentation demonstrates the value

management process as practised by the Malaysian Government for flood mitigation projects.

3

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE OF VM

To identify and analyse options, to remove components and costs not contributing value to the proposed service, system or project objectives without adversely affecting its objectives and functions.

A multi-disciplinary engagement that analyses the functions of designs, projects, services, products, facilities or systems

To maximise benefits and achieve optimal costs. To overcome planning flaws which have resulted in

output or facilities whose performance were not optimal or below their true value potential.

4

1/29/2015

3

RATIONALE

TO OVERCOME PLANNING WEAKNESSES SUCH AS: Poor scoping exercise that failed to accommodate or

consider key options or functions that, with wider consultation, could have been exploited;

Design inadequacies which produced facilities that were limited in its ability to serve a wider clientele;

Poor financial planning and budget preparation to support project requirements;

Poor resource sharing and integration between the government agencies involved (working in silos).

5

6

• Ensure value transition• Ensure value continuity • Ensure value consistency• Manage project risks

maximizing value delivery

• Clear value objectives• Ensure value transition• Ensure value continuity • Ensure value consistency• Manage strategic risks

• Ensure value transition• Ensure value continuity • Ensure value consistency • Review value realization• Learn the lessons & improve

value

criteria

Lessons learned &

Improvement

value

criteria

VA VE VR

1/29/2015

4

1. Information Phase

2. Function Analysis Phase 3.Creativity Phase

VE LAB STAGE

6. Presentation Phase

5. Development Phase 4.Evaluation Phase

PRE LAB STAGE

LAB STAGE

POST LAB STAGE

1. INFORMATION PHASE

2. FUNCTION ANALYSIS PHASE

3. CREATIVITY PHASE

4. EVALUATION PHASE

5. DEVELOPMENT PHASE

6. PRESENTATION PHASE

1 - 2 WEEKS PRIOR TO LAB

3 - 4 DAYS LAB (WORKSHOP)

1 – 2 WEEKS POST LAB FOR PRODUCING VE LAB REPORT;

IMPLEMENTATION - AS SCHEDULED IN THE LAB ACTION PLAN

VE study durationvalue engineering value engineering

The more time that is spent on pre study information gathering &

preparing, the better the study will be”- Steven male et al, 1998 -

©2013JKRMALAYSIA

1/29/2015

5

AuthorizeEntities with executive

authority to take decisions or resolve issues in lab

ConsultExperts who have to be consulted on particular

aspects during lab

InformEntities who have to be

informed on lab decisions ( not to participate)

DoEntities who have to carry

out major tasks of lab recommendations

value engineering

VE study composition

©2013JKRMALAYSIA

FRAMEWORK AND FORMAT

VM is imposed on projects valued at RM50 million above

Can be imposed if deemed necessary by Economic Planning Unit based on project complexity or importance

Consultative and inclusive approach involving all subject matter experts and stakeholders

Lab/workshop environment Every stage guided by forms/templates leading to

final report Endorsed by implementation agency and budget

controllers10

1/29/2015

6

1. INFORMATION PHASE

INTRODUCTION & TEAM BUILDING• Participants’ introduction,

• Ice breaking • briefing on agenda & lab objectives

SHARING OF PROJECT & DESIGN INFORMATION• Review VALUE ASSESSMENT (VA) Report , • Project Brief, • SOA, data, drawing, document, authorities requirement etc

ESTABLISH COST MODEL & CLIENT VALUE SYSTEMS• Validate initial study on Client Value System, • Cost Model

ESTABLISH & PRESENT PARAMETERS• Brainstorm, record and present requirements/ parameters / limitations of VE lab study scope• Agreed parameters (must have) of VE lab study scope [INFORMATION PHASE TEMPLATE]

SECRETARIAT/GROUP LEADER

GROUP LEADER/CONSULTANT

LAB

LAB

VALUE MANAGEMENT Reference : JKR.VE.Lab.06Page No : 1Issue No : 1

List Of ParticipantsRevision No : 00Date

PROJECT : Rancangan Tebatan Banjir Sg Kedah/Anak Bukit, Kedah Darul Aman.

Group : A Date : 10/11/2013 Page : 1/1

NAME POSITION COMPANY TELEPHONE / EMAILTeam Leader :

Team Member 123456789

10

Facilitator

1 Idrus Ahmad TP BBI2 Hassan KPP BPMI3 Rosazlan KPPK BPME

LAB PARTICIPANTS

1/29/2015

7

INFORMATION PHASE TEMPLATE

VALUE MANAGEMENT Reference

: JKR.VE.Lab.01

Page No : 1Issue No : 1

Information Phase Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT : Rancangan Tebatan Banjir Sg Kedah/Anak Bukit, Kedah Darul Aman. GROUP : A

LEVEL : PROJECT / SPACE/ ELEMENT / COMPONENT PAGE : 8/10

SCOPE : DATE : 10/11/2013

REF. ISSUES ADDRESSED REMARKS


: JKR.VE.Lab.01



PROJECT

: Construction and completion of 'Viaduct' and associated works at Section 49, Passage #4 (KM 157 Gerik - Kota Bharu), Ecological Corridoor Central Forest Spine (CFS), Gerik, Perak Darul Ridzuan

