311th HSW/PKO, 8005 9th St, Bldg 625, Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5353

Y -- DESIGN BUILD PLUS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) SOL F41622-R-XXXX DUE 012400 POC For contracting information contact Ms Carmen Stewart, 210-536-8778; for technical information contact Mr Charles Ondrej, 210-536-3594 WEB: DESIGN-BUILD PLUS WEBSITE, http://sarah.brooks.af.mil/sarah/ViewSolicitation.asp?ID=DBP. E-MAIL: Ms Carmen Stewart, carmen.stewart@hqafcee.brooks.af.mil. Y -- DESIGN BUILD PLUS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) The 311th Human Systems Wing Construction Contracting Branch, 311 HSW/PKOC, 8005 9th St, Bldg 625, Brooks AFB, TX 78235-5353, in support of the Air Force Center of Environmental Excellence (HQ AFCEE) is in the early process of developing a Design Build Plus (DB+) Indefinite Delivery/ Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract for planning, design and construction of AF facilities. As part of this process, the AF is soliciting input from interested parties on the DB+ Concept, which describes the structure and content of the future contract. Request that all interested parties submit their responses to the RFI to this office at the above indicated address, not later than close of business, 4:30 CST, on January 24, 2000. Electronic submissions are encouraged! Please submit all electronic submissions to carmen.stewart@hqafcee.brooks.af.mil. Faxed responses should be faxed to 210-536-3498. Responses are to be limited to 10 pages (double sided) with an eleven-point character size. Interested parties can download the full RFI from the San Antonio RFP and Acquisition Highway (SARAH) web site at http://sarah.brooks.af.mil/sarah/ViewSolicitation.asp?ID=DBP, F41622-R-XXXX, under "files". All questions or concerns regarding technical issues should be directed to the technical representative, Mr Charles Ondrej, at 210-536-3594 or email charles.ondrej@hqafcee.brooks.af.mil . Issues regarding contractual matters or concerns should be directed to Ms Carmen Stewart at 210-536-8778 or email carmen.stewart@hqafcee.brooks.af.mil . DESIGN-BUILD PLUS REQUEST FOR INFORMATION The Air Force Center for Environmental Excellence, Design and Construction Directorate (AFCEE) is contemplating the validity of an acquisition model herein known as Design-Build Plus (DB+). AFCEE is considering an associated Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) multiple award contract (MAC) for planning, design and construction of Air Force facilities nationwide, utilizing the DB+ model. DB+ is presently in the conceptualization phase of consideration regarding requirements, contract structure and details. This Request for Information (RFI) seeks industry comment on the DB+ concept based on the generalized information contained in this document. This RFI is neither a formal solicitation nor a request for proposals. This RFI is for informational and planning purposes only and is not to be construed as a commitment by the Air Force or AFCEE. DB+ CONCEPT Historically the government has utilized the familiar processes of Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B), Design-Build (D-B) and Architectural/Engineering (A/E) professional services for the acquisition of design and construction requirements. For the purposes of this document, DB+ is an acquisition model that melds certain aspects of traditional Design-Bid-Build (D-B-B) and Design-Build (D-B), as well as A/E professional services. The contemplated DB+ model would function as follows: STEP 1: a. Upon project approval and funding availability the government would select and negotiate and award a delivery order (DO) to an A/E firm herein referred to as the concept definition (CD) A/E, as an independent, third party entity. The CD A/E would assist the government in accomplishing Concept definition: square footage projections, equipment lists, budgets, preliminary site plans, floor plans and elevation studies Parametric government cost estimate DD Form 1391 development Design 0% to 35% Development of the statement of work (SOW) for DB+ contractor The CD A/E or any of its subsidiaries would be ineligible to perform any work in support of the requirements that it assisted the government in developing for performance by the DB+ contractor. b. Simultaneous to the award of the CD A/E DO, the government would negotiate and award a separate FFP DO to a DB+ contractor to perform the following tasks. The DB+ contractor may Provide initial investigative services: geo-technical studies, hazardous material surveys, existing conditions surveys and value engineering evaluation etc. The DB+ contractor's results of these studies will constitute the degree of risk that he/she would assume for the project regarding differing site conditions etc. These results will be incorporated into the project concept definition, the parametric government estimate, would serve as the DB+ contractor's validation of the concept definition and forms the basis for contract award under Step 2. Review/validate concept definition documents and products which include the statement of work (SOW) and any design development Submit proposal to the government for a traditional D-B requirement STEP 2: Under most circumstances the government would negotiate a FFP DO for a traditional type D-B requirement to the DB+ contractor, who would have validated the design and agrees to a guaranteed maximum price (GMP), with a shared savings arrangement. The GMP will be the validated concept definition price. The government anticipates that all DOs will be FFP, however all DOs may not include a GMP or shared savings arrangement. STEP 3: The DB+ contractor completes the design, constructs the