k E?’A0 A039 363 CONSTRUCTION EHOINEERII t3 RESEARCH LAB (ARMY) CHAI AI—ETC F/s 13/2fl A SYSTEMS APPROACH To CONtT~UCTIoN OF RtCREATIONAL ARCA FACILTT—— ElC (tJ)MAR ?? CJwORREL

I UNCLASSIFIED CEfiL—TR—O—76—VOL—1 M.

lrjit?UiII L___ItPm~! c U U!

I _ ____I I _ II _ U BEa

__

1.0 ‘: r~t~1 2 5

I.’• _ _

. ~K1 ‘ 25 f(~ff~I ~I

~~~~~~ I

constructionengineering ) I I TECHNICAL REPORT

research March 1Q77

laboratory _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO CONSTRUCTION OFRECREATIONAL AREA FACILITIES

VOLUME I: PROG RAM METHODOLOGY‘a

—— by-

Edward .1. Wonel

D n c ~T~r, ’ ‘n

~/ ~A~; ~H; flIII UI U

-~~~~ ~VM~~~RL

A ppruvc d b r pubik rclease;distribuiion unlimited.

--—--

~

— ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,-,~~~~~,

r —

The contents of this report are not to be used for advertising, publication, orpromotional purposes. Citation of t rade names does not constitute anofficial indorse ment or approval of the use of such commercial products.The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Departmentof the Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents.

IDESTROY THIS REPORT WHEN IT1S NO LONGER NEEDED

DO NOT RETURN IT TO THE OR/GINA TOR

I

0USER LVALUATIC1~ CF REPORT

REFERENC E: Technical Report D-76, A Systems Approach to Constructionof Recreational Area Facilities, Volume I: ProgramMet ho do logy

Pl ease take a few mi nutes to answer the ques ti ons below , tear outthis sheet , and return it to CERL . As a user of this report, yourcustomer commen ts will provide CERL wi th information essential forimproving future reports .

1. Does this report satisfy a need? (Comment on purpose , rela tedproject , or other area of interest for which repor t w i ll be used .)

2. How , specifically, is the report being used? (Informationsource , desi gn data or procedure , mana gement procedure , source ofideas , etc .) ____________________________________________

3. What is your evaluation of this report in the following areas?

a. Presentation : _________________________________

b. Completeness : _________________________________

c. Easy to Understand : __________________________

d. Easy to Implement: _____________—-__________

e. Adequate Reference Materia l : ____________

f. Relates to Area of Interest: ______________

g. Di d the report meet your expec tations?

h. Does the report raise unanswered questions? ________—-

0 i. General Coninents (Indicate what you think should be changedto make this report and future reports of this type more responsiveto your needs , more usable , Improve readability , etc. )

__________

4. If you would like to be contacted by the personnel who preparedthis report to raise specific questions or discuss the topic , pleasefill in the followi ng i nformation.

¶

Name: _________________________________

Telephone Number: ________________________________

Organization Address: _________________________________

5. Please mail the completed form to:

Department of the ArmyCONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORYATIN: CERL-SOlP.O. Box 4005Champaign , IL 61820

I , -~ ___ _ _ _ _ _

k.

SEC LASSIF I C A TIO N OF T i l tS P AG E (W?i .n h.t.

REPORT DOCUMENTATiON PAGE lj E)~’ORE COMPLETING FORM-.

r ~~

‘ n -~

-~~

2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. R E C I P I E N T ’ S C A T A L O G NUMBER

CERL -T~-D-76 V&-I~~j.... ~ ___________________________

a a-wi a an, ..,. ~~.

k.,, ‘~~E~REATJONA L~~ REA FAC IfITIES.

0F~77 (.~I A J J ~,d 7

VOLUME Ti ~~ROGRA~~~1ETHODOLOGY / 6 ~~~~~~~~RMI~~~~~ RG. R~~~OR~~~~~~~$E~~

a W UTHOR(.) B. CON ’hJ.~~~ I~~ UflAf l

ç~O~~~~~~ardJ.frel~~~

’

J _ _ _ _ _ _

5. PERFORM ING ORGANIZAT ION NAM E AND ADDRESS tO. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PR O J E C T . TASKA R E A & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORYP.O. Box 4005Champa ign, Illinois 61820 C’W 1.S..31104

I I . CONTROL.L ING O FF IC E NAME AND ADDRESS ~~~~~~ I-I.- ~~~~~~~

(//) MarO d77 IJ..!~ NUMBER OF P~lGES

________________________________________________________ 7814. MONITORING AGENCY N A M E & ADDRESS(I( dlf l .r mi t from Control l ing OltIr..) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of thia r.port)

,- UNCLASSIFIED/61- IS.. DECL .AS SI FICAT ION/ DOW NGRA OI NG

—

14. DISTRIBUTION STA T E M E N T (of thia R.po,t)

Approved for public release; distribution wilimi ted .

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of t1~. abatract ..mt.r.d In Block 20 . If dl ff.r ~~it from R.port)

1$. SUPPL EM E N T A RY N OT ES

Copies are obtainable from National Technical Information Service ,Springfield , VA 22151

14. KEY WORDS (Conlinu. on rar•ra• .Id. if n.c.a.ary td ld•ntlfy by block numb .r)

industr ialized sanitary facilitiestwo-step formal advertisingperformance specificat ions

24. A .6TaACT rcwf ~~.. ~, ,.~~~~~ .i~~ II n~~....ry id.meifr b~ block n t .b.v)

L (i . ~. ____J.-’ This report describes a program conducted b~ the US. Aitny Construction Engineerin~~”.~Research Laboraiory~WTcón3üii~Woñ with the U.S. Army En~ neer Division, Ohio River ,for 14~ procurement ob 78 industrialized sanitaty facilities. Performance specificationsand two-step formal advertising procedures were used to obtain the desired facilities.The low bid price was 53 o the conventional construction government estimate.

DO

.:.

~~~~

Nm 1473

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tm! (WPl.u~ D.?. lIIn i.Z~~6