GROUP : A


SCOPE : GENERAL & PRELIMINARIES ITEMS DATE : 24/06/2013


GENERAL & PRELIMINARIES ITEMS

1 To include all Contractual Requirements

2 To include all S.O.'s Requirements

3 To include all Project Requirements

4 To include all Authorities Requirements

5 To include all Contractor Requirements


1/29/2015

8


: JKR.VE.Lab.01



PROJECT


GROUP : A


SCOPE : EARTHWORK / DRAINAGE / PAVEMENT / GEOTECHNICAL / PROVISIONAL SUM DATE : 24/06/2013


Drainage Works

1 Must refer to JKR Standard specification and method of measurement (MOM)

2 Refer to JPS guidelines and requirements (where applicable)

3 Proper drainage structures to be provided to cater for actual need

4 To comply Arahan Teknik (Jalan) guidelines, REAM and MASMA guidelines

5 Reevaluate existing drain/culvert and to upgrade as necessary



VALUE MANAGEMENTReference

: JKR.VE.Lab.01


Information PhaseRevision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT


GROUP : A




Road Pavement1 Must follow R4 standard2 Must follow ATJ 5/853 Lane width 3.25m4 Climbing lane width 3.25m5 Road shoulder 2.5m width - paved 1.5m, unpaved 1m6 Design speed 60km/h

7Pavement thickness, Wearing Course = 50mm, Binder Course = 60mm, Road Base = 300mm, Sub-Base = 150mm

8 Marginal strip 0.5m

9 Pavement design should consider high volume of heavy vehicle.

10 To include treatment to existing pavement. Eg: resurface and tapping

11 To provide layby for enforcement vehicle parking

1/29/2015

9

2. FUNCTION ANALYSIS PHASE

ACTIVITIES TECHNIQUES OUTPUTSESTABLISH OR

VERIFY PROJECT FUNCTIONS & ALIGN

DELIVERABLES

Brainstorm functions, establish FAST Diagram & align with deliverables

Verified Project Functions & deliverables

[FAST DIGRAM]

ANALYSE FUNCTIONS AT

SPACE / ELEMENT / COMPONENT

LEVELS

Brainstorm functions for selected spaces, elements & components; analyze spaces adjacency & flows

Identified functions of spaces, elements & components understudy [FUNCTION ANALYSIS TEMPLATE]

IDENTIFY MISMATCHES

Discuss and record possible and identified value mismatches

Identified mismatches for value improvement [FUNCTION ANALYSIS TEMPLATE]

PRESENT ANALYSIS Present function analysis & finalize scope of VE lab study (potential for value improvement)

Verified function analysis and agreed scope of VE lab study [FUNCTION ANALYSIS TEMPLATE]

VALUE MANAGEMENT Reference : JKR.VE.Lab.02a


Function Analysis Phase (Sheet 1) Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT GROUP :

LEVEL PAGE :

SCOPE DATE :

REF. SCOPE DESCRIPTIONFUNCTION AREA (m²) USER CAPACITY

REMARKS VERB NOUN TYPE COST (RM) SPECIFICATION

Notes:FUNCTION -

TYPE:B - BASIC FUNCTION

S - SECONDARY FUNCTIONRS - REQUIRED SECONDARY FUNCTION

FUNCTION ANALYSIS PHASE TEMPLATE

1/29/2015

10

VALUE MANAGEMENT Reference : JKR.VE.Lab.02a


Function Analysis Phase (Sheet 1)Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT: Construction and completion of 'Viaduct' and associated works at Section 49, Passage #4 (KM 157 Gerik - Kota Bharu), Ecological Corridoor Central Forest Spine (CFS), Gerik, Perak Darul Ridzuan GROUP : A

LEVEL : PROJECT/ SPACE/ELEMENT/ COMPONENT PAGE : 1/5

SCOPE: General & Preliminaries Item, Drainage Work, Pavement Works, Road Furniture, Traffic Management & Temporary Road Diversion DATE

: 24/06/2013

REF. SCOPE DESCRIPTIONFUNCTION AREA (m²) USER CAPACITY

REMARKS VERB NOUN TYPE COST (RM) SPECIFICATION

1 GENERAL & PRELIMINARIES ITEMS 1,967,800.00 include CIDB Levy

To include all Contractual Requirements Comply JPS req. B

To include all S.O. Requirements Comply JPS req. B

To include all Project Requirements Comply JPS req. B

To include all Authorities Requirements Comply DOSH req. B OSHA

To include all Contractor Requirements Comply Contr. req. B

2 Drainage Works 568,000.00

Drainage Discharge Water B JKR Spec/MSMA (JPS)

Culvert Discharge Water B REAM

Inlet/Outlet Protection Protect In/outlets B

Sump Collect Water B

Notes:FUNCTION -

TYPE:B - BASIC FUNCTION

S - SECONDARY FUNCTIONRS - REQUIRED SECONDARY FUNCTION

FUNCTION ANALYSIS PHASE TEMPLATE

3. CREATIVITY PHASE

ACTIVITIES TECHNIQUES OUTPUTS

BRAINSTORMING IDEAS

• Apply “Creative & Innovative Thinking” techniques

A broad list of generated ideas [CREATIVITY PHASE TEMPLATE]

RECORD IDEAS

• Record all ideas in templates

• Do not judge yet!

PRESENT IDEAS

• Present to exhaust ideas (go for quantity)

1/29/2015

11

SincereBe open mindRespect othersCreate permissive environmentGood human relationsParticipateRespondAppreciateDo not pre-judgeQuantity first, quality later

RULES OF BRAINSTORMING

…3. CREATIVITY PHASE

Simplify anything?Eliminate anything?

Add anything?Relocate anything?Change anything?Improve anything?

Combine anything?

How else may the function be performed?

“Can

We”…?

What else can perform the

required function?

BRAINSTORMING QUESTIONS..........