requirements and provides warranty services. The DB+ contractor is defined as an entity or teamed entity having or having available to it, resources of an A/E firm or equivalent staff. The DB+ contractor must be able to provide review and integration capabilities, which will be necessary for the DB+ contractor to determine the validity of the concept definition before submission of his proposal to the government. The DB+ contractor must be able to integrate the concept definition and his acceptable performance risk threshold, thus becoming an "integrator" of that part of the process. The plus (+) aspect of the DB+ identifies the contractor's participation in site investigation and validation of the planning, programming, design and government estimate. The DB+ contractor will assume all risk and responsibilities for implementation and coordination of all regulatory reviews, quality control throughout all phases of the DO and ensure technical adequacy of the final design. The government would perform reviews of both the CD A/E products and the DB+ services and products to confirm compliance with the DO requirements. The government invites industry to comment regarding its thoughts, ideas, concerns, perceived benefits, possible inhibitions and weaknesses of the DB+ concept. Recommendations for process improvement are encouraged. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AFCEE is considering a nationwide, all 50 states, award of a multiple-year, multiple-contractor, FFP indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract for DB+ design and construction services. The contracts or program could have a program value of $150M -$400M. The program value would constitute the total contracts ceiling amount. The collective amount of all DOs issued against the IDIQ contract cannot exceed the contract ceiling amount. The contract base period could be for as long as 8 or more years with a possible two-year completion period. Each contractor may have different specialization characteristics i.e. housing, commercial/light industrial, infrastructure etc. A guaranteed minimum amount, to be determined at a later time, would be established for the IDIQ contract. The average size of each DO project could have a range of $10M -- $25M. Does industry feel that a regional contract would be more appropriate for performance under the DB+ concept instead of a nationwide contract? The government would also be interested in having industry comment on the feasibility of a smaller program value. Would a program value of $50M be more or less feasible? Please provide the rationale for your comments. The contract design and construction requirements may include but would not be limited to the following facility types: military family housing, administration facilities, dormitories, hangars, warehouses, physical fitness centers, small arms training ranges, health and wellness centers, infrastructure (runways, streets, wastewater treatment plants). All DOs awarded for requirements against the contract will be negotiated. The selection of individual project DB+ contractors for each DO would be determined by a government approved selection plan that would be incorporated into the basic IDIQ contract. The selection plan would include the criteria that would form the basis for contractor selection. Selection criteria may include considerations regarding the amount of contractor workload, location of work, past performance (timeliness of services, construction cost/schedule control, quality of products and services), contractor capabilities, specific DO project requirements etc. Repeat DO awards may be based on the same criteria. Industry comments, recommendations and rationale regarding possible selection criteria are encouraged. Suggestions for the structure of the project selection plan are also encouraged. The government contemplates the award of FFP DOs, which would include a GMP with shared savings incentives. The government envisions some type of shared savings arrangement between the government and the DB+ contractor if the DB+ contractor were to complete the design/construct requirements under the negotiated amount. Under D-B arrangements for example, contractors are incentivized to provide better quality homes by proposing enhancement features in their proposals, thus providing a government benefit. The contractor benefits by improving his/her chances to receive the award. The government realizes that a shared savings arrangement could cause a disincentive to contractors to offer enhancement features. The government would like to have industry comments, recommendations and rationale for what it feels could be an adequate shared savings or contractor incentive arrangement, which would be beneficial to government and the DB+ contractor. IDIQ SOURCE SELECTION Potential IDIQ contractors could possibly be chosen under a competitive two step source selection procedure. Step one may include the following evaluation criteria: a. Experience in performing traditional, turn-key, D-B-B and D-B contracts b. Past Performance of all team members on similar contracts with emphasis on customer satisfaction, meeting schedules and budgets, number of change orders, claims, use of Alternate Dispute Resolution processes, and partnering c. Qualifications of key personnel of all team members (years of experience, roles, academics, professional license, awards/recognition, etc.). Contractors in the competitive range would be invited to participate in step two, however the number of firms invited to participate in step two will be limited to a maximum number that will be determined at a later time. Evaluation criteria for step two may include a. Qualifications of all team members