US Army Corps of Engineers Army MILCON Transformation

US Army Corps of Engineers Army MILCON Transformation… Update NCSU Engineer Forum 21 May 2007 MT Standards & Criteria Team Leader Headquarters, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 1

Overview US Army Corps of Engineers • • • DASA (I&H) Direction The Challenge Align with Industry USACE Reinventing MILCON Processes Framing the Strategy The Model RFP… Time, Cost, Quality? The Model RFP… What does it do? After Award? Pilots & Lessons Learned One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation

US Army Corps of Engineers DASA(I&H) Direction • Development of strategy and implementation plan to support the major permanent restationing initiatives that the Army will execute. • Overall objective is to provide the ability to establish, reuse/re-purpose facilities with minimum lead-time, leverage private industry standards and practices and to reduce acquisition/lifecycle costs Nov 2004 One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 3

Our Challenge!!! US Army Corps of Engineers MILITARY WORKLOAD Multiple ‘Peaking’ Programs w/Critical Facilities Needs BRAC 05 Critical Questions… How much, when? IGPBS Temp Bldgs Army Modular Forces MILCON/GWOT Spt NOW Installations OVER TIME One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 4

US Army Corps of Engineers Align with Industry… MILCON Barracks (1+1) $168/SF, Scope: 99, 500 SF Private Industry Apartment Installation Industry • Function: House Soldiers • Construction Type: Type I or II non-combustible • Occupancy Type: Residential • Operations: Accommodate Sleeping/Bathing, Accommodate Relaxation/Cooking, Accommodate Privacy, Gather People, Facilitate Circulation • Function: House People • Construction Type: All Types • Occupancy Type: Residential • Operations: Accommodate Sleeping/Bathing, Accommodate Relaxation/Cooking, Accommodate Privacy, Gather People, Facilitate Circulation Projected cost savings 15 -20% Projected time savings 20 -30% One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation

US Army Corps of Engineers USACE Reinventing MILCON Processes on the Fly s tie i v i ct A d ke Q ua Li lity fe o f ng e ng ni orc ini an F ra M he T t ntal rome Envi ort e S upp Forc u lar Modati ve Init i ion CON m at MIL sfor Tra n ng io ni Stat n o C i t A cu lin ss R N ly e t B xe n O ion c re C o e E t r R L e Inh MI ecu N Ption Su al Es x ppo tat O en E C e rt IL v M ein R OT W G ing n n i W & n o i t va ement o n In prov Im s s s e n i ncie mes s u B ficie utco O Ef lity Qua “USACE must reinvent MILCON processes while executing Mission requirements and implementing MILCON Transformation” One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 6

US Army Corps of Engineers Framing the Strategy • Team effort between government and industry (Forums) • Minimize Perceived Risk – Two Phase Approach, Performance Based, Process Consistency, Evaluation, Execution, etc. ) • Programmatic Acquisition Strategy Approved – 1 Feb 2006 – Moving away from acquiring facilities one at a time – ST Application (FY 06 -07), DB – MT Application (FY 08 Transition), Combination of DB/DB(B) • Design COS, IDIQs, Geographic Execution, etc. – LT Application (Beyond…), D-Adapt-B The Primary Mechanism: • USACE MT Model RFP One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 7

US Army Corps of Engineers The Model RFP… Time, Cost, Quality? • Model RFP Objectives for Time, Cost and Quality: – Aggressive Time goals established – 20% reduction in cost over the existing design criteria and USACE processes up front in the programming – The primary factor in the competition is to maximize quality within the time and cost constraints – Phase II Evaluation Factors, C/T/Q One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 8

US Army Corps of Engineers The Model RFP… What It does • Consistency via RFP throughout the Army • Sets the baseline Functional, Operational, and Technical Standards • Sets ambitious Schedule and Budget, & Evaluates on Quality received • Performance based requirements, maximizing flexibility, and minimizes proposal efforts • Tailored only for site specific requirements • Provides for Life Cycle Cost, Maintainability, Durability, ATFP, Energy Efficiency, and Sustainability in evaluation factors One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 9

US Army Corps of Engineers After Award? Streamlined: • Design After Award – – – DOR vs Contractor vs USACE Design Review Process and Options Level of Design Detail Release for Construction Site Specific Coordination • QCS, Schedules, Submittals, Environmental…. • CQC, Temp Const Facilities, Closeout Submittal…. One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 10

US Army Corps of Engineers Pilots & Lessons Learned • Pilots – FT Campbell, Ft Bliss, FT Bliss, Ft Carson, Ft Riley • Model RFP LL – State of the Art (DBIA!!) – Pilot Projects Status • Corporate Lessons Learned – – Performance vs Prescriptive Culture/Perceptions Consistency Quality Drivers Inherent One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 11

US Army Corps of Engineers Contracting Procedures • Past Government methods – IFB – RFP Best Value • RFP Best Value – LPTA – 1 Step RFP – 2 Step RFP • Contract Mechanisms Design Build – Performance vs Prescriptive – MATOC - Multiple Award Task Order Contracts – SATOC - Single Award Task Order Contracts One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 12

US Army Corps of Engineers Some Differences Between Public and Commercial Design. Build Government. Competition in Contracting Act Follow-on Contracts Must be Competed Price is a Consideration “Best Value” (Price/Quality) Price Usually Established at Award (FFP) All Terms Defined at Award Commercial – No Competition Required On-Going Relationships are Common Quality Based Selection is Common Price Often Established After Design Starts Can Use “Guaranteed Maximum Price” FAR has no Exact Comparable Pricing Method One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 13