…3. CREATIVITY PHASE

1/29/2015

12


Creativity Phase & Evaluation Phase Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT

LEVEL PAGE

SCOPE DATE

REF.

CREATIVITY PHASE EVALUATION PHASE

GENERATED IDEASClient

acceptability

Functional

suitability

Technical

feasibility

Economical

feasibility

JUDGEMENT(E) - EVALUATE

(I) - INFORMATION

(D) - DISCARD

CREATIVITY & EVALUATION PHASE TEMPLATE

4. EVALUATION PHASE


JUDGE IDEAS

• Judge each generated idea in terms of:

* Client Acceptable

* Functionally Suitable

* Technically Feasible

* Economically Feasible•Judgement on ideas•Ranked ideas (E/I/D)•Shortlisted of “EVALUATE” ideas

[EVALUATION PHASE TEMPLATE]

RANK IDEAS

• Rank each generated idea whether (with consensus):* Evaluate – Potential solution* Information – Potential for

future* Discard – Non potential

PRESENT• Present to shortlist ideas

(judged & ranked as “Evaluate”) as consensus

1/29/2015

13



PROJECT: Membina Dan Menyiapkan 'Viaduct' Dan Lain-lain Kerja Yang Berkaitan Di Seksyen 49, Laluan 4 (KM 157 Gerik - Kota Bharu), Koridor Ekologi Central Forest Spine (CFS), Gerik, Perak Darul Ridzuan : A

LEVEL : PROJECT / SPACE / ELEMENT / COMPONENT PAGE : 1/8


REF.



acceptability

Functional

suitability

Technical

feasibility

Economical

feasibility


(I) - INFORMATION

(D) - DISCARD

GENERAL AND PRELIMINARIES ITEM

A1Can we increase percentage of preliminaries value (from 6.7% to 7.0% or higher)?

/ / / x E

Contractual Requirements

A2Can we include Performance Guarantee Sum in the BQ?

/ / / / E

A3 Can we include Advance Payment in the BQ? / x x / D

S.O. Requirements

A4 Can we reduce the number of vehicles required? X / / / D

A5Can we include motorcycle as vehicle required in the BQ?

X / / X D

Project Requirements

A6 Can we relocate S.O.'s site office nearly to site area? / / / / E


4.Evaluation Phase

5.Development Phase

6.Presentation Phase

3.Creativity Phase

4. EVALUATION PHASE

DECISION

AGREE

NOT AGREE

1/29/2015

14

WHETHER:

“EVALUATE” – Potential solution

“INFORMATION” – Potential idea for future

“DISCARD” – Non potential ideas

RANK EACH IDEA (WITH CONSENSUS) TO

SHORTLIST IDEAS FOR FURTHER EVALUATION:

…4. EVALUATION PHASE



PROJECT

LEVEL PAGE

SCOPE DATE

REF.



acceptability

Functional

suitability

Technical

feasibility

Economical

feasibility


(I) - INFORMATION

(D) - DISCARD


A1Can we increase percentage of preliminaries value (from 6.7% to 7.0% or higher)?

/ / / x E

Contractual Requirements

A2Can we include Performance Guarantee Sum in the BQ?

/ / / / E

A3 Can we include Advance Payment in the BQ? / x x / D

S.O. Requirements

A4 Can we reduce the number of vehicles required? X / / / D

A5Can we include motorcycle as vehicle required in the BQ?

X / / X D

Project Requirements

A6 Can we relocate S.O.'s site office nearly to site area? / / / / E


1/29/2015

15

5. DEVELOPMENT PHASE


DEVELOP IDEAS

• Expand “Evaluate” ideas into workable solutions by evaluating:

* Advantages & disadvantages

* Innovation created

* Risks or constraints

* Cost implication

• Support idea with illustrations, sketches etc

• Detail evaluation of ideas • Recommended ideas [DEVELOPMENT

PHASE TEMPLATE]

FINALIZE IDEAS • Discuss and gain consensus on best ideas for recommendation (if two or more potential ideas)

SUMMARIZE COST

• Summarize costs optimization of all recommended ideas

• Review Cost Model

• Reviewed Cost Model

PROJECT WORK PROGRAMMING

& ACTION PLANNING

• Establish or review project work programme (CPM)

• Develop and agree Action Plan for post lab implementation

• Project Work Programme• Agreed Action Plan

INITIATEPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT

• Identify and register project risks

• Discuss mitigation measures & responsible party (if possible)

• Identified project risks[RISK REGISTER TEMPLATE

ASSESS VE STUDY

OBJECTIVES

• Assess achievement of each VE Study Objective

• Identify lessons learned • VE Study assessment• Identified lessons learned

DEVELOPMENT PHASE TEMPLATE


Development Phase Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECTGROUP :

RECOMMENDATION BOX:

YES/ NO

EVALUATED IDEA

(From Can We…)PAGE :

DATE : 25/06/2013REGISTRATION NO:1

EXISTING DESIGN / SKETCH COST BREAKDOWN

COST BREAKDOWN

ADVANTAGES / INNOVATION DISADVANTAGES / RISK COST IMPLICATION

realistic estimation increase costORIGINAL DESIGN COST

(RM)

EVALUATED IDEA COST

(RM)

NETT SAVING OR

EXTRA COST

(RM)

1/29/2015

16



Development Phase Revision No : 00Date : MAC 2012

PROJECT

: Membina Dan Menyiapkan 'Viaduct' Dan Lain-lain Kerja Yang Berkaitan Di Seksyen 49, Laluan 4 (KM 157 Gerik - Kota Bharu), Koridor Ekologi Central Forest Spine (CFS), Gerik, Perak Darul Ridzuan