. ,. .._...,sfl , . ‘ V h I S V n.. ..4fl ..e. A.S.a sf1.1.. )

~~~ . -i . ‘i.~~~) —

‘-‘-- -~~~~ The cost savings did not result from a particular design for sanitary facilities, but fromthe definition of the project and the manner in which the facilities were procured. Givena sufficient number of facilities within a particular geographic region, builders can reducematerial costs through bulk purchasing, and labor costs through the learning-curve phe-nomenon. The labor cost savings, which is the significant one, can only be achieved if thebuilder is performing in its area of specialization, a sizable part of the builder’s savingswill be passed on to the purchaser only if other builders who are also permitted to achievesuch savings are in competition. The key to the approach is performance specifications,which describe the facility requirements so that builders can propose individualizedsotution~~ iited in .th~ij..~ ,articular skiils~ thus , performance specifications put otherbuilders in competition on the same basis.

This report is in two voluines~-Vulunsc I describes the methodology followed d~~ing-t cuur~w’o~~ this program and includes detailed documentation of each stage, ‘tli(pro-curement guidelines and program implementation procedures.Ayolume II presents theRequest for Technical Proposal, including the performance sp~ ifications and the eval-uation documentation.

UNCL ASSIFIED3tCu~~ITY CLASSIF ICATION OF Th Is PAGErU4~SB D a tMfs.sdJ

FOREWORD

This research was conducted for the Civil Works Dircc~orate . Office of the Chief ofFngnteers (OCE). under reimbursable order number (‘W IS 31104 . The OCE technicalItionhtors were Mr. Lucien (;uthrie and Mr. George Gihsoii .

The work was performed by t h e Master Planning and Systems Iluildiiig Branch. Ilab-itability and Planning Division, U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory(CERL), Champaign, IL. The CERL principal investigator was Mr. Edward J. Worre l.The principal consultant for the project was Mr. David M. Pellish.

Appreciation for their assistance in conducting the program is expressed to Mr. A. 0.Kauranen and Mr. R. F. DeLozier. U.S. Army Engineer Division , Ohio River; Mr. W. E.Showers and Mr. J. Theobald, U.S. Army Engineer District , Louisville; Mr. P. Schwartzand Mr. F. McAleavey, U.S. Army Engineer District , Fort Worth; Dr. D. Gordon Bagby,Mr. Michael G. Carroll . Mr. Richard L. Schneider, and Mr. thomas A. Kenney, CERL;the Evaluation Board members; and Ohio River Division and District representatives whoparticipated in the program.

Dr. D. Gordon Bagby is Chief of the Master Planning and Systems Building Branch.Dr. Robert M. Dinnat is Chief of the Habitability and Planning Division. COL J. E. Haysis Commander and Director ofCERL, and Dr. L. R. Shaffer is Technical Director.

ITIS mtlti S.cIIs~COC u n Sectlsi

~j

St - -tI S TR t 1I~4,. *VIILUIUIT c.eu

3

- . -

CONTENTS

DO FORM 1473 1FOREWORD 3LIST ~ F FIGURES AND TABLES 5

INTRODUCTION 7BackgroundObjective and ScopeApproach

2 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT STAGES 10General Data CollectionDevelopment of Performance SpecificationsStep One of Two-Step Formal AdvertisingStep Two of Two -Step Formal Adve rt isi ngPrototype Facility ConstructionConstruction of Required Facilities

3 DISCUSSION .. F KEYELEMENTS 25Cost SavingsMaintenance of Facility AestheticsInnovat ive Elements

4 MAJOR PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES 29

5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 30ConclusionsRecommendations

APPENDIX A: Program Implementatio n Flow Chart 39APPENDIX B: Procedures for Utilization of Two-Step Formal Adve rtisi ng 54APPENDIX C: Stats-of-the-Art Sympo sium Questionnaire 59APPENDIX 0: B.ckground and Procedural Questionnaire 60APPENDIX E: District Design Requ irement s Matrix 63APPENDIX F: Specific Design Requirements 66APPENDIX G: Legal Memorandum on Aesthetic Clause in Two-Ste p

Formal Advertisi ng Procurement 68APPENDIX H: Manufacturers Capability Questionnaire and Replies 70APPENDIX I: Legal Memorandum on Continued Use of Two-Step

Formal Advertising 71APPENDIX J: Pictures of Brookv ill e Lake Proto type FacilIty 77

DISTRIBUTION

4

FIGURES

Numbe r Page

I Construction Materia l Index of Wholesale Price of Mater ials 9

2 Main Plant Location of lndustrialii.ed Building FIrms 10

3 Projects Receiving Industria lized Sanitary Facilities 13

4 Advance Notice to Bidders 15

s commerce Business Daily Procurement Notification 16

6 Sanitary Facility Schedule From Evaluation to Construction ofPrototype Facility 18

7 Bid Schedule 19

8 Architectural Drawing, Sheet Al , Supplied by APSCO 22

9 Architectura l Drawing, Sheet A2 , Supp lied by APSCO 23

10 Architectural Drawing, Sheet A3 , Supp lied by APSCO 24

II Checklist for Potential Users of Industrialized Buildings forSanitary Facilities 30

12 Total FY 77/78 Construction Program for Civil WorksDivisions and Districts 35

13 Dodge Digest City Index Data Points 36

14 Example Contour Lines 37

TABLES

Numb er Page

I Comfort Stati on Costs Adjusted to 1975 Costs M

2 Washhouse Costs Adjusted to 1975 Costs

3 ORD Projected Sanitary Facility Construction Program FY 76/77 12

4 Distribution of Bids and Relationship to Conventional ConstructionGovernment Estimate 21

5 Projected Division/District FY 77/78 Comfort Station andWashhouse Construction Program 32

S

TABLES (cont ’d)

Number Page

6 Division and District Groupings of FY 77/78 ConstructionRequirements 37

BI Specific Mechanics and Rules of Two-Step Formal Advertising 55

I6

A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO I us conclus ion led researc h ers to consider us ingCONSTRUCTION OF buildings Cur posed of components niaoutactu red in aRECREATIONAL AREA FACILITIES factory. hecau~e . by definition , they are transportable.VOLUME I A s t a t st ca l comparison bet ween ( I ) t he costs of

Lonventio na ll~ instructed com f o rt s i lt ions and ss as h -

houses and ( 2 ) a~ ai lahlc pre fa bricated counterpartsand inforniat ion accumu lated from industrialized build-1 INTRODUCTION ng manufacturers suggested that significant cos t savingscou ld he iea lited through the “learn ing curve ’ *

plie U ifl~ i IOU ii di’ si gns ss c rc standard lied, and t Ii n nighBackground vo lume I)rodtil ion spre ading fixed costs over larger

In 1974 . the (II t IC of the (‘lltet of I i i g ii ie c fs (O(’l - ) r iuniheis of iiii its.reviewed the ci isi per square toot for facilities con-st ructed at (‘oips of I.ngineers ics e rv o lrs between l~~ I lowe s i t . ii ss is ir ccssa i v to deter m ine ss te ther tI les ea r s l~t65 and Pt S and ad;usled the m to ret ied (.‘orps sal u t a r y faci l i ty pi grani tad sufficient volu m e1975 costs The ad~ns icd cost per square toot rc t lec t ed and design unifo rmity t o result in savings and whet h er

108 percent increase I ruin the 1965 cost , as shown Iii any production- , procurei llcnt- . and design-compatibleTab les I and 2. This escalation was verified by t he firms were available to serve a market within an eco-Index of Wholesale I’ricc of Materia l for all c o f l St ru c - nomical shipping radius. Investigat ion of these questionstmon materia ls. In ‘965 the index was ~5. 8 . by October revea led encourag ing resu lts. First , ( orps sanitary facil-l- )75 it had risen to 17 5 . 9 ( Figure 1). an increase of ties are typically limited to two models- comfort84 percent. O(’E determined t hat ilie escalating con- stations and washhooses. A few facilities are modifiedstruc t ion cost necessitated the development of new somewhat , hut the desi gn is usually standardized.procedures to obtain facilities required at Corps Second , the (‘orps has an active sani.t ary ta ci lity con-rese rvoir areas. The U.S. Army Construction En~ neer- struction program. Several Divisions had mastes plansm g Research Laboratory (CERL) wa s tasked with fo r c nst iuct ion of a minimum of 100 facilities overdeveloping this me hodology . the nest several years. The t S. Army Engineer Division.

Ohio River. identified a master plan detailing an I YObjective and Scope 76.77 construction prograiii 01 233 facilities . FinaIl~The objective of this study was to develop a nieth- t Ile greatest number of production- , procurement- .odology for obtaining faci lities at reduced cost for and design-coinpal d Ie firms is in the m idwest . conlmg-Corps reservoirs which cou ld be iiiipleinenied by (orps uous with the demand in the Ohio River Divisionof En~ neers Division and E)mstrict offices. The meth- (Figure 2).odology was to include procurement procedures ,specifications. evaluation documentation , and program Since all three conditions were satisfied h~ the Ohioimp lementation procedures. River l)ivision (ORD). it was selected as a possible site

for an ill-inclusive program involving the procurementApproach of industria lized sanmta i t a c i l i t ies . On 20 September

Am i initial in~est iga imon of the high cost of comfort 1974 ORI) decided to allocate a substantial number ofstatio ns and ssj sl ihouscs at Corps of I ngineeis ’ rec- f~1 h u e s prograrnnucd for construction to the indus-i~ .siio i~m l a ic a s indicated that co i i:to rt station costs tria li,ed building program. This report describes thepci si lu.mre tout ~ert ’ best exp lained by I

~ I, which procedures used in the program and the program

iel . t t cs cost ~l i iectl ~ to lI me distance f rom urban areas resu lts. I hapter 2 contains an overview of the sixand mnversel~ to the num ber of partIc ipatI n g bidders. project st ages and prcsc ii I s information on the requ ired

data to he co l lected . perfo rmance spcc ulil. i i i lims , two-( SQFT 27 I i i - 5. 13 (BID) + 0.52 (1)1ST)(2 ~-4 I I 3 .92 ) IL q I J ~ ~~ “tc,i rn mn~’ iurv i’ ’ IIiip pi p i i i - i p ,ri — u i p i ’ i p i ~~.,i it

i ,isk ~ iic ~ igno t i i i IllU 1~v pniiitii~ ipsi l y it i i . ,uipl i , i— ~* ii i i i i i -,

i~bere (‘SQFT = cost per square foi t w r i c s ,1 idc nipc ~t ipera!i~ins t~~- s - , u I, os lp l , p i p i i i i - l l i i i ii

Bil) number of bidders submitting pro- 5 i P ~~~C1 bei ones sti t t p i u in l I~ k i i is l i -p t i . i - . i I , ) i- .iI i ~ i l I i .i ok i i

performed . Ihe , i s s o i p t e d l,uh ,r pn nlui i s i i ~ wilt ni t e.iwp is,iI5 (In pru)ecl rapi dly (I- rum / ,iiiustrialg:i-iI /I.,uoni . I liii I I p l I p l i m i ( 01111)151 distan ce (m u iniles between project 0111cc . S i l i l on i p T i l i l e t - iii t rt i , n S l i p s P S ( i’ngress .Site and nearest u ban area. t i p ) I . pp 227 ~nd 225

7

Table lComfort Stition Costs Adjusted to 1975 Costs

Comfort Sq Ft Cost Per Sq Ft Month & Year Adjusted Cost PerSta tion Cost (m 2 ) Heated (m

2 ) Constructed Sq I t (m 2)

12 .000 341 306 ) N 35. 19 (392. 15) Oct. 64 74.64 (811 .35)368 03.1) N 411.57 (4 5 1 02) Mar- 65 84 .19 9~

12,500 341 (30.6) N 36.66 (408 49) Apr. 65 76 ( ( 7 ( 8 4 5 . 5 7 1

20,00() 341 (30.6) N 551,5 (65359) Nov.65 12 1. 72 (1352 93 )14 .1 32 384 (34.5) N 36.8() (4 1(9 62) Nov .65 76.37 (547 91)19 .000 512 (46))) Y 37 .11 ( 4 t ) 0 4 ) Feb. 66 7 ( 5 4 (82 1.94 )16 .275 384 (34.5) 42 )8 4)l.73( Apr 66 84.33 (938 .74)2t ,25t 34) 130.6) N 624 1 (695.45 Jun. 66 124 7 (1383 94118 ,001) 341 (30.6) N 5278 (555 23) Jut. 66 105 (13’: ‘-1 .57)

16 ,500 3(14 t34.5~ N 4297 (475 .26) Au):. 66 55 49 ‘)S t14 .1(11(1 384 (34.5) N 36.46 (41(5.79) Aug. 66 84.32 (937.37)28 ,700 341 (30.6) N 84.16 (937.9(1) NOV .66 167.46 (1 866.42)20.000 227.6 (20.5) Y 87.87 (975.60) Apr. 67 169.60 (1882.90)24.900 341 (30.6) - 73.02 (81 3.72) Jun. 67 1411 .93 (157 (1 .47)22 ,000 384 (34.5) N 57.29 (637.68) Aug.67 110.57 (1230.72)14.500 227.6 (20.5) Y 63.71 (707 .31) Mar. 68 114 .91 (1273.15)2t ,500 384 (34.5) N 55.99 (623 .t8) Mar. 68 100.99 (1 1 2 1 . 72)22,963 323 (29.0) N 71.09 (791.82) May 68 128.23(1425.27)22.000 384 (34.5) N 57.29 (637.68) May 68 11(3 34 (1147 .82)22.500 384 (343) N 58.59 (652.17) Jun. 68 105 69 0 t73 .90)15 ,500 384 (34.5) N 40.36 (449.27) Jun. 68 72.81 (803.68)28.434 635 (57.1) Y 44.78 (497.96) Jun. 68 Sn 77 (896.32)16,404 227.6 (20.5) Y 72.07 (800.19) Nov.68 130.00)144(1 .34)14.760 246 (22.1) N 60.00 (667.87) Aug. 69 98.14(1095.30)18.840 313 (28.1) N 60.19 (670.46) Aug. 69 98.45(t099.55( -

25,960 465 (41.8) N 55.83 (621 .05) Aug. 69 91.31 (1018 .52)16 ,500 227.6 (20.5) Y 72.49 (804.87) Jun. 70 112.84(1255.59)13 ,075 227.6 (20.5) Y 57.45 (637.80) Jun. 70 89.41 (994.96)28,400 312.3 (28.0) Y 90.94(1014.28) Jun. 70 141.54 )t 552 .27 i25 .000 384 (34.5) N 65.10 (724.63) Jun. 70 101.33 ( t 3042112 ,000 230.8 (20.7) N 51.99 (579.71) Oct. 70 80.92 (91(4 34)25.108 314 (28.2) N 79.96 (890.35) Oct. 70 124.46(1 388.94)16,096 227.6 (20.5) Y 70.72 (785.17) Dec. 70 1111 .07(1224.86)19.600 290 (26.1) N 67.59 (750.95) Mar. 71 92.5 t (1028.80)24,000 227.6 (20.5) Y 105.45 (t170.73) Jun. 71 144.34(1603.90)30.557 384 (34.5) N 79.57 (886.28) Jun. 71 I08.92 (12l4 .2~) )

35,571 332 (29.8) N 107.14 (1193.65) Sep. 71 146.65 (1635.30)23,000 312.3 (28.0) Y 73.70 (821.42) Oct. 71 100.81 (I tt7 .13)32.700 279.8 (25.2) Y 118.99 (1297 .61) Jun. 72 147.22(1596.06)27,524 373 (33.5) N 73.79 (821.61) Aug. 72 91 .29111 )187 9)30,000 303.96 (27.3) Y 98.70(1098.90) Jun. 73 112.7 1 (1252.74)32 ,000 312.3 (28.0) Y 102.46(1142.85) Jun. 73 1171 (2 (1302.84)29 ,000 354 (31.8) N 81.92 (911.94) Jun. 73 93.55 (1039 .61)19.200 367 (33.0) N 52 32 (581.81) Jun. 73 59.74 (663.26)18 .969 432 (38.8) N 43.91 (488.89) Jun. 73 50.15 (557 33)

8

i rmbk 2Was hhppuw ( tisis Ad;ustt’d l i p 1975 ( i ,s ls

Was hh pp usc Sq Ft Cost Per Sq I t Month & Year Adjust ed ( oat PerCoat (m

2 ) h eated (m 2 ) ( instructe d Sq f t (m 2 )

32 .2)1(1 471 .98 08.8) N 74 .54 18 29.59) Apr. 67 14 3 .56 (1601 .6 8)26 .299 424 .65 (38.2 ) Y 6 1.93 (688.45) Nov .68 11 1. 7 1 ( I 2 ~ 9 .21,23 .050 3 i9 . 5 (37. 8 ) Y 54 95 609 78 , Jun. 70 85.52 ( 9 5 1 . 2 5 )23 .2 5 t 4 19.5 (37.8 ) 1 55.50 6 1 5 . 59 , tn , 70 (16.38 960 .7 8 i29 ,300 4 19.5 (37.8) Y 69 .84 (775. 13) Jun. 71 9 5 f ~0 ( t ( i h t . 92)

1005 ( 91 ) 4 ) V 49 (14 (554.07 ) Au g.7 1 (5 .22 (759.07 )45 .96’’ ( ( (( 5 904 N 45.73 (508.4(0 ‘i ug. 71 62.5)) (696.5 ) 1)4 5 .1(0)) 1 207 .7 ( 1 1 ( 5 6 ) V 37.26 (414 .36) ( Ic? 71 51.00 (567.67 )49 .30’) t 279 .7 ( I t S 2 i Y 38.52 (4 27 . 95 ) Jul. 72 47 66 530 .65148 ,681 549 (76 .4 ) N 57.34 (637. 18) \u, 72 70.94 ( 790 1053.000 1367 ( 123.0) . 60.72 (674.79) Aug. 72 75.12 836. 73 )66,917 448 (40.3) Y 49.37 ( 16 6 ( 147 ) S ’ s 72 1(14.8)) 2042. 3765.01)0 1300 (117.0 ) N 50.00 (555.55) Jan. 73 57.1(1 633 .32)62.000 1232.2 (110.8 ) V 50.32 (559.56) Jun. 73 57.46 (637 89)6 ( 1 .00)) 1249.7 1112.5) Y 48.01 (533.33) Jun. 73 54.83 (6(17 .99)50 )300 993 (89.3) Y 50.35 (559.91) J un. 73 57.5)) 638.29)

INEEXITO -

155 -

140 - ____

125 -

1960 1965 1970 —

1972 —

/973 —

/974 —

1975 —

YEAR

Figure I. ( onstru ct ion material index of w holesale price ot materia ls.

‘1

step form iial advertising procurement procedures. and which combined or adapted curre nt procedures and

production informnation on the required facilities, innovat ive techniques. Since the project was a prototypeprogram, t his was also the first time that the Corps of

Chapter .3 discusses t he Ihi rec key elements whic im I.ngincers had particip ated in procurIng the number of

separated t l~ms ~-omict ruC t U>m ) piogl aill lm pp mii others f ac il it ies obta mn~d du rmm ig t h is ~~~~~~

‘l Ime poli’ mmt lah

ci ‘51 saving.S. mm m uii m ltcna t )CL’ ni t Im e aest ite t ks pp l t h e t om ‘‘Ies. somm s le a m tied’’ was very ili g il . antI all t int mcl hnIie ( l

buildings, and t he innovations throughout the program. required activ Ities were undertaken to observe am idrecord difficulties , investigate their causes , and , ulti-

Chapter 4 presents the procedures which should be mately, deve lop a successfu l methodology . The program

followed when implementing a similar program in was divided into six stage s to permit successfu l coor-

Corps of Engineers Divisions or Districts and discusses dination and control:

the use and responsibilities of a project manager.Chapter 5 contains conclusions and recommendations. I. Data collection -

2. Development of performance specifications3. Step I of two.step formal advertising4. Step 2 of two-step formal advertising

2 OVERV IEW OF PROJ ECT STAGES 5. Construction of prototype facility6. Construction of the required facilities.

General To insure that all of the required activities were accorn-

The industriahzed sanitary facility program was pus hed, researchers developed a flow chart for the

both a construction program and a research project program. A modification of the initial flow chart is

.

i 5 4 .I * ~•~~[ ~• U %~~/ $#( ‘I ~~~ ft •

$1 ..I1,% .

