U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, MOBILE, ATTN: CESAM-EN-MN, P. O. BOX 2288,, MOBILE ALABAMA 36628-0001 OR 109 ST., JOSEPH STREET MOBILE AL 36602

C -- SURVEY OF A-E CONTRACTING PRACTICES IN THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOL JACKPR-6169-0001 POC Contact Mr. Don Evick, HQUSACE, CEMP-ES; Contracting Officer, Leo J. Hickman (Site Code W31XNJ) 1. CONTRACT INFORMATION: The Corps relies heavily on the services of private A-E firms in executing its missions, and values its relationships with the A-E community. The Corps is conducting this voluntary, anonymous survey of its A-E contracting practices to determine where improvements may be needed. A-E firms who have applied for or been awarded a Corps A-E contract in the last 2 years are encouraged to respond. If interested, submit a separate response for each Corps office involved. Firms may also submit a separate response for each solicitation or contract to reflect different experiences with the same Corps office. Use plain paper. Indicate the name of the Corps office, the question number and corresponding numerical response (5=strongly agree; 4=agree; 3=no opinion; 2=disagree; 1= strongly disagree). QUESTIONS: 1. The Commerce Business Daily announcement clearly described the project, selection criteria and submission requirements. 2. The Corps notified us in a timely manner how we did in the selection process. 3. Our request for a selection debriefing was promptly satisfied by the Corps. 4. The debriefing clearly indicated why our firm was not selected and will help us to better compete for future projects. 5. The debriefing indicated that the selection process was fair and in accordance with the announced selection criteria. SKIP TO QUESTION 24 IF YOU WERE NOT SELECTED FOR NEGOTIATIONS. 6. The statement of work was complete and clear. 7. The Corps negotiators discussed the contract clauses regarding our professional responsibilities. 8. The negotiations were fair and professional. 9. The negotiations were conducted in a timely manner. 10. We were advised during the negotiation phase about the performance evaluation process. SKIP TO QUESTION 24 IF YOU WERE NOT AWARDED A CONTRACT. 11. After we reached agreement, the contract was promptly awarded. 12. The Corps provided effective and timely support and guidance throughout the performance of the contract. 13. Our products were reviewed by the Corps and the customer in a timely manner. 14. The review comments improved the quality of our products. 15. We were paid promptly. 16. We were fairly compensated for contract changes. 17. We were regularly advised of the quality of our performance throughout the contract. 18. We were given a copy of our performance evaluation soon after the completion of the design or engineering phase of the contract. 19. The evaluation of our performance was fair. SKIP TO QUESTION 24 IF YOU DID NOT DESIGN A PROJECT THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED. 20. We were promptly informed of any ambiguities, errors or omissions in our plans and specifications during construction and allowed to clarify or correct them in the most effective manner. 21. The Corps was fair in assessing liability for design errors or omissions. 22. We were fairly compensated for services we provided during construction. 23. We received a prompt and fair performance evaluation at the completion of construction. 24. We will continue to seek work with the Corps of Engineers. You may also include any narrative comments that would help the Corps improve and streamline its A-E contracting process. Return your completed survey(s) in a plain envelope by 9 August 1996 to: Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: CEMP-ES/A-E Survey, 20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20314-1000. The survey results on the Corps= Internet home page (http:\\www.usace.army.mil) in October, 1996. (0170)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0022 19960619\C-0005.SOL)