GROUP

: ARECOMMENDATIO

N BOX:

YES/ NO

EVALUATED IDEA

: A1: Can we increase percentage of preliminaries value (from 6.7% to 7.0% or higher)? PAGE : 1/26

DATE : 25/06/2013REGISTRATION NO:1

EXISTING DESIGN / SKETCH COST BREAKDOWN

EXISTING preliminaries is 6.7%

EVALUATED IDEA / SKETCH COST BREAKDOWN

Increase preliminaries to 7%

ADVANTAGES / INNOVATION DISADVANTAGES / RISK COST IMPLICATION

realistic estimation increase costORIGINAL DESIGN COST

(RM)

EVALUATED IDEA COST

(RM)

NETT SAVING OR

EXTRA COST

(RM)

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION IDEAS (GROUP A)No Ref Description

Amount (RM) NETT VALUE

(RM)Saving Extra


1 A1 Can we increase the % of preliminaries value from 6.7% to 7% or higher?

2 A2 Can we include Performance Guarantee Sum in the BQ?

3A6 Can we fixed the S.O.'s site office at the open area closed to the site?

A8 Can we allow extra cost and resource for generator set for electrical supply?

4 A10 Can we include any cost for DOSH requirement?

DRAINAGE WORKS

5 A11 Can we include outfall drain for this project?

PAVEMENT WORKS

6 A18 Can we utilize existing road diversion area as replacement of layby?

ROAD FURNITURE

7 A20 Can we include a solar flashing light before approaching this area?

8 A21 Can we install a TL4 safety barrier at the high possibility accident area?

9 A22Can we add a warning signboard 500m and 100m on both side before and after the area to alert all vehicle

driver?

10 A24 Can we change the transverse bar to rumble strip?

11 A25 Can we add 'cat eye' embedded to the parapet wall ?

ENVIRONMENTAL

12 A37 Can we review the overall cost price for EPW?

TRAFIC MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL

13 A27 Can we reduce the used of sheet pile?

14 A29 Can we relocate any of all the services utilities on the existing road?

PROVISIONAL SUM

15 A31 Can we inlude RSA Stage 5 in after CPC?

16 A41 Can we omit Billboard?

MAINTENANCE

17 A38 Can we itemized road and temporary road diversion maintenance?

VARIATION OF PRICE (VOP)

18 A39 Can we review VOP?

PROFESSIONAL FEES

19 A40 Can we review Professional Fees?

SUBTOTAL (SAVING/EXTRA)

NETT EXTRA TO PROJECT COST(EXTRA COST)


1/29/2015

17

4.Evaluation Phase

5.Development Phase

6.Presentation Phase


3.Creativity Phase

DECISION?NOT AGREE

AGREE

NOT AGREE

DECISION?

IMPLEMENTATION

AGREE



REPORTING • Prepare initial VE report and presentation slides

• Initial VE Report• Presentation Slides• Finalized VE ReportPRESENT &

REVIEW

• Present initial VE Report and obtain stakeholders’ feedback

• Review and finalize VE Report (if necessary)

SIGNING OFF* Not necessarily during lab stage

• Secure stakeholders’ approval (signing-off)

• Approved VE Report* Can be during Post Lab Stage

1/29/2015

18

PART 2

VM for PEKAN FLOOD MITIGATION PROJECT PHASE II

35

Project Background Information

Item

Topic Page

1 PROJECT INFORMATION

1.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND 3-5

1.2 PROJECT INTRODUCTION 6-7

1.3 OBJECTIVE 8

1.4 SCOPE 9

1.5 OUTCOME 10

1.6 PROJECT GIVENS / CONSTRAINTS 11

1.7 PROJECT MUST 12

1.8 FAST DIAGRAM 13

1.9 PRE-LAB PROJECT COSTS 14

2 LAB ANALYSIS 15-16

3 POST-LAB PROJCET COSTS 17

4 LAB SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 18

5 ACTION PLAN 19-24

7 ENDORESMENT OF LAB DECISIONS 25

8 CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS 26

8 ATTACHMENTS36

CONTENTS

1/29/2015

19

PROJECT BACKGROUND INFORMATION PHASE

37

• Pekan town lies at near the mouth of the Pahang River where

monsoonal floods are common during the months of November till

March

• Flood impact is heightened when heavy rainfall in the town and

surroundings as well as in the upper catchment coincides with high

tide in the South China Sea.

• The worst recorded flooding occurred in 1926 dan 1971.

• Flood of 2007/2008 was the worst in three decades causing much

property loss and disruption of economic activities, power and road

links.

PEKAN

To Kuantan

To Rompin

SOUTHCHINA

SEA

SOUTHCHINA

SEA

LOCATION PLAN

PEKAN

KUANTAN

ROMPIN

BERA

BENTONG

MARAN

TEMERLOH

JERANTUT

LIPIS

RAUB

PROJECT SITE


1/29/2015

20

Month, Year Flood Levels (m RL)1926 5.79

Jan,1971 4.85Jan, 2000 3.03Jan, 2001 2.93Dec, 2001 3.91Jan, 2002 3.77Dec, 2003 3.4Dec, 2004 2.99Feb, 2006 2.91Dec, 2006 3.02Dec, 2007 4.01Jan, 2008 2.6Feb, 2008 2.56Jan, 2009 2.89

ARI or Return Period

Event (Year)AUSTEC Report

(Flood Level, m RL)Current Analysis

(Flood Level, m RL)2 - - 3.095 - 3.96 3.6910 - 4.42 4.1525 - 4.88 4.76

(30) Jan 1971 - 4.8850 - 5.49 5.22100 - - 5.69

1926 6.20 5.79

Based on january 1971

event, it was agreed that the

flodd mitigation for Pekan

would target a 30-year ARI

In December 2007, the flood

level was an 8.5 year ARI

event


• Pekan Flood Mitigation Project started since the 3rd

Malaysia Planin 1978 and until the 9th Plan in 2010, a total

of RM 22,094,914 had been spent to control the flood.