~~~‘I ~t •‘I( . • •j.• • I• • • J

• S

~~~~~~~~

-

Figure 2. Main plant location of industrialized building finns (respondents to survey).

10

presented in Appendix A amid dms cussed in (‘hapter 4 . In November 1974 . (‘I:RL prese nted its proposal f o r

This chapter details the procedures comprising each ) of overcot imi m ig time h igh cost it sanitary faci lities to ORl) .t he six stages . as well as the et for ts taken to proniote which expressed co m m ce rr i with miiaintai riing aes t h e t i ccoordm nat mon. cuns ideratiomis , var iety ‘f building dcs igi is . arid vandal-

proof f ac t h it ic s. As idemiti lied in Appendix F . t heseBecause of the number of agencies involved in the requirenienls became the under l~ ing Ihienie for thep~ gra in, one we rr id imig di ftic iilt y was in so ri rig I hat all

agencies . inc ludmng (‘I’ RI.. t he four Districts within prugrammi and the spec Ifications. ORI) concu r red w Ith(‘F.RL’s approach to time prohleiii arId t he ove ra llORD Nashville, h untington , Pittsburgh. amid Louisville

and the states of Indiana . Ohio, Kentuck y. New approac h o f the progra lmi . and tentat ive ly agreed on -

I I a sc hedule of meetings to he held at I) mst rid and‘ ork . Pennsylvania . and ‘A est Virginia . were tota lly s tj l c i pt ti~ es t o gather design criterI a . (2) proceduresco o rdmn atcd lb roughout the progra nm. To lilirmmflhI / c the I or tile dcv&’lopmnerm I amid ICV Ic W of the per : ,coordim iat iomi prob lem wm th in the Distr ict s , ORE) niimiiedMr . Willia m I- . Showers of t h e louisvi lle District ~ts the 5;~~~ih1~~t i s . am i d (.3 ) t he detir t it ion ot niajor program

milestones. ihie ORl) L) ist mi ~ts attended the meetingI )ivisiomi cmirdinator. All 1) 151, ic ts wc e required to and w ere requested to arrange a meetIng betweensupply their sanitary facility require m ents ii’ Mr. (‘ERL researchers and t ite appropriate state official sShowers for inclusion in t he overal l program require-to tam niliante theni with the program and solicit theirments. Mr. Showers forwarded the consolidated support.requirements t o (‘FRi. and w ot ked closel y in developing

the final ORE) requirements. (‘oordinatmon ot the S tates Ii: Decemuher 1974 . (FRi. held an industrializedto insure t hat their design and state req ui rements were building sta te-o f .the-art symposium to inform indus-received and analyzed fo r ,,om , (,, rrm mar icc ~~ the l) ist riL is triahi,ed building na r mufactu re rs of the program .and Division’s requirements was accomnp lished through determi ne their interest , and be informed by themeetin gs at key decm siori -i riakin g po m m ils between Corps indust r~ of the t’easihi lmty of such a venture and possib leand state personnel having the tmut hority and resp msihiI~ areas of c ’ ’ i ce rn . More t h a n 50 manufacturers werefly t o discuss d ij l t -re nces in reqoJ )cmcn (s and develop invited in order to insure that the indust rv was well-a consolidated program. represented and t hat their comm ile nts would enable

( ERL I develop realistic performanc e specifications.Data Collection Man rita , - I (ire rs fu mii I 1 s ta t es. including Ca lifornia .The f i rs t s me p of t he data co llection ~ as I’) determine Ne~ York, Tes~s . and Mirpnes ,,ta , attended t he meetingthe procurement procedures ava i lable 1 p m ~r )curing ‘~ A brief questionnaire designed to provide Imiformat ionlarge group of facilities. (i RE determ ined that the on the industry ’s capahi lmt ~ ( Appendix C) was distrib-Department ppf Defense has l~ .o Inel bIrds of executing uted to all attendees . Responses indicated that ’a program of this t ype Iwo-step for m al advert isIng andone.stcp competitive negotiation. These are the ioil~ I. Most companies do not insta ll their units; it isDOD procurement techniq u es wh ich allow use of the purchaser ’s rc\p ~unsi hility to do so.performance specifications; th es e specitictit ioris are t he 2. Most cimnipariies do not limit delivery distance.only design procedure a llowmng industrialized building 3. (‘ ompanmcs wc i e willing to respond to eitherproducts to cc >m npe te without a r h imra p -

~ restr ict ions, performance specifications , descriptive specitlca timi n s .(‘l:KI tm ’as found thaI using pe rf o rm? (.Incc sp e cmtic a tm mmn s (Pr fixed desi gn and specification.it lcr east ’s the mil m un ih i ’r m~f llruis c~P m npet imlg in a particular 4 . Tooling-up for such a programn would lake he-p m mm gr a mii. rlm~’ ioriit.mI advert isimig process does not twec ri 30 and 120 days.adequat e ly accot imnmodatc the perfor m ance spec it ’mcai i~m nu 5. Number of faci l i t ies that could be producedlet tmnique . Although ( ‘ I- Ri . initial ly identified one-step during a 6- m ont h period ranged from 144 to 500.coimi pet it ive n egotiatio n as the it lost v ersat i le nietf iod , 6. All nuanuf ’acturers had a wi llingness/capability tofurther investigation indicated that its use is currently provide different exterior finishes.restricted to family housin g. 1 wo-step fortiial advertising(TSFA ) was therefore chosen. In October 1074 , the Points I and 5 were not substantiat ed during ti m et hief Counsel or the Corps of Lnginecrs (‘lvii Works program , hut tile mnanuta c turers ’ willingness ti p respondDirectorat e review ed and concurred with ( FRL’s to performance specifications and capability to providelegal and technical re4sons b r using TS I-A. ( Additiotial different exterior inishes were im portant results.( t lScL iS s iOt) on t h e USC of TSFA ms contained in Chapter3 , and A ppen dix B Contams the procedures for use of Prior to a visit to each District t o gather the designTS I’A .) ,

requirements , a questionnaire (Appendix D) was

II

dist ributed to obtain lntort mitioil on plutiibmn g desi gmi Table 3ieq uiiemiie nlts . rese rvoir procedura l ni iet hum ds .and general ORE) Projected Sanitaiy lacility Construction Programcomfort s ta t t mmru teatur es . This information fa m iliarized l- ~ ~~~~~~~~

t he personnel visiting the Districts with existing and ~~nifort Waslihouse Totalprojected aLr llty needs . Station Unit Unit Facilities

I’rom 13 to ho January 1975 , (‘1: RL representatives Nashville 23 14 37visited the Pittsburgh. Ilumtting ton . and Nashv lllC Pmnshurgh 20 None 20

- . h untington 3t~ 34 72Distr icts to discuss the requirements f~ r san itary fac il- Louisti!k 86 IS I 04ities sc heduled to he built during h’Y 7(i-77. Thisiiitorit ,ation was combined with previousl y gathered ioi St. 167 66 233mntor mat i o m i fromu Louisville District t i establish ten~tative desigmi criteria requmr en icnts for sa nitar y faci litiesbuilt by ORD (A ppendix I ). ( ‘E R L analyzed this At the January 1975 j mmi nt meeting. ORD personnelinformation wit h regard to feasibility, known industry reviewed the figures presented in Table 3 and decidedcapability, and the design requirements of ORD and to identify 7t~ units for construction under the indus-the states of Indiana , Kentuc ky, and Ohi mm (Appendix fria lized sanitary haci l i ty program. The exact breakoutF). Since ihe mm ver all ob t ectmve in deve loping the design and sites hot the specified units were to be determinedrequirements wa s to developa sin gle so lution acceptable and specified prior to 1 March 1975. Figure 3 showst i m all organizations , emphasis was placed on developing the locations of the projects selected.sufficient facility standardization to achieve costred m icimons , Development of Performance Specifications

Development of the performance specifications wasIn a Joint meeting on 24 January 1975 , (‘i RL a very critical phase of the program. Performance

presented its recommnemided design criteria to ORD. spec ifications are to identif y the functions required toLouisville District , and Ion Worth Disti iut (( ‘i’RL’s be performed rather than the exact details of theco-wr iters m i t the pcrtor iiiance speci ficat ions) . required product. Requirements were specified in a

general fo rm so as not to exclude manufacturers havingOne of (‘FR L’s major concerns at the start of the the capability of constructing similar required items.

sanitary fac i l i t~ prog rat u was the number of units The specifications established maximum and minimumprojected for construction throughout ORD during levels of ’ perfor m ance and were kept as simple as pos-} ‘Y 76/ 77. In the initial briefing to ORD, CERI sible, identif ying w hat was not acceptable in order tostipu lated that a su fficiently large volumne of units prevent COi )t tac tor errors.should he allocated to the program to insure cost Savingsfrom repetitions in production of a standard unit, The During the initial development of the performancediscussion ‘s it h industry representatives on the feasibil- specifications , copies of the Indiana and Ohio buildingrt y of producing sanitary facilities through industrialized codes were purchased to insure that the state codesmethods indicated that cost red uclions could be would he followed. Additionally, sanitary health codesac hieved u t t e r produuion of several units if the design of all participating states were obtained to insure thatof the facilities could he standard ized. Since the none of the regulations were excluded. These proceduresrequirements of sanitary facilities do nol vary substan- were required to insure t hat the participating statestially from one unit to an other , it was determined that would rap idly approve t he performance specificationssost savings could be .ichicvcd if the number of desired and subsequent designs when they were submitted.facih itmcs was reduced below 100. The Districts , inkeepi n g with in dust ry recommendations , decided t heir During development of the performance specifica-rese rvoir area program could he satisfied with a comfort finns , participating states requested that certain designstation unit and a washhouse unit , criteria he writ ten to meet their existing state practices.

Throughout the gathering of the design criteria , allm m t he meetings held at the District of (ices ,represent. participating agencies were reminded that such tailoring

a t ives were requested to identify the District’s projected would he ex tmen i ie l y cost ly; in the past , several similarsanitary faci lity con ,s ) iuct ion program for FY 76/77 programs had failed because they tailored the criteria(Table 3). to meet different f’act ions ’ demands. When an additional

12

requirement was identif ied, it was analyzed to insure DIA N A , FOR BUIlDINGS (‘ONSTRU(TI’I) INt hat the prescribed procedures used by the majority i mf INDIA NA. CONSTRUCTION CORI’S FOR ALLagencies were not sacrificed. A good example of one LOCKS SHALL SF FURNISIII.D BY THEof the few tailorings of the performance specifications CONTRACTOR.in this program was the State of Indiana’s requirementfor a s pecific locking system. The following phrase was A copy of the mitial draft of the performanceincluded in the performance specification: speci fications was forwarded to each participating

organization for review and comment. This procedurecorresponded with the use of matrix management *

ALL LOCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH followed throughout the program. A meeting was heldHEAVY DU1’Y (7K) CYLINDERS AS MANU to review the performance specifications from theFA CTURED BY BEST UNIVERSAL LOCK CO. standpoint of their not describing the requirements inINC., INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA. PERMA- per formance language, not adequately covering a re-NENT CORES FOR CYLINDERS WILL BE quirement , and/or specifying an item that should beFURNISHED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF

______

NATURA L RESOURCES, STATE OF IN- *Discus~j~mn ic conraj ncd in Chapter 3 . Prerequisite 6.

/—i’NYd

L~~~~~~~’GA N

CI. vELmD~~~~~~ ~ /

jv~~~ P A

5,‘4~ ~~~~~‘“•—‘- “~P ‘ Y0U~~~~SI4tN5

ILLINOIS/

INDIANA : N L*L~ I

•~~~ qHIo

SS~~~~ ViLtI ~ I c*ssas ce /LA KE LASS ¶/ 1

- LAST FceKAL

/ P5101(5 Ri’1 - -LA SS ‘ ‘-

~ ~~~~~~~~~~ I) ious,v~~x FN**WFON T

LAST LI % W ~~

(1 KENT UCKY

L AS S ,

-“

- -‘ Si ,.

,. 5

”

“-/_