US Army Corps of Engineers Contracting Procedures • Developing the Request For Proposal Section D - Proposal Submission Requirements, Evaluation Criteria and Basis of Award RFP Sections 00110 & 00120 or 00111 • Proposal Requirements. Contract Forms, and Conditions – – – – 00100 00110 00120 00600 00700 00800 Solicitation, Offer & Award - SF 1442 Instructions, Conditions & Notices to Offerors Phase 1 Design-Build Selection Procedures Phase 2 Design-Build Selection Procedures Representations and Certifications Contract Clauses Special Contract Requirements One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 14

US Army Corps of Engineers Award Bases “Best Value Continuum” (FAR 15. 101) • Two General Approaches: – Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Proposal – Cost/Quality Trade-off Process One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 15

US Army Corps of Engineers "Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Proposal" • Government States Minimum Needs • Evaluate Go/No-Go Criteria • Appropriate When– Little or No Innovation Allowed – Govt. Not Permitted to Pay $1 More for a Much Better Proposal – Small and/or Noncomplex Projects • Least Work/Award Documentation for Govt. Evaluators One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 16

US Army Corps of Engineers "Lowest Price, Technically Acceptable Proposal" • Government States Minimum Needs • Evaluate Go/No-Go Criteria • Appropriate When– Little or No Innovation Allowed – Govt. Not Permitted to Pay $1 More for a Much Better Proposal – Small and/or Noncomplex Projects • Least Work/Award Documentation for Govt. Evaluators One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 17

US Army Corps of Engineers Cost/Quality Trade-off Process • Quality may be More, Less, or Equally Important than Price Must be Determined and Stated – FAR 15. 304 (e) • Relative Importance of Each Factor, including Price, must be Stated - FAR 15. 304 (d) • Trade-off determines “Best Value” One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 18

US Army Corps of Engineers Cost/Quality Trade-off Process • Proposal Evaluated Against “Comparative” Standards • Can Use Some Go/no Go Factors • This Method Appropriate When – Variations in Design Solutions or Industry Capability Will Add Value One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 19

US Army Corps of Engineers Proposal Evaluation Criteria • Inform Offerors How Proposals Will Be Evaluated • Identify All Significant Factors and Subfactors and their Relative Importance • Describe Basic Evaluation Process • Describe Basic Evaluation Criteria • State the Basis of Award • SSA Must Approve Revisions After RFP Issued One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 20

US Army Corps of Engineers “Evaluation Standards” • Establish Minimum Level of Compliance With RFP • Describe in RFP: – Minimum Standards Where Possible – Each Factor and Significant Subfactor – How They Will Be Evaluated One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 21

US Army Corps of Engineers “Proposal Evaluation Categories • “Quality” Information – “Design-Technical” – “Performance Capability” • “Price” or “Cost” Information • Oral Presentations (Optional) One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 22

“Two-Phase Design-Build US Army Corps of Engineers Selection Procedures FAR 36. 3 Primary Considerations For Using 2 Phase Considerable Design Proposal Costs? • Technical Proposal Provides Quality/Innovation Advantages to Gov’t? • Expected Number of Offers? One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 23

US Army Corps of Engineers “First Phase” Primary Considerations For KTR Qualifications Past Performance Past Experience Management Key personnel One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 24

US Army Corps of Engineers Phase 1: Open Competition • Conducted in Accordance with FAR 36. 303 -1 • Offerors Submit: – Information on Certain “Performance Capability” Aspects – No Price Proposal • Government “Short-Lists” Most Highly Qualified Offerors for Phase 2 • Must State Maximum Number (3, 4, 5) in the Solicitation One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 25

US Army Corps of Engineers Purpose of Performance Capability Proposal • Provides the Government With Enough Information to Determine Whether the Offerors Will Have a High Probability of Successfully Completing the Project. • Organization and Technical Approach • Experience and Past Performance • Key Personnel • Financial Capability-Bonding • Contract Duration • Preliminary Schedule • Financial Capability • Subcontracting Plan • SB/SDB/WOB Past Performance One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 26

US Army Corps of Engineers Phase 2: Only Most Highly Qualified Offerors • Firms Short-listed in Phase 1 Submit: – Extensive Design/Technical Information – Remainder of Performance Capability Information – Cost/Price Proposal and Price Breakdowns One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 27

US Army Corps of Engineers Phase 2: Only Most Highly Qualified Offerors • May Be Continuation of Same Solicitation or Separate Solicitation • Government may Offer Stipends to Unsuccessful Phase 2 Offerors – Government Shares Estimated Cost to Develop Technical Design Proposal – Technical Proposal Must Meet Minimum Standards – See Exhibit 2 for ECB 2005 -7, Use of Stipends in MILCON Funded D-B Projects One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 28

US Army Corps of Engineers Purpose of Technical Proposal • Provides the Government Enough Information to Determine Whether the Design Proposals Meet or Exceed the Minimum Requirements. One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 29

US Army Corps of Engineers • • Typical Design-Technical Categories Technical Approach (Narratives) Specifications Drawings Renderings Design Calculations List of Materials, Catalog Cut Sheets Models/Brand Names One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 30

US Army Corps of Engineers Required Level of Detail for Technical Submission Information • Must Establish Mutual Understanding of Project Scope of Work • Inversely Proportional to Level of RFP Design Criteria ("Nominal" to "Full") • RFP can Use Combination of Nominal, Partial, Full • Some Design Development Effort Internally Required by D-B Teams One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 31

US Army Corps of Engineers Price Not The Key Evaluation Criteria • • Contract Line Item Schedule Fair and Reasonable Material Unbalancing Price Breakdown Information One Corps Serving the Army and the Nation 32