• Flood areas have increased from 1830 ha. to 2,600 ha.

• Studies have reassessed the flood risk areas and revised

them to 6,200 ha.

• In the 10th Malaysia Plan, MYR XXXX has been allocated

for protection of 6,200 ha.

INTRODUCTION INFORMATION PHASE

1/29/2015

21

U

Poldering Parcel 1

Poldering Parcel 3

Possible Future“Poldering Parcel”

Poldering Parcel 2

PEKAN FLOOD MITIGATION MASTER PLAN

Flood Mitigation for Pekan to be divided into 3 parcels as follows;

Parcel 1 :Royal town of Pekan (2,600 ha)Parcel 2 :Mosque, hospital and Pelangkah Residential Area (1500 ha)Parcel 3. Miang & Durian Sebatang Rivers Agricultural Area (2100 ha)

PROJECT INTRODUCTION INFORMATION PHASE

OBJECTIVE INFORMATION PHASE

42

• To protect Pekan town and its surrounding, Miang

River village to the south, Pulau Keladi to the

west, Pasir Panjang to the east from bank

overflow of Pahang River with a protection level of

30 years ARI.

• To minimise destruction of property, loss of lives

and road connections due to floods in order to

sustain economic activities

1/29/2015

22

ORIGINAL SCOPE INFORMATION PHASE

43

Under the 10th Malaysia Plan, the original scope of works for Pekan

Flood Mitigation was as follows:-

Project area: Pekan Town and surroundings (2600 ha.)

1. Land acquisition from local government Pahang River (102.5

acres)

2. Consultant and survey fees

3. Upgrade and construction of pump houses at Belibis River

4. Construction of flood control bund/levee along Pahang River

(2.7km)

5. Construction of control structures

6. Construction of internal drainage

NO. DESCRIOPTIONAMOUNT

(RM)

1. Preliminary works

2.Upgrading and Construction of Pump houses at Sungai Belibis (Parcel 1)

3. Construction of Flood Protection Bund/levees (Parcel 1)

4.Construction of Flow Control Structures (hydraulic structures) (Parcel 1)

5. Construction of internal drainage system (Parcel 1)

6. Land acquisition (Parcel 1)

7. Consultancy fees (Parcel 1)

8. Provisional Sum, Variation of Price, Supervision (Parcel 1)

9. Parcel 2 (inclusive of Land acquisition, VoP, Preliminaries, Perunding, Supervision, and Prov. Sum)


11 Earlier works for Pekan Phase I (completed 2012)

Jumlah :

PRE LAB PROJECT COSTS INFORMATION PHASE

44

1/29/2015

23

OUTCOME INFORMATION PHASE

45

1. Bund and associated flood control structures areable to protect Pekan and its surroundings from twoflood hazards, Pahang River overflow and swampoverflow from the west and south (total area 6,200ha) to a protection level of 30-year ARI.

2. Improvement to internal drainage are able toovercome flash flood occurrences in Pekan towncenter up to protection level of 10-year ARI.

PROJECT GIVENS / CONSTRAINTS INFORMATION PHASE

46

No. ITEM

PROJECT GIVEN

1. Approved total project cost RM 600 million and implemented in phases

PROJECT CONSTRAINTS

1. 10th Plan (RP3-RP4) allocation of RM140 million to be completed by 2015.

2. Phase implementation causes cost increase and delayed achievement of full project benefits

3. Ketapang link – a proposed crossing over a key watercourse separating a residential area in the flood zone - has been approved by the local planners

4. Pekan to Rompin main road upgrading works have been scheduled for completion by Public Works Dept. (JKR) latest by 2017

1/29/2015

24

47

COMMENT = (A = AGREE, D = DISCARD, I = INFORMATION ONLY)

PROJECT MUSTFUNCTION ANALYSIS TEMPLATE

No. ITEM Comment

Project must …

1. Achieve its objective A

2. Be carried in phases and completedlatest by 2019 A

3. Utilities must be relocated before project physical works commence A

4. Land acquisition to be completed before project commences A

5. All relevant agencies / stakeholders affected by the project must engaged/consulted

A

6. If bridges are affected and if alternative routes are 1 km or more away, temp bridges/crossings must be constructed before existing bridges are demolished