~~~~~~~~~~~~

‘ I— i, ,~~~‘ i. :/ “~‘ VIRGINIA

,,(? ~~~

‘

I NA*4VLLES/

I, TENNESSEE (f’ ~~~~~~~

I 1 CAR

- —‘

. “ 7 ~ Y~Y~~MISS A L A 8 A M A

40 0 40 ~~NILU

/ I -

~~~~~

0 ‘PROJECT LOCAl mON

Figure 3. Projects receivini g industrialized sanitar y faci lities.

13

eliminated. The persons attending this meeting were electrical power for heating and ventilating; and (6) therequtred to ( I ) be totally famnilian with the program, enforceme n t of the injunction would jeopardize the( 2 ) have the authority to approve any modifications procurement action which had begun prior to theto t he facility requiren r ients . and (3) be tota lly familiar moratorium. DAEN.FFU responded that the reservoirwith their organizations ’ comments and t hose of the parks were under the jurisdiction of the (‘ivil Worksother agencies and hc able to discuss ramifications of Directorate , and therefore the moratorium was notpn)posed comments. applicable to these facilities. ‘Fhe letter further suggested

t hat for (‘ivil Works projects , electrical resistance heat.To insure that all organizations were aware of iri g sh ould be used only where other heating systems

comments developed by other agencies , comm ents are not practicab le. The letter recommended thewere sent to all organizations participating in the following actions:program several weeks prior to the review meeting.Since CERL .icsisted Fort Worth District in developing I Provide minimum capacity electrical space heatingthe initial pc rlmm rmiianc e specif Ications , cop ies of all and water heating equipment. Design temp erature forcmmm ment s from all org amiizat ions were torwarded to space heating should be 65°F (18°C) maximum.CERL for consolidation. (‘LRL reviewed all comments 2. Omit space heating for those facilities that willand contmnon areas of con cern and drafted alternative not be operated regularly during the winter months.performance specifications to faci litate the discussions (The use of portable chemical latrines during thesedtmnng t he review meetings . As a result of the total months may be an acceptab le alternative. )review , the alternative specifIcations were accepted by 3. Provide vandal-proof temperatu re controls thatall agen cies. are not readily accessib le to occupants of these facilities.

~‘he initial specifications required the manufacturer Step One of Two-Step Formal Advertisingto design the foundation to support the facility. Corps Completion of the performance specification m i -personnel (or their contractor) were to construct the tiated the development of the Request for Technicalfoundation in accordance with specifications furnished Proposal (RFTP) package and notification to industryby t he manufacturer; the actual cost of the foundation of the forthcoming contract. Prior to issuance of thewould be added to the cost of the facility submitted RFTP. discussion arose regarding the possibility ofby the manufacturer. However , subsequent review of setting aside this procurement action for small business .the specification resulted in the requirement that the CERL examined the requirements for a small businessmanufacturer design and construct t he facility ’s founda- set-aside and reached the following conclusions:t ion. This transfer of responsibility insured that themanufacture r had complete responsibility from the I. This project was a research effort endeavorin g toinitial developmen t through the final erection of the determ ine whether or not sanitary facilities could befacili ty. Thus, this program followed the lines normally built less expensively through standardization andassoc iated with turnkey construction. Volume II con’ repetition. At the start of this program , det erminin gtains the specif ications issued for t Ine program. who would or would not respond to the RFTP was

impossible, because the design solutions were beingAfter the specifications had been developed, the requested rather than dictated as in conventional

(‘orps issued a m oratorium on the use of electrical construction projects. Consequently, respondents couldresistance heating. On be lmalt ’ m i t the Louisville District , include small firms, large manufacturing corporations ,CFRL requested that the sanitary facility program be individuals, or consortia comprised of a combination ofexcepted from t he mora to rium by the Utilities Engineer- the aforementioned. (In the future , experience shoulding and Operati ons Division (DAFN-FUI) at the Office ameliorate this problem and make a more reliableof the Chief of Engineers. As justi fication f u r an determination possible.)exception, CERL identified: (I) the comfort stationswould have approximately 1000 ft (92.9 m2 )and would 2. Because this two-step solicitation required theuse 9 kW of power , and eac h shower facility would design and erection of 78 buildings having uni que andrequire approxi m ate ly 56 kW of powe r;( 2) there were comp lex characteristics within a 1- to 2-year period,no ot her utilities at each project location ; (3) natural respondents were required to possess both sophisticatedgas was not always available; (4) although fuel oil and design skills and nnanageme nt capabilities. CERLpropane gas could be used , cost would be prohibitive ; believed that small conventional construction firms(5) it was anticipated that all bidders would choose unacquainted with industrialized methods would not

14

- - - -- —

-.J~~ ~~~~~~ -‘ - r ~5,; ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ “ ... ‘ ‘ .~~~~._.J Ci ~~~~ C ” ~~’ ~~~~- “ ~~~~~‘. ~~~‘. ‘ - -C ~) 4 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .t ‘ .. ,ZZ-

~ . ~~~ ‘~~~~

‘~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~

, ,~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ‘ — o , .1 V’S 0 -‘ c~ ~~

— ,~ e, -fl 3 ~ - fl’ — ,~

. - - C - -

~o 9 ~~~r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~

4 ‘-1 .4 a - LI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L) ~~~~~~~ ‘ C ’ .5-4

~~~~ o. ‘.1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~. ,C L ~ ~~~~~~~~~~ C

(-~ ~~~~~~ ~~. . , . o. ’ .~~~~~— .,— cm, ,, ~ ,.‘ — ‘~ ~ ,, o o .-. - ~~ ., - - -. -(‘) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ru. -’~ ‘ m ~~~

‘-0- ~ ‘ .-_5 C) L) ~ 5- — — ‘ ~~ ,~~ ‘ ~IC - ‘-. C) — ,,.~~ ‘ 2 5 . - a ‘~~~~~ ‘~~~~ — m’~~~CL) ~ ,- , , ‘

~~~~~~~‘.. ‘-~~~ 2 ” c ~~~~~ ~I — C ~ —~~ - = .-- ~~~~~~ - -- - - ‘ “ . 1 ~~.I

~oo ~ I ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,r ,~~~ ~~, C

- ,~~~~~

, 5-. 4 — ‘, - ‘ .~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ‘~ ‘~:

—

I- •~~ - oz ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ c5- ±: ~~~ - _ -::4 -‘ (,~ CC LU ~~ a ; ‘ ‘ E ’

~~~~~ ’— ’ F -~~ -‘ - 2c m I 5 I ~~ o w oo v* ~~~~ -, ~~~ ‘ ‘ S 0 ”) _~~ ~~~~‘ ‘ r -~~Cm ~~ I_- C) 515 1~

.‘ ‘ “ — ~‘ , 1s. C - c - -cm. ~~ _.m vs _______f — . -‘ E -- t ,,. ~_ I 0-

~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~ ./ E~~~~~ ~~~~~ ;

5” LU LU “ •I I ‘ ‘~

. : Is, ‘ , s’s VS

— (~~ X C) ti s i ~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4- .-

_ -~ - -~~~0-

~~~—. ~H ‘~~~ “‘ - ~~~ C ~~~~ .~~ ~u-- vs ~ m, ‘“‘i” ” £ -“ ~, .- “ ‘ — 7 . 4.4 C — — — 5- - —.

~ “ ‘~ . 4 ‘ ‘. — — — 5- : - ~ -.

Ct LU I— a’ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :t-C t ”

_~~-~ I_ ~~~~~~~~~ . t. .,~ m.