b. Ability to accomplish work (resources, facilities, technological support, etc.) c. Management Plan d. Safety Plan e. Fee Structure f. Sample Pricing Exercise g. Scheduling h. Quality Control Plan. Teaming or partnering arrangements among general contractors, A/Es, management firms etc. would be highly encouraged for potential DB+ contractors. A potential DB+ contractor could be a general contractor, an A/E firm, a management firm or a combination of the aforementioned. Evaluation criteria may include considerations for teaming or partnering with small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned businesses and minority-owned businesses. The criteria may likely include considerations regarding a. Extent of commitment to use these concerns b. Complexity and variety of the work these concerns may perform c. Past performance of offerors in complying with subcontracting plan goals for these concerns d. Extent of participation of these concerns in terms of the value of the total acquisition. Industry input regarding teaming or partnering considerations, comments and recommendations for the selection process are highly encouraged. Process improvement suggestions are welcomed. OBJECTIVE Through DB+ the government wishes to obtain customer satisfaction for products and services delivered and substantially reduce the number of construction change orders. The government believes that a significant attribute of the DB+ concept is that it may encourage innovative design solutions via best value rather than the low bid acquisition method, while reducing traditional design costs. The government also believes the method may deliver projects faster than traditional project delivery methods and within Congressionally approved budgets. The DB+ process would provide for a single point of accountability i.e. the DB+ contractor, and a true buy-in of all parties through a team approach may be obtained. FEEDBACK AFCEE would appreciate your input concerning any aspect of the content of this RFI document. Your comments are important and will be considered in the development of realistic goals and objectives. Please comment as you feel motivated to do so, however we do not expect a comment on each issue presented for the DB+ concept. Following are additional considerations on which the AFCEE would like you to think and comment. 1. Would therebe anything that you would add or delete to ensure that AFCEE and the Air Force would consistently obtain successful projects in terms of project cost, project schedule, innovation, quality and customer satisfaction? 2. Are there any unrealistic requirements/stipulations that would prevent your firm from responding to an RFP for this type of contract? 3. AFCEE is interested in ensuring timely and proper actions are taken to correct construction defects and warranty issues on completed construction. As such we are considering a requirement that the DB+ contractor provide an "escrow" account derived from the DO award amount, to ensure timely and proper actions are taken to correct construction defects and warranty issues. To aid us in achieving this, we request your comments and alternative incentives and solutions. 4. Would you consider renovation and addition work as being feasible requirements to be accomplished via the DB+ concept. Please comment and recommend any suggestions you may have to successfully accomplish this type of work within the DB+ concept. 5. The Air Force typically mandates some minimum level of self-performance on its construction and D-B contracts. What if there were no self-performance requirements, but rather a requirement for full on-site staffing to award/manage subcontracts, ensure safety of the work force, control construction schedule and costs, and to control the quality of the construction effort? Please comment on this scenario, and please give consideration to the impacts to construction cost, construction schedule, quality of the completed construction, and ability to accomplish work nation-wide. 6. Following is a comment from a member of industry: "We have recently noticed that, in competing for other D/B contracts, there is a trend among some of our competitors whereby projects are bid in-house, and then once selected an attempt is made to find subcontractors to match their "budgets". Many are even trying to find local General Contractors to take the job at the D/B contractor's bid cost (or less...). We do not believe that this meets the intent of "past performance and experience". One way to help guard against that practice is to require bidders to submit a list of the major subs they are proposing to use, and sign an affidavit attesting that they will be performing the work as represented in their proposal." We request your comments on this recommendation. Please, also give consideration to the impacts to construction cost, construction schedule and quality of the completed construction. 7. AFCEE desires to structure the DB+ model to offer the opportunity for repeat business to a cadre of design-build entities. The repeat business idea is a powerful incentive to encourage timely services, construction cost and schedule control, quality services and products, and cooperation with AFCEE to satisfy our customers. We request your comments regarding equability and possible solutions to the dilemma of satisfying the needs of demanding customers and the legitimate desire of a DB+contractor to turn down work perceived as unprofitable. 8. Please comment and if appropriate offer your recommendations on the suitability of having minimum DO size requirements for DB+ services by region. Posted 01/10/00 (W-SN414545). (0010)

Loren Data Corp. http://www.ld.com (SYN# 0090 20000112\Y-0002.SOL)