A

7. Keep within project allocation ceiling A

8. Erosion & sediment control best practises to be incorporated to the maximum A

9. Improve flow efficiency in existing drainage system A

10. Employ poldering concept A

48

FAST DIAGRAM FUNCTION ANALYSIS

PHASE

Improve river conveyance

Geotechnical works

HOW

Detail Design

WHY

Structures

Earthworks

Divert flow

Flood forecasting

Flood warnings

Flood maps

Non-Structures

Drainage works

Landscape works

Study

Survey / SI

M & E works

Instrument

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences Improve river

conveyance

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area


conveyance

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area


conveyance

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area


conveyance

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area


conveyance

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Landscape works

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

M & E works

Landscape works

Instrument

Flood maps

Flood warnings

Flood forecasting


Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Structures

Non-Structures

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Geotechnical works

Earthworks

Drainage works

M & E works

Landscape worksReplace bridges

Relocate utilities

Produce flood hazard map

Alert community

Forecast flood

Widen / deepen rivers


Build flood bund / wall

Build channel / tunnel

Divert flow

Survey / SI

Study

Detail Design

Implement structural measures

Implement non

structural measures

Acquire land

Flood damages

Flood losses

Flood victims

Reduce flood risk

Flood depth

Flood area

Flood occurrences

Remove constriction

Construction

Install siren

Install system and

instrument

Flood Mitigation

1/29/2015

25

Bil. Question Comment

Can we….?i) Simplify/eliminate/add/combine/transfer or

move/change/modify/exchange

1. Reduce cost of land acquisitioni. Pahang River type 1 bund from RM250,000/acre to RM

200,000/acreii. Pahang River type 2 bund from RM250,000/acre to RM

200,000/acreiii. Ketapang Link from RM250,000/acre ke RM 200,000/acreiv. Collector drain from RM 250,000/acre ke RM200,000/acre

E

2. Change Ketapang Link alignment by considering development proposal to include ‘single carriage way type R2 without shoulder

D

3. Reduce cost of utilities relocation to RM1,000,000.00 E

4. Need for TNB (power) sub station for Belibis Pump Station D

5. Extend type 3 bund to the road junction leading to Pasir Panjang E

6. Remove the proposed TNB sub station at Sungai Mat Dulang Control Structure

E

7. Add TNB sub station for Control structures along Pahang River bund E

8. Examine size of Ketapang Link and replace with bridge with roadculvert

E

9. Re-examine size of control room at Sungai Belibis pump station E

49

“CAN WE…” PARCEL 1 - PHASE II CREATIVITY PHASE

Lampiran 4a

Nos. Question Comment



10. Remove the item of protection of existing structures from the PDA E

11. Remove the need of Quality Assurance from the PDA E

12. Deepen Pahang River D

13. Remove the landscape component E

14. Replace borepiles in bund type 2 design with spun piles E

15. Change Type 1design from vertical flood wall to earth bund E

16. Review land area to acquire for bund type 1 design

17. Add land acquisition area for type 1 flood protection bund E

18. Review need of pump of 2500 l/s capacity for Sungai Belibis pump house

D

19. Provide mobile gen-set to replace standby gen-set E

50

“CAN WE…” – PARCEL I, PHASE II CREATIVITY PHASE

Lampiran 4…

(E = Evaluated, D = DISCARD, I = Information Only)

1/29/2015

26

Bil. Question Comment



20. Reduce cost of land acquisition

i. Bunds for Parcel 2 from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acreii. Sungai Genuk from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acre

51

“CAN WE…” PARCEL 2CREATIVITY PHASE

Lampiran 4a

(E = Evaluate, D = Discard , I = Information Only)

Nos. Question Review



21. Reduce cost of land acquisition

i. Bunds for Parcel 3 from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acreii. Sungai Air Tawar from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acre

E

22. Reduce coverage area for Parcel 3 E

23. Review size of bridge crossing Air Hitam River E

52

“CAN WE…” PARCEL 3CREATIVITY PHASE

Lampiran 4a

Total Ideas = 23Total Ideas Evaluated = 20Total Ideas Discarded = 3

(E = Evaluate, D = Discard , I = Information Only)

1/29/2015

27

1) “CAN WE” Reduce cost of land acquisition

i. Bunds for Parcel 2 from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acre

ii. Sungai Genuk from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acreiii. Bunds for Parcel 3 from RM110,000/acre to RM

100,000/acreiv. Sungai Air Tawar from RM110,000/acre to RM 100,000/acre

REFERENCE: “Can We”for Parcel 1 Phase II no. 1/22 sahaja

Strength: Weakness: Savings : RM5,225,000

Reasonable costs of land acquisition

NIL Addition : RM 0

Lain-lain :

Discussion with Land Office and Evaluation Dept. on 4 & 5 December 2012

53

Skop / Spesifikasi Asal Skop / Spesifikasi Cadangan

RM250,000/ acre RM200,000/ acre

VALUE IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS OF “CAN WE”EVALUATION/DEVELOPME

NT PHASE

Lampiran 5a

54

ii) DETAILED COST PROPOSALS

NOS. ITEM / WORKQUANTIT

YRATE (RM)

AMOUNT(RM)

1 Bund type 1 Pahang River 21

2 Ketapang Link 4.5

3 Air Hitam River 21

4 Collector Drain 56

JUMLAH (RM)

VALUE IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS OF “CAN WE” – samb’

Lampiran5a

iii) COST SUMMARY

Original cost RM

Proposed cost RM

Savings (-) (-)RM

EVALUATION/DEVELOPME

NT PHASE

1/29/2015

28

2) “CAN WE” Add power sub station at Belibis Pump Station if we use existing pump

Rujukan: *refer slide “Can

We” for item Parcel 1 Phase II no. 4/22 sahaja

Strength: Weakness: Savings : RM 220,000

Cost savings Cost will increase if current situations demand an additionasl sub-station.