~~~~I— ‘D . S ~~~~ . L — _ 4. S . 5,. .- .~4 — .4 — C- I’1~~~~-’ ~~ ‘ ~~~‘ ‘ ‘ ~~~~

o ’ 5 -~~ 5 m • C — — ,2~~ ~~~

—‘ , ,~~~ # U-Z ~~~ . Z 5 T h C ,Z ,~ c~~ ’~~~~!_ ~~~~ ‘~~~ m — ’ ~~ - ‘~~‘~ 0 -o C) LU C-’.. 5- .‘ “S ‘ ~,- ‘ V’ C. $ ‘ -: 5- -- ,r CI— - L ) v s ‘ - - .,~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ‘ C - .. LU

VS (.~ — 0- C (1 ‘ “ - — ‘~ 5- 0 s. .C I’ C C ~~ cm.w r i-- u.s ~~ Cm m • ‘V .‘ — = • 5- ~ ‘ ‘ z .~ r ‘ — - — -. U) VS—— s~~o a. ~~ ~ C 5 - u - r . .~ C C ., i~~ C .

~ I-

~~~~ cr 2,.~4_L~_

~L .s ~, ‘5-

= -:~ ~~~~~~~ ~ - ~

,

~ ~~~

vs

—5 Cm s— ~~ 0 Q) 5: — ~- . — 5. -~

h p

~~4’_f<0 <~~~ Cl— !-5 IV S . .J 0 U) I IC’. 5-/5 5— OUL I- I 0- u.s C w0111(,,, ~~ z ‘

~~ I— I— , ‘ : -‘Os Z 5— — _J VS .l~’S s 5” :1: 5- I ‘5- -‘.5~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ t~~

5- 40~U, I— VS U) ‘S S S )

~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ‘S ~~ ~~~ ‘

~~ w vs u.s ...) .5- U ,~ ~

. I - ~‘vs I 5— 5— ~~ ._J C) U) Q4 - ..~~~~~ ‘~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,J ~ ‘.‘ I •1’

LU VS _J U. ~~ 5-5 4 ~j -I vs _J —. .~JLs~~”

5- Z - o - I—1—I Z — V’S U) ..J 4 5~ -~ 4 ,. I I I I-‘T —5 Ct 0 ~ C 0 C~~~ ,, 5— S . SI

~~ < L’S U) :i - ~— . C I,

-‘ -

ri~ ~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~ z ‘

~ I5-’ U) U) U) .. - 5) I - , -‘, 1 5-s’~~~~ I.

~~~ I -

~a’ ’A ~~~-. - ~~~~~~~~~~ .~ ~ ~~~~~~

,

F:

. ‘ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ • : :I —. ‘ ‘ C. ~~‘ P t’5- 15-i 0 r,-~ - .

~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4 , 5 .f l :

C) a ‘- ~ a - .4’: I aU) - 0 0U~ s’• C - ‘ ‘ p” ! a — -~— 0 “ a — — ‘ P 5-’ “ * -

~~~! !!!~

‘ E~1 T’’~ ~• -,~~ , . ‘ .. ‘ ~ ~~~ 5-: ~~~ ‘ I

~-° I a ’ ’ . I , ‘~ - • • LI

’S

:.~ .~ ‘

~ ;. ‘ . ~‘ ~~~~~~~~

~ , & - ‘ P . 4 - . -- - . . - - ‘ 5-

- — -‘ c; ~~~~~~~~

F — , * ‘ ‘ ‘5 - ’ - I ,’.4 - - - -- - - - - 4 - 4. - _i _~

/ _ . - 4

- -, 4

-,

IS

be able to submit acceptable amid timely solutions at a On S Ju ly 1975 . 13 prop osals were received fromreasonable cost. The ictu re , (‘ER L strongly recoin- industry with regard to the RFTP. The contractingmended t hat the procurement action not be set aside of f icer convened the initial evaluat ion hoard meetingf o r small business , at t ime I.ouisvmlk’ District on IS Jul y 1975. Volume II

contains t h e documentation used hy t he evaluationThe louisvi lle I)mstrict received a call from the hoard. l’ar t ic ip at ing in this board were personnel from

Atlanta Small Business Association (SBA) . w hich 01W. (‘ER L. h untington and Louisvil le Districts , andbelieved that ~a fair and reasonable price could be representatives From the states of Indiana. Ohio. andreceived from a small business; t he SHA was willing, West Virginia.based on t he information they had received , to makethis program a test case . CERL informed the Louisville The mandate of the evaluation board , wh ich includedDistnct that if this case caine before the required an aesthetic design hoard and an acceptable productofficials, it wou ld not be set aside for small business hoard , was to identify t hose proposals which success-because of the nature of the program. After additional fully met the minimum perf orm ance requirementsdiscussions wit h the SBA regional representative , specified in the RFTP. To ir.sure that an accurate andLouisville District decided not to set aside this program unbiased evaluation was conducted, all board membersfor small businesses, and no additional discussions were registered professionals. The aesthetic design boardensued. consisted of (‘orps and state architects who reviewed

and evaluated all material related to design aestheticsOn 6 May 197 5 an advance Notice to Bidders was and appearance to determine whether the proposals

issued (see Figure 4) in conjunction wit h the Commerce were acceptable. Board members independently com-Business Daily Procurement Notification, under pleted the evaluation docum ent which accompaniedsecti on ~4 . Prefabricated Structures and Scaffolding each proposal. The acceptable product board consistedFigure 5). During the fourth week of the advertising of personnel from CERL who assisted the evaluation

period , a m idter m conference was held at Louisville board in determining whether proposals were accept-District with representatives of participating flints to able. This board operated on an “on-call” basis anddiscuss the performance specifications and to clarify evaluated only products and methods of construction/any ambiguous areas in the specifications. During this fabrication unfanniliar to the members of the evalua-meeting, Corps representatives were available to discuss tion board.detailed characteristics of reservoir areas referenced int he RFTP. Attendance at the meeting was optional for To insure that the likes or dislikes of a particulart he bidders. At the conclusion of this meeting. an arc hitect did not bias evaluation of a manufacturer .amendment of solicitation was issued that modified the criteria for disqualify imig a design were ( I ) a majoritythe specifications and detailed other pertinent RFTP of aesthetic design hoard members were required to

changes resulting from the meeting. identify an area of design as nonresponsive. or (2) thetotal sum of nonr esponsive areas had to be greater than

— — - ~~~~, -- a preestablished factor. The factor was defined as the~~ Structures and Scaffolding number of aesthetic design areas multiplied by 1 .75.

t~ 54 — FABRICATE AND CONSTRUCT/ERECT At the conclusion of the step-one evaluation, six ofAPPROX 56 TOILET BLDGS AND 14 WASH BLDGS. the 13 proposals were considered to have the aestheticThis proposed procurement wilt be a two-step formal . . -

advertisement. Step-one of the procurement witl be aveit attributes described in the specification. but eachole May 75. This is the initiat package of a potential 5-year contained some flaw or discrepancy in design or facilityprogram d.sugned to suppiy 200.300 peckeg.d sanitary layout. The evaluation board determined that these

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Deetnsto befurnmshed proposals should be revised to make the m acceptable

Louisvltle, Huntington , and Pittsburgh Engineer Dilts ., before step-two bids were requested. It was recom-Ohio River Div. — RFTP DACW2 1-75-B-0089 - RFTP due mended to the contracting officer that the six proposalsdate of Step-one 17 Jun 75. (P122) be identified as acceptable with minor modifications

US Army Engineer Dust., Louisvitle and that those modifications be identified for revision.600 Fede at Ptac.. Loulsvitte , KY 40202

In other programs of this type, manufacturers w hoseFigure 5. (,omnierce Business Daily procurement proposals were acceptable with minor modificatmon is

n otification, had nut been allowed to modify thefu proposed designs.

16

Ilowever . simice t he intent u t this ~rogramii was to solicit capabilities of the manu facturers. The identified sclied-as n _ i n n ’. iii:mn u fac tu t - rs as possible . the nianufaL inrers ule ( 1-igure 6) was c unsidened to he tight hut realistic -

were .i 1k wed to revise t hei m prop sals if t lie m odi f ica lii rnlid lii i u’quuiuc ., t u i ~aI u-dt-si g mu om lime th r - s m gmn w:i’. I mu t 1)0 -~ Scpte iim he n I )7S j st’i’oiid mm m ee t i t m g ot t im e

.ues t ht - t k- .u hl y u m uuai -cc p l .m hlc . ev alu at io n maid wa s .o i ivi- mi eih i t l Im e I o i imsvm lle l ) ms t nic io iiice to mee v ahima t e t ine designs pme viuuust ’, id eu m lmt led as

rime ieu mm a uim m mm g seven proposals were tudged aest het- acceptable with m inor m odifications . Of time sixmca lI~ umiaccept ab le . event though in at least one instance , proposals received for additional evaluatio n , f ive wereti me pro poser had fo llowed the specifications ver y close- considered to be acceptable for step-two form al ad-ly. Oiiu n iiam mii fac t urer . uponi receipt of the notice that vertising procedures t hose of Ohio Building Products ,his proposal was nini ies ponisnve fur failure to comply Inc.. Mosse r Construction , Inic., Ren Corp., K1)M Con-with the aesthetic requirements of the RFTP. decided struction Co.. and t he Associated Piuntihing Supp lyt o lodge a protest with the co mi tm a ct m n i g officer. CERL (‘o. of Indiana , Inc. (APSCO). The one unacceptablev. rote .i legal memnorandun m (Appendix G) to the con- proposal was revised satis factori l y with regard to spacetr ac tmng of f icer in response to time protest. In a meeting requirements and layout , hut t he ext e rior treatmentwith the manufacturer , i t was determined that the offered virtually no diversification in the use of materialsaest hetic clauses identified in time RFTP had been and was judged unacceptab le. The consensus it theinformally disc ussed with the General Accounting evaluation board was that certain inexpensive modifica-Off ice (GAO) and were legal because: ( 1) aesthetic is a (ions could have been made to the proposed structureprope r factor to specif y as a m inimum requirement; which would have made the appearance aestheticall y( 2 ) the aesthetic clause in the Rl-’TP (1.1.4) is an acceptab le. In view of the closeness of the step-twoacceptable clause to specify an aest hetic requirenment; bidding period and the availability of five acceptableand (3) the proposal was evaluated fairl y, and the proposals, t he board did not execute the prerogative ofresults s~cre reasonab le without a m m~ evidence of fraud, going back to t he unacceptable proposer. It was rec-abuse of authority. or arbitrary action. ommended to the contracting officer that the five

acceptable proposals identified above be allowed toIn t he preparation for the second step of the two- participate in step-two bidding.

step formal advertising procedure , a revised schedulewhich considered t he additional evaluation of the Step Two of Two-Step Formal Advertisingmanufacturers’ proposa ls that were acceptable with The five acceptable manufacturers were notified ofmmnor modifications was required. A meeting was held t heir participation in this stage of the program. Thewit h ORD and Louisville District to establish a feasible remaining manufacturers were sent a detailed descrip-schedule. The nature of this program , t he ramifications tion identify ing w here the proposals fell short of theof winter construction, and the requirem ent to test and specifications . Each acceptable manufacturer was re-evaluate a prototype facil i ty prior to time construction quired to supply costs in the areas identified in Figureof the required facilities necessitated a tight schedule. 7. In preparation for the hid opening, (‘FRI. developedAni~ schedule w h mmc h identified the co m pletion of the t he conventional construction governm ent estimate~iro notype facility at Brookvilhe’ Lake Reservoir after based on comfort stations and washhouses constructedti me start of winter was not acce ptab le because of the from 1965 to 1975 (Tables 1 and 2). The followingneed t o in su re that lime prototype facility was evaluated* information was deve loped -during the wmm it et and the winning bidder allowed to

use these n itonit hs f i r tooli ng up for the remaining I. Average cost per square foot of 46 comfort sta-fa cnhi ties. Manufacturers were asked about t he schedule t ions constructed for the Corps of I ngineers during theto insure t hat the program did not impede or in any penod 1965 to 1975 (adjusted to 1975 price levels):way constrain their design development process . All $10 5.99 ($ 1 140.87/rn 2 ).v s c ’ p i tic ol time manutact urt ’rs were willing to express 2. Average size of comfort stations in sanitary facil-their reqm umre r ue nmts regarding the questions asked ity proposals: 555 sq It (5 1.6 rn2 ).(Appendix Iii 1 bus . (‘I RI. was able t o determine the 3. Total estimated construction cost per comnfortrequirements for a light schedule that were within the station (built conventionall y) : $58,824.

- - - — - - 4. Average cost per square foot of 18 washhousesrt~vm&~ ut s i m i l a r pro gram s identified that eViituau ion of constructed for the (‘orps of Engineers from 1965 tothe pr ut um~pe ta~ ilm n ~ was neo~s%a r) to mlluminant- those ite ms

rm,~umrm n~ m u t t , anl ,uns which were undetected during pre- 1975 (adjusted to 1975 price levels): $88.54 ($953.04!viuus evj tu~~tiu,n rn 2 ).

17

Act ivity Milestone

Identify mnanu facturers ’ - i rlificatuons 8 August

Disc uss mnoduf icatio mi w it k ..e District representatives I l - I S August

Required modification submitted to Louisville District 29 August

Evaluate modifications 5 September

Receive approval o f design from states; states identify requiredexterior treatment 9 September

Notify acceptab le proposals by te legram ~ September

Follow-up notification of acceptable proposals by letter 9 September

Open manufacturers ’ bids 30 September

Award contract 7 October

Suhnnit hid bonds 17 October

(,mve notice to pr oceed (NTP); request preparation offoundation in formation/drawings 17 October

Conduct preconstruct ion conference wit h invoI~ed Districtsand firm; request quality control program and foundationdrawings 22 October

Begin foundation work at Brookville Lake 27 October ’

Comp lete Brookville Lake foundation 6 November

Submit contract drawings and specifications for reviewand iliprova l 28 October’

Appr ove contract drawings and specifi cation s 6 Novembe r

Complete construction of Brookville Lake facility 22 December

Not considered to be a major milestone.

Figure 6. Sanitary facility schedule fronn evaluation to construction of prototype facility.

18

- ‘

. ~

“,

, ‘.

_ __ ;

- CONTINUATION SHEET ~~ ~~ ~

t r i M ’ . Pt , s ‘ . . -

—

C - 4 - a ’

* ‘ a - - PC !’ ( £ ‘ -~

Indu srelali zed B u i ldin g s , San itary Fac i l i t iesin accordan ce with the Request for Techn i cal ‘ -

-

Proposal dated 12 May 1975 , your proposal -

5ppr nvf~i under ~ t p l I and the Provisions ofth is SF 33 ( Step II) Building prices wi l l -include f a b r i c a t i o n and deliv ery.

[FR OOK Y I L L E I. AK E , I NDI A NAExterior Trpatrient - TYPE A

1. To ilet Buildings , heated 2 Ea

2. Site preparation erection and testing 1 .)ob for

f~LtJt’1 C R EE K , WEST VAExterior Treatment - T YPI~ A

3. ‘To i le t Bui ldings , unheated 8 ía

4. W ash buildings °‘ea ted 2 Ia

5. Wash buildings, unheated 2 Ii

6. S i te Prepara t ion erect ion and testin g I JOb for

7. Acces s to Site (estimated ) 7,500 Ln . Ft,

EAST LYNN WEST VAE x t e r i o r Treat ment - TYPE A

8. Toi let Buildings , unheated 2 I i

9. Wash Buildings , unheated 2 -L a

10. Site prepar ation erection and testing 1 iO b

11 . Access to Site (estimated) 500 In. F t.

YOIJGHIOGHENY , PAExterior Treatment - IYPF A

12. To i let Building , heated 1 ~a for

I . Totter r; u il d inq , unheated 1 ~a for

14 . ‘. i t e prep ara t ion erect ion and test in g 1 ~Job for(5, Accpçs to Si te (estin uated ) 320 Ln. Ft.

~o los i - j

Figure 7. Bid schedule.

19

4 ’ . 4 5 ’ ‘ Q ’ ’ t & ‘ : ‘ 466 I •i~ N : - ~‘ o~~ 6i .. C ‘.~ ‘ - t

CONTINUATION SHEET________ ______________________ L DACW2 7- 75 B -0089 2 2

‘5 4 ’ NO 4 4 , P i ’ ,,f S SIlVO CiS OUA’th’ V ,,~.,, : ‘,:‘ a s C ~ 4, .” - ,

CAESAR CREEK LAKE , 01110-

‘T~ter’1o~~Ti~~~~~~~~~~Typ E~~16. Toilet buildings heated 13 Es

17. Was h but ldings , heated 7 Ea

18. Site preparat ion erectton and testing I J0’ for

19. Access to Site (estimated) 8150 In. Ft.

EAST FORK LAKE , OH IOExterior Treatment - TYPE A

20. Toilet build ings , heated 10 Es

21. Wash bu ildings , heated 7 Es

22. Site preparation erection and testing 1 Jol for

23. Access to Site (estima ted) 8000 In. Ft.

PATOK,A LAKE INDIANAIxterlor ‘freatnient - TYP E A

24. -

Toilet buildings , unheated 13 Ea

25. -

Wash buildings , unheated 8 Ea

26. Site preparation erection and testing 1 Job for

27. Access to Site (estimated ) 9700 Ln . Ft.

TOTAL- Location 0f Fabricat ing Plant : _

36 oa I?

Figure 7 (cont ’d)

20

5. Average s u e of waslihouses in sanitary facil ity The preconstruction con te renc e was held 4 Novem-proposa ls: ~73 sq ft (8 1.1 m2

). her 1975 by Louisville I) ist ikt . l)uring this meeting.6. Total estimated construction cost per washhouse the l) isri i ct covered the provisions of t h e co ntract

t built ci)nventionall y ) ¶77 .295 . furnished the for ms fo r the suppl~ co ntract andconstruct on contract requi rements; and discussed the

(~siuig t i ns informat n - n, tl~ coun ve nt io ,na l construe— labor relations aspect oii d t hic - requiremen t tot thet i(un c os t s est imate for thi s program was determined to appropriate posting at the job site , the reqi i irentent f oor

¶ 5 .105 ,4 ( ( ) 52~~~4 1 ,200 for 50 c uiio fort stations reproducible drawings and specifications, sa tety , valueand S2 .1n4 .260 for 2~ washhooses. engineering, and auditing. APS(’() presented their co in’

struction quality control program , submitted one sCtAs identitied in Table 4 , t he winning low bid was of blue-line drawings of footing and foundation fo r

supp lied by Associated Plumbing Supply Company ut approva l , and requested two ) com plete sets of ’ siteIndiana , Inc (A PS(’O). Fort Wayne , IN , at approx- drawings in accordance with t he spec ilio .ations .imnate ly 53 percent of the conventional constructiongovernment esti m ate. Figures 8.9 , and 10 are drawings Prototype Facility Constructionof the propose d facilities supplied by APSCO during The prototype faci lity was comp leted at Brookvillethe initial submission. Lake Reservoir , I N . 23 December 1975. Four appr ox-

imatel y I mont h, testing and evaluation were conductedSubsequent to the opening of the bids, a general to insure that the facility met the requirements of the

meeting was fie ld with APSCO to (I) establish a date performance specifications. Among the tests conductedfor the preconstruction conference and who would were impact , sustained loading, and measurement ofat tend; (2) identify how the payments would be light levels. CF RE. submitted duo ’uments oil ’ t he testacco m plished (the contract combined aspects of both results and recom m endations for modification to thea supply contract and construction contract); (3) re- remaining facilities to t he Louisville t ) isl r icl . whic hquest a form al schedule from the contractor for the maintained the responsibility for implementing thedates of t h e erection of the buildings at all sites; recommendations. Appendix J contains pictures of the(4) request a set of footing and foundation drawings Brookville Lake proto type faci lity.and samp les of aggregate and shingles indicating colorselection (not previously identified) be furnished at the Construction of Required Facilitiespreconstruction conference; and (5) establish a date for Production and erection of the required fac ilitiessubm ission of drawings and specification (10 days after have now been initialed . (‘I RL monitored the initialpreconstruction conference). facilities in t he production phase ut the project to

obse rve and record the procedures used. It is believedt hat monitoring was and will continue to be an essentialactivity for subsequent projects of this type until

Tab le 4 sufficient documentation on production and erectionDisUibution of Bids and Relationship to procedures is acquired. The following is a description

Conventional Cona~ ucdon Government Estimate of the activities at one site Caesar (‘reek Like Reser-voir , OIl .

Percent ofEirms Bid ($1 Estimate - . - - - -The initial activity APSCO pertoirrned at this site

APS(’() 2 ,689 .434 .50 S3 was forming and pouring of the slabs. E ach slab hadt oni SS~ y n e , I N the plumbing insta lled and the forms for the shower

and sump drains com pleted prior to pouring. DuringSIa ,ssc r (co nSt ruCt ion , Inc. 3 .529 ,350.00 69 the pouring of the concrete, t he slabs were troweledio’Iiicuflt . (MI

smooth. Temp lates we re placed to niark t he holes to beken Corporation 4 ,826 ,208.00 9~ drilled in the slab which would later receive the anchorMuncie , IN bolts for securing the concrete panels to the slab. All

- slabs were completed and ready to receive the panelsKI)M Cou istr uc iicun (‘ c u 4 ,366 ,882.00 86 . - - -

Richmo nd IN severa l months prior to the erection of the facility -

I- rcction of t he facilit y was accomp lished with a four.Ohio, huilotung Products . Inc. 4 .072 .420.00 80 person crew: a foreman who operated the crane; aWiIIuu ug hh~ h u h . (>11 second person who assisted in unloading the panels

2 1

I ‘ . - . .~~~ .‘ ,. -~ 4

I ‘ :‘ I , f t~-- , - - ‘ I ! t oI I

- ri.~ II ~;

f ., O 1 4

~ i~ -

, - .

.- -

ij ‘1

, I

0 , ,

.

t

~~~~~~~~~~ ‘ 0~~~ — 0 , ,

‘~0’~

’ -

- ‘

‘ I ,~~

5: . , . ‘~~‘ “

t - ~ ~~~~ —

- - -~

; I~

I . ‘ i ’-.. ’ .ç~.. , : .~~ - t - ‘ ‘-.