Add : RM

Not top be included in SCOPE if 2500l/s or more capacity pumps needed

Power interruptions will occur Others :

55

Skop / Spesifikasi Asal Skop / Spesifikasi Cadangan

TNB Sub Station Not in original scope

VALUE IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS OF “CAN WE”

Lampiran 5a


NT PHASE

56

ii) Cadangan Kos Teperinci

Bil. ITEM / Perihal Kerja KuantitiKadar

Harga (RM)Amaun (RM)

1 TNB Sub Station 1

2

3

JUMLAH (RM)

VALUE IMPLICATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS OF “CAN WE” – samb’

Lampiran5a

iii) Ringkasan Kos

Kos Asal RM 000

Kos Cadangan RM 0

Penjimatan (-) (-)RM ,000


NT PHASE

1/29/2015

29

IDEA

TOTAL SUBMITTEDTOTAL

EVALUATEDTOTAL ACCEPTED

22 19 17

COST REDUCTIONS RM 0

COST ADDITIONS RM 0

FINAL TOTAL (reduction/addition)

RM 0

57

REPORT SUMMARYPRESENTATIO

N PHASE

Lampiran 6

Original Project Scope Lab Analysis Post-lab Project Scope

Land acquisition1.1) RM250,000/ acre1.2) RM110,000/ acre

Members from Evaluation Dept., Pekan Land and DistrictOffice and Office of Land and Mines concur that landacquisition cost can be reduced by RM 50,000/acre andRM10,000/acre respectively

Land acquisition1.1) RM200,000/ acre1.2) RM100,000/ acre

2) River Bund Type 2 –Borepile

Piling system can be switched to spun piles at lower cost 2.1) River Bund Type 2 – Spun pile

3) Land acquisition 15 km Parcel 3 bund/leveee can be targeted at residential andmarked-for-development areas only

3.1) Land acquisition 9.5km

4) Not in scope Necessary to extend bunding to Junection at Pasir Panjangvillage to increase protection of lands marked placed underEast Coast Economic Region (special areas of economicdevelopment)

4) Flood control levee 1.6km long

5) Protection of Existing Structures

Not necessary. 5) Removed from scope

6) Landscaping along Pahang River levee (RM4.8 million)

Landscape necessary for strategic areas 6) Landscaping for strategic areas only (RM2.0 million)

7)Ketapang Link: 10 m channel, bridge 1 unit

Size of Ketapang link can be reduced based on currentneeds. A bridge is unnecessary and can be replaced with aculvert

7) Ketapang Link channel size 5m, twin box

culvert 1 unit

58

LAB ANALYSIS PRESENTATION PHASE

1/29/2015

30

Original Project Scope Lab Analysis Post-lab Project Scope

8) Utilities relocation cost RM1.5 million

Utility companies agree that cost can be reduced by RM500,000.

8) Utilities relocation cost RM1.0 million

9) TNB sub station at SungaiMat Dulang

TNB (power company) assures that existing sub-stations cansupport additional load requirements

9) Removed from scope

10) Not in scope Lab agrees the need for additional power sub-station tosupport control structures along Pahang river bunds due tolong distance to existing sub-stations

10) TNB sub station for control structures along Pahang River bund

11) Control house - area240 m2

Lab agrees that size of control house can be reduced ifstandby gensets are replaced by portable genset

11) Control house – area reduced to 180m2

12) Quality Assurance elements

Quality Assurance elements have already been includedunder preliminary costs

12) Removed from project scope

13) 3 nos. standby Gen-setsat the control house

Lab agrees that mobile Gen-sets are more suitable as usageis not frequent

13) 1 nos. mobile genset

59

LAB ANALYSIS PRESENTATION PHASE

Preliminary Detailed Abstract

BIL. DESCRIPTIONAMOUNT

(RM)

1. Preliminary works

2.Upgrading and Construction of Pump houses at Sungai Belibis(Parcel 1)

3. Construction of Flood Protection Bund/levees (Parcel 1)

4.Construction of Flow Control Structures (hydraulic structures) (Parcel 1)

5. Construction of internal drainage system (Parcel 1)

6. Land acquisition (Parcel 1)

7. Consultancy fees (Parcel 1)

8. Provisional Sum, Variation of Price, Supervision (Parcel 1)



11 Completed works under Phase I (actual costs)

Total :

POST-LAB PROJECT COSTSPRESENTATIO

N PHASE

60

1/29/2015

31

61

LAB SUMMARY PRESENTATION PHASE

Ob

jeck

tif

• To protect Pekan town and its surrounding, Miang River village to the south, Pulau Keladi to the west, PasirPanjang to the east from bank overflow of Pahang River with a protection level of 30 years ARI.

• To minimise destruction of property, loss of lives and road connections due to floods in order to sustain economicactivities

Pro

ject

sco

pe

Project Area: Pekan and surroundings (2600 ha.)

1. Land acquisition from local government PahangRiver (102.5 acres)

2. Consultant and survey fees3. Upgrade and construction of pump houses at

Belibis River4. Construction of flood control bund/levee along

Pahang River (2.7km)5. Construction of control structures6. Construction of internal drainage

Project Area: Pekan and surroundings (6,200 ha.)