~~ -

- r . ~~~

--

‘U f t L~~~~11 1

1

I .

I too

,

1 -

‘ ‘ ‘‘ II—- 1~1-~~

. - ItI I it

__ 1 / ~ o

L ~~~ ,

r -~

r’~~

’ • , .t

_ m

I I I ..~, ~~~~

I. ~~~~~ 1 t 1 ‘ - 1’. I - -

5 5 . —.. ,-t . . - -

c It- , 0 r — ‘ 0 mlI 4’,, .

~~~~~~ ~.4. .%— ., - ‘ - --S Ci

II :Ii - I • - I,i.

; ~I ’ ~1 —~ — t , ‘ 1 ‘ — ‘ 0 , t . C , t

I ~~

- ; / “ - It ’ q

I ~ ) 4

~ I!~ ~! I I

~~ \ —.rc ‘~ ‘

I “ 0

~~~~ II~L~ ~ I

~~~~ r \ ‘ - I

-

t

~t1~ iii •—~. - \ - .-

~ ~~~~~~~ 1 “i’

, ‘~~~~

- -

_,~~~

.‘i .~

•

~~~~~~

—-

~~

:‘:~~ .

• I . , . r j

,~~

-

~~

“ ~.4 -~ I L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~I

~~ ~~~~~ . , .

• r~~t~

, ., ~1:Ill II i’

_________________

, . 1

- - . — ~ 0~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ I.4 0 - : - --— — ‘ : ‘

. 4 -~~- . 4 - ,

.—. . . . . . .. - -.4 4 .—. — ‘I

- . ,

“~~~‘ 0

I I ,’

- ‘

5 ~ o ~~~~~~~~~

‘~~ ~~

‘ , . : ~~ ~~ - r , - —— - , - ‘ ‘

- .~~~~~~- . - -.- - . 4— - I •o 0,

~ ‘ — - —-‘

v~

It— I:

~ ~ ;~

t~:

i c~~~I

/I ~~

-‘ ‘ - 1 - :

‘5 ‘0 1 .‘ - -‘~‘~~~ • “—:‘—

~° 01”

- ‘ ‘ I 1 • ‘

• “ r~. 1 . - 0i l ,, j ~1’~ “~

-

t

o ) -

_______________________________________________________________________________

‘I i

~0~ I~ ~~, ‘~~~I o I

‘

~ ~‘h1 -I ~. ~~~~~ o~ ~

~

•,

l~~~

,l — •

l ’I ~~

~ : ‘

C -1~ ~“

~~~~~~ : r ’ ~~- ., . o ‘1-

0 I g , ,I . :‘ I

~ _ 1 ‘

,. ‘ ‘ - -~ S

C

1 j :‘‘ O . o I C ’ . ,

~~~~~, , - t ‘~~~ ‘ C

9 ‘ I

- — 1 ~ ,

~

II. 1 tjo l,~~~ - I .5o r . - , - . ,

-: . - I

- I : ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ to u i u ~; / . .