1. Land acquisition from local government PahangRiver (756 acres)

2. Consultant and survey fees3. Upgrade and construction of pump houses at

Belibis River4. Construction of flood control bund/levee along

Pahang River (4.25km)5. Construction of control structures6. Construction of internal drainage7. Construction of bund/levee Parcel 2 (15km)8. Construction of bund/levee parcel 3 (9.5km)

Pro

ject

C

ost s DE

Original Now Difference

XXX XXX MYR 35.14 MILLION

19.5

Original Now

PEKAN FLOOD MITIGATION PLAN PHASE II

5.86 %

50.0

Cei

lin g

2013 2014 2015 70.5

XXX XXX2017 2018 2019 XXX

2016 XXX

2020 XXX

62

ACTION PLAN PRESENTATION PHASE

ACTION BY COMPLETION DATE OUTPUT

1VA report (draft) to VM Section, EPU

JPSM 14 December 2012 Finalise report

2VA report approved and returned to JPS

EPU 21 December 2012Draft VA report approved

3 Report signing ceremony EPU/NRE/JPS 4 January 2013 VA report signed

4

Report circulated :-a. EPU (2 set)b. NRE (1 set)c. JPS Pahang State (1 set)d. JPS Malaysia HQ (1 set)e. National Audit Dept. ( 1

set)

JPSM 11 January 2013Records and reference/action

1/29/2015

32

63

ACTION PLAN – PARCEL 1 PRESENTATION PHASE

BIL ACTION BY COMPLETION DATE OUTPUT

5 Appointment of consultant JPSM 25 February 2013Letter of Appointment

6Prepare design and Biils of Quantities

JPS / Consultants 15 August 2013Design plans and Bills of Quantities ready

7Conduct Value Engineering (VE)

JPS / Consultants 30 August 2013 Design plans and Bills of Quantities finalised

8 Land acquisition JPS / Consultants 30 September 2013Complete land acquisition

9 Prepare Tender Documents JPS / Consultants 30 October 2013Tender Documents

ready

64

ACTION PLAN – PARCEL 1 (continued) PRESENTATION PHASE


10 Issue Letter of Acceptance JPS / Consultants 25 March 2014 Tarikh milik tapak

11. Construction completed JPS / Contractor 30 October 2017Certificate of Completion

1/29/2015

33

65



12. Appoint study consultant JPSM 01 February 2016Issue appointment letter

13.Conduct Value Engineering (VE)

JPS / Consultants 15 February 2017Design plans and Bills of Quantities ready

14. Land acquisition JPS / Consultants 03 March 2017 Design plans and Bills of Quantities finalised

15. Prepare Tender Documents JPS / Consultants 15 February 2017Land acquisition completed

16. Prepare Tender Documents JPS / Consultants 15 July 2017 Tender Documents

66

ACTION PLAN – PARCEL 2 CONTINUED PRESENTATION PHASE


17. Letter of acceptance JPS / Consultants 25 September 2017 Site possession

18. COMPLETION of works JPS/Contractor 30 October 2019Certificate of completion

1/29/2015

34

67



19. PREPARE Tender Documents JPS / Consultants 15 July 2017 Tender Dokumen

20. Issue Letter of Acceptance JPS / Consultants 25 March 2018Date of Site Possession

21. Completion of works JPS/Contractor 30 October 2019Certificate of Completion

NO. ORIGINAL PROPOSEDValueAdded

Addition(RM)

Reduction

(RM)

1/22Harga tanah parcel 1 RM250,000/ ekar

Harga tanah parcel 1 RM200,000/ ekar

-

3/22Kos Pengalihan UtilitiRM1.5Juta

Kos Pengalihan UtilitiRM1.0Juta

5/22Tiada dalam skop asal Bund Type 3 ext – 500m

Bund Type 4 – 800mBund Type 5 – 250m

√

6/221 no TNB sub station diStruktur Kawalan Mat Dulang

Tiada

7/22Tiada dalam skop asal TNB sub station di Ban Sg

Pahang Control Structure√

8/22

Skop Ketapang Link -channel 10m, jambatan 1 unit

channel 5 m, twin box culvert

9/22Control house with meeting room

Control house without meeting room

10/22Keperluan Protection Existing Structures

Tiada keperluan Protection Existing Structures

68

SUMMARY OF OVERALL PROPOSAL - VMPRESENTATION

PHASE

Lampiran 7

1/29/2015

35

ENDORSEMENT OF VALUE MANAGEMENT LAB CONCLUSIONS

Project Cost : RM XXX,XXX,XXX.00

Finalised Project Scope

Project Area: Pekan town andsurroundings (6,200 ha.)

1. Land acquisition from lcoalgovernment along Pahang River(756 acres)

2. Consultancy and Survey Costs3. Upgrading and construction of

pump houses at Sungai Belibis4. Construction of flood protection

bund along Pahang River (4.25km)

5. Construction of controlstructures

6. Construction of internaldrainage system

7. Bund construction - Parcel 2 (15km)

8. Bund construction - Parcel 3(9.5 km)

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environemnt and the Economic PlanningUnit, Prime Minister’s Dept. agree with the scope and costs as decided/agreed inthe Value Management Lab of 03-07 December 2012 for the Proposed PekanFlood Mitigation Project Phase II

Name : XXXXXXXXXXPosition : Undersecretary

Development DivisionMinistry of Natural Resources and Environemnt

Date : ………………………….

Signature

Name : XXXXXXXXXPosition : Director Economic Section-Environment and Natural Resources,

Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Dept.

Date : ………………………….

SignatureName : XXXXXXXXXXXXXPosition : Director General

Department of Irrigation and Drainage

Date : ………………………….

Tandatangan

69

PRESENTATION PHASE

Nota : VE must be conducted before tendering

Closing Remarks

• VM relatively new but gaining strong momentum

• To adopt VM into various types of development projects and fine tuning intervention criteria

• Establishing pool of experienced facilitators and subject matter specialists

• Improving lab process

70

1/29/2015

36

Thank you

A Contribution by the Malaysian National Committee of Irrigation and Drainage

September 2014

Acknowledgment: Idrus Ahmad & Rohani Ahmad, Dept. of Irrigation & Drainage ; Zawidatul Asma Ghazali (Dept. Of Public Works), Malaysia