Ii • ;- ‘~I;— ‘ i~ I it o l d

I I I ~~~‘ I III F It1 F I I I t i l IH- 1 ° ‘ . ~~~

I ~II I

~- ~~ !~~~~~°‘~ — \ ~~~~‘c ~! \- - /

- - I

] I

I ‘

~

~~~~~

‘ 3 ~~‘T I I o u t .

I I I I

24

t icu i n the t i i i c k and heseleol the li ck ~ hcn i t i o ’~ sS o i o ’ th.ul pr outeci ~ or sc t eens the front e mu t iamico ’ W hie n thein pI .tcc ’ , a t u mid t°c 41 11 W I I I I t r s u~~c led the g m c o o i t ,ii icl c o un c i c t u . ’ panels e t omi t a m io l m u g th ic ’ doors ~ e r o erected , aplaced the nt’ou pmemm c base lad s between the sL.h and special mg was used ci I m is um o t h at the wa lls we me p lummmhthe panel pr ir om to the panel bt ’;ng pIa~ i i time slab - Sb t he dosor trunk’s couuld he p ro o pe l h’5 f itted later , Allam i d a t c n m m l h person responsible four mixing the g m co u t three doo rs mhi ~ ri e chl am lic , ol roouni . Ihlo ifleui ’S I es l i 000 i r i i .

and plaL ing I he .ummchor bolts mit I lie ‘lab c s I he 1’anc ls amid the wcuil men s i 0’st m oum used cx .ic I ~ t he sa mmi e -

were ie umioov ed I ruin t he tItIC kf - cuu i addmtiona l er - -ss ’ perfo rmed comm - s i te s~~ik bef o re

In preparation I’or thou.’ concre t e wall pamiels t he slab the t acu l i t s was .i~ cepted by the Corps. l i me ea rç o em i t e r snod the holes which had beeo drilled previoo usls t o o i i ose i t e d t im e side w u mid o os s .und doors . I r a i n ed the r o o t ,

receive t h e anc huo r i t o o h i s were thucu r uu ug h I’~ ch eati ec i ( ‘ t ia lk sheat Ii and shingled the i t c o t - and curnpktcd the t rmnllines out lining the p osit ico n ut the pan els we re imu am ked woom k around the edges out the wo o f . 1 lie electri cal coo l>-

om i the slab to insure proper plac u nco c o t the go ‘oi l tm , mc t c Ii ills ! oiled all required e lect n eal wiring , includingw i n b c c o t the mechanical space . wiring above the ceiling

W hen t h e e lection a c to cahhx - hei. ’ami . one ot t he ink-nor fur a imy c o t the req rc ir ed Iiehling. inserting clrc uit l~plumbing walls which se pam.ule s the m echanical space required by m hi e hand dr~ em amid wa ll ~uu &kc Is . and installa-from the t o o m le m r 0 0 0 0 m o t Wa ’ removed from the truck - t muon of light Es at t he front entrance II I the building. DieWhile the panel was s i ispemRt eol I rum the .umm e , anc hoor paint cress e~ufked arid pain ted time intetmo r spaces andbol ts were screwe d into the t i ut s whic h had prev ioo ushs the cx t e mi t ur t r im. Thu.’ f inuu s hiniog cii’w insta lled thebeen set in the base cut the wall panel. T~ c c dm t t em ~nt plum bing t ix tu nes and toi let parlmt ii)ns.R pes c c l gft oo i m w e ie oi . cc ed within the chalk linesprevious ls drawn . ,\ grout having a curing inhibitorwas poured lnio i the hi t ch e s t c t coontain the inc Iior broi l sTIme sec umid grout , w li io .im had a t hic ker ~u’ m isIsIcf lc v . DISCUSSION OF KEY ELEMENTSss~is placed ~ mlhin m I me chalk h u e s Icc ‘mm :u bed for thepane ls. Neo op mctie 1,ads and Ievehirtg pads csu.’ nc ’ al.sc’ placedwit hin the chalk lines ese rs 3 f t (0.’) mt. Three ke~ e le r m ie nts sep a ra t e th us proigrani l o o m

ot hets CI o~l sax ungs , maintenance o i l the fac ilmi aest re t-5J 1cm these .k I I v im ies were completed , the craiie es and innovations throughout the program. T h mts

placed mim e panel on the slab in its final resting position. chapter disc usses these three areas.I inal measum ei iocnit . s were made to insure that the panelw as in its proper p ‘-~1 11c m) - Ii .iol lust men ts were mueecss ,ii v . Cost Savingsa crowbar was used to move the panel into the required ihe actu a l c o o S t sav ing achieved i~~ t his pr o gmum ~~.,s .

p osition. .\ l c l i ip001a ro cable and chrinmie l were attach ed us previously disc ussed , 47 percent oh the ccons e ntm onalto the first panel to > m aintain t h e plumbed position conist r ol~ I on gouvernrmient est i muma le - l’here is anotherun t il a sc- coond panel w as posimi ooio e o l . I I-’ crane cables source ot oust sav im ogs whi~b nsa~ not be readiI~ mdc nluti -were released so that the process could be mc t o c : i t eot fo r able the cost t s so ~ iated w m ihu designing and procuringthe next panel, a simigle I ac ’ilit s A conservative est in m a te of the m isc

requ im cot to) design Omi e I .hility is 100 hours. I hus .I Ic e seconmol panel c hose n Ion the prucc ess was a panel 1lesigmimuoc ’ 7M facil i t ies might equmre appr oux mm na t u. ’k

w h ic h . whemi o c c s i t i o o i l c d . would he perpemi o hi c ular to o the 7N0() man-hours , lIme t o t , i i m an—hours worked ott thisInst panel , this was required to structural ly s t a hili,e program by Cc o t ps personnel during the past year and atIm e hit si pam me l. I lie positioning process described above half amount to ,it o c r n c t 65 to 7~ percent to t the norm alwas tfie n repeated fo m- the m u e x! p inch Af ter the second reqoliremne nt. Ihus , t his program has achieved both costpane l was positioned , the two pane ls were bolted savings per square b out and c o n s l savings in mrta n-hoimrstoge them and the te mmi po tary sma bmlm iati o n cables were o o t p i o o o t o i c tmon . Since hi~ pe rcem o l o ut t he required du o crenmoved to r t he plae eim ent c it the remaining panels . umentat morn as been deve loped , tu rt t ie r mmp kmcmi ta I morn

of t he program will result i t t additional sac im ug s.I lie r e m l m a m tm mug pamie ls were selected and placed so

tl me y could he bolted to and supported by the previous’y Maintenance of Facility Aestheticspositmo nied paitels . lsi the overall process , th e interior The Request for Technical Proposal I RFT)’I con-wal ls w ere erected f irst , thetu the e nd walls , t he front ta m ed statements earl y in the ducumnent identi fyinge°,t e i i o u m walls , t he side wall , and finally the shout wall that cacti proposal would he reviewed and evaluated urn

25

its o u w m o merits amid that t h e , t esmf ie tmcs of the proposal of an industrial environ ment. To achieve these benefitsw o u ld he -v a ltca ted hs .i m eam n o f reg lstered architects, and successfull y apply t he industrialized buildingIhe fo l luowing sentences w -ei o - included tnt the RETI’ technology, certain prerequisites must he acco omp lished.and were fo dlo owe d during the evaluation: To accomp lish these prerequisites , innovation must

occur t hro ughout a programli. The industnahi,.ed sanitaryD~ SR.N 01- I IIl Si - FA( ’ I LIT I I’S SIIAE,L BE facility programn solved the following prerequisites:,-\l -ST HI 1 IC A l LY PU \ S h \ ( ; . (‘O°s t i ’A T IB I I ITY ( I ) development of cuniti nuit~ , repetition ,and suff icientWITH TI l l -. N.-\ FI RM I NVIR( )NMI.NT IS RI’ - vo,lum sm e , ( 2 ) use of an alternat ive procurement process ,

QUIRLI) . FA ( l 1 hT lh S Sll0L I.l) PRESI’ .NT A ( 3 ) use of an alternative strategy for communicatingI IA RMONIOIJS APPI A RA N( ’ l WHICh BLI NDS p ro t ect req uirements , (4) revision c o f roles and respon-W I T H 1) 1 1 : PARK S( ’ I -NERY. SUBMITTALS W I L L . sibi l i ties o m t the partici pants in the procurement process ,BE l’,VA LIJA TI.’l) BY A BOARD TO BE 1)1-S. (5) co ombinatmon of multi ple cont ra c ts , and (6) matrixIGNAI ED BY TIll - U.S. ARMY LNGINEI-,R manager iment . A description of these prerequisites aridDISTRICT. I Oh : IS \ i l f [ h- W HEN THE (‘ORPS OF associated innovative solutions follows.LN(,INI IRS REVIEW DETERMINES THAT APt~OPOSE1) BU I LDIN(, IS UNATTRA( TIV E , Prerequis ite 1. Den- c/u p nment of Continuit y , Repetitio n ,EVEN T H()t ’ (,hI MEETING ALl. TIlE STANI)- and SuJj i (’ient Colu’neA RDS BI-LOW , IT WILL BE JUD(,I l) NON-RI-SPONSIV I . -Explanation , To> crea te a c limate encouraging cap rta l

- - . investmnerit for a new product and t o o maximize the costAnother requirement was too have a variety of designs . - - - - -- . - . ‘end Its ot exist rig industria lized products (m e., vo lunneand exterior treatments. This was identified in the . - - . -

- - discounts and learning curve effic iencies), it is necessaryRI-TP with the following staten ie nits. - - . -to have pred ictab le . repetitive buying patterns of

VA RI) I Y IN DESIGN IMM;E . MA TERIALS AND sufficient vo lum e and sim ilar design requirements.

COLORS IS T o BE PROVIDED FOR THE EX-TERIOR PERMITTING SEV I:RAL STANDARD Innovative Solutions. This program aggregatedEXTERIO R MATERIAL SF1 ECTI()NS BY USING individual construc liorm requirements into one largeA(.}’N(’Y. A MINIMUM UI TIIRI’l. EXTERIOR procurement package using two tec hniques across~T R I . AT M I NTS AND ONl : INTERIOR T R I -A T - distr ict (multi-base buy~ig) and fiscal year (multi-yearMENT ARE TO HI.’ SUBMITTEI) IN THE STEP buying) boundaries. The ultimate package was sufficientONE PRO POSAL. FOR 1- VALUATION . A NY PLAN to maximize competitmo o n yet minimize costs: 13AND BUILDING FORM OR SHAPE 1’HAT MEETS manufacturers responded t o o the RFTP and the resultingTill SPACE ANI) Al-STH I’T I(’ REQUIREMENTS low bid price was 53 percent of the conventional con-MAY RI, PROPOSI D. struction government estimate.

The following sisle m mi ent was used t o o describe the ORD and Louisville District indicated that a smallerexterior walls c c l the faci lities: program would have been more desirable ; the partici pa-

tio ,n of many states comp licated the overall adm ot inistr a -l’X T I’RlOR MAt ERIALS OF BRICK . STONE. tion oif t he program , and the bonding requirementsAM) WOOL) AR E TO BE USED IN THEIR NAT- precluded the pani icmpati omm m of many small firms ,URAI. STA Fl - 1-INISIIEI) WOOL) SHALL BE thereby reducing competition. CERLbelieves ,however ,STAINI’.l) OR PAINTI I) IN A(’(’ORDANCE WIT h that the low bids received in this solicitation wereAN I XT I RIOR PAINTING REQUIREMENT IDEN- direct consequences of the repetition and standardizaTII’IEI) ~N TIll PERFORMANC E SPECIFICA- tion obtained by large-scale production. Data suggestlIONS, that a reduction in program scope from 76 to 40

faci lities would have engendered a 20 to 30 percentInnovative Elements increase in per unit costs to t he contractor and ulti-

Industria lized building technology bias different mately to the government. In addition , the argumentprere qoimsi tes for successfu l pro ucurement and subsequent t hat “the large program reduced competition” has twoutul m lat io)n than conventiona l technology , It offers time , sides; at least one Contractor stated that had the projectcost , ai md quality benefits because of the efficiencies of not been as large , t heir firm would not have beenprefabrication and t he product-development potentials interested in participating in the program.

26

Prerequis ite 2. ( - ‘t,/ i:af,c ,,, of an Al ternative Procure- ing industm~ is such a vo datm l nori s tam dard industrymen: Pru’cess and the (‘orps must insure that the fa c ilities t h e y

procure are aesthetically and tech nically acceptable . itExplanation, The traditiona l procuremen t pro ccss was necessary to ) r the (‘mi rps to require suhim mission of

of f o o u t m uah a d v e t t i s o m u g . w mile adequatel y accommo dating technical pr o c t oo usak t o m evaluations of respo o mosive ness.mIt e s t ,m t c ou t mI me mit oh conv cnt iuut mal huilding tec lunoolu gy.does mliii lit we ll w i t h that o u t im idt i sf mial m ,e d ht mi klmtmg I lie begat t easo o i i s im s t i ty u tu g t I me usc c i I SI -A includetccl iuiou Iucg~ - l’u vale c ou mm ee mmis on t i t h er agencies i m mc ie as mI t e I)eium it t le t mi c o t l)clc ’iisc’ ’s p io t cu mt e m i t c ’ mi t p0lic~it mg l~ u se ,i hid-desi gim hum ldm m og sy stem . The maim com oceuui mm i g co oim i u i ic r ci t l products ol d m f b e t c ’ t u t o lc’ .igii -

advantage c o t t he hid-design-build process is that it the for mi ma l advert sing ec ltmuique ’s faih u r c- t o o allow to nre c h ue sms instead of dictates a solution. In this way. the t he su h mmm is s moom i amid es mluat u umi of technical proposalsmanufa cturer is a major participant in the proicess . (whic h is t h e ent ire reasoomi l o o m c m c , i t t c o m i o c t t h e TS I-Aproviding substantial input to the design and typical m e t hod ) amid t o o use ou tlo e m design strategies besides thesolu tion in the market place, ra ther tItan being required perf oo rma nce co tic e pt with any degree of Succe ss .to respond to an am b imr ; o rv harotware solution developed I-.R I l80,I,7~s 2 conditions for when to use 1S I-A .

by a third person. The Depart imuent of Defense has two) ASPR 2-50l~ , 502 . and the results of 3 years ofmet hods to execute a hid-desi gn-build process two-step research by tIme (SA ’s Public Building Service ( I’BS)to rrnal advertising (TSFA) and one-step competitive imito whethe r TSFA was atm acceptable iuie mhod to uscnegotiation, it > pro curing mndustria hited building com ponents. Their

research indicated that it was. Th e General Acc oun tu m igInnovative Solution. This program ori~~nall y chose Office (GAO) a~~eed , and PBS is curre ntly using the

one-step comolpetitive negotiation as being the mriost TSFA noetbiod for its systemm us building projects . 0( 1’ sversatile method ; however , its use is currently restricted legal counsel or (‘tv i l Works concurred in Cl- RE’ sto procurememit involving fa m ily housing. TSFA was decision t o o use TSFA after reviewing the above comusid-therefore eventually used. ORD and Louisville District eratiom is on IS October 1974.indicated that they felt TSFA should not have beenused in this program , since the program did not fulfill Continued use c o t TSEA for t o ut ure industrializedthe conditions required for its use set forth in ASPR projects can be justif ied because ( I) the conditions for2.5Ø2~ (i.e.. the ageticy must not have the capability to) TS I-A ’ s use have not changed and (2) even if they have ,write a prescri ptive specification). They also felt that other laws and regulations more fundamental t h iami thesince they h ad an acceptable design (the winning sub- one sentence at issue in ASPR 2-5 0 1 * preempt thatmittal) . that they would request it in all subsequent regulation. Toda~ . the industrialized building industr~procUremenl act ions rat her than using two-step formal is as diverse , volatile , unpredictable , and unkn oiwn as itadvertising again, was when this project began. The exposure to five

acceptable designs in this program does mo ot emi uble the(‘ERL believes that ( I ) the original decision to use Corps to accom m odate the industrialized building

TSFA was correct , amid (2 ) sufficient precedents exist industry with a comiventional ,descript ive design . Rather ,to> cu)ntinuc’ use of TSF,\ in future industrialized san- for the foreseeable future , the performance specifics-itary facility projects . There are legal and tec hnical tion/proposal submission/evaluation syndrome willjustification s fu)i using TSF A in this project and inbu i tu re projects . 2 “IX)I) Pcul icy cind Procedural Guidance toor the Use c o t

- - . . One-Step Competitive Negotiation and Two-Step 1-ormalThe tec hnical reasons fur usin g 1SF-A in this project - - - - -- . . . Adve rtuirm g Pnoocurement Procedures in the Acquisition ut

were primari ly based on the premise that industrialized I-aeil itmes ,” ER 1180-1- 7 (I)epartment co t t)eten~o’ 20 I)eeeimi-buildings are pie-engineered com m ercial products , eac h her l97~ ).

wit h unique design and technical details. As such , they > “Prcoc urem rment by 1-ormal Advertis ing. Part 5 Iwo Smc ’pcan he procured m ost econo m ically and effectivel y Formal Advert ising; (‘onditions I-or Use,” .4SPR 2.50!wit h open unrestricted competition via a performance (t)epartment ot the Army, 2 October 1975 ) .

speci fications approach. Since the industrialized build- ‘I-r oo m Legal Memoorandum by Mike (‘a rrool l. ( 1 RI legaladviso r )5 M;iy I 97t ), ‘‘An oubjective o c t this mett o oto t s toopermit h it’ development of a sufflc~ nt descr iptive and mom

“Proocurenoe no n by I-u rinal Ao lv e rtms irc~ . Part 5 Two Step unduly restrict ive statement of the Government ’s require-I cu rm m m a l fidvc ricoo ,o 1.’; General,” .4SPR 2 .502 (Department c i t ,ncnt , . . so the subsequent pruoo-uremcnms may be made byt ime Sr o io~ - 2 ~~c to her 1975p . tuormal advertising.”

27

prohahl~ have to he repeated ml the (‘orps desires to proach seeks different solutions to a problem. It detailscoo m it inue the ~ou st amid tinue s. mv mngs of the original the functions to he pe rt oi rm uu ed with minmmumn referenceproj ect . to t h e procedures to he used . If d riwi m ugs are inc luded .

they are line drawings which > do miot mnention dimensions.Second, the one troubli n g sentem ice at issue in> ASPR

2- 502 is overs hadouwed oud preempted by the most Innovative Solution. This program had sinmp le linetundaniem utal pnoocurememit rule of all requiremen ts drawings with references only to m inimum or nnax m m uu um nshould he stated i i i an unrestr ictive fashion so as to dimnensit ns identified in the specifications. The ~turnen-,i~hieve niaximumn coo mpetit lon - (See 41 t .JS( 253 (a), stuns were illustrative and not mandatory - RespondinghO I S( 2304 (g); 10 IS C 2305 ; ASPR I -300.1; tnanufactu rers felt that it was stimulating to hid onASPR 1- 120 1 , ASPR I ~- 1 07 , F-PR I - I .301 - I . ) I f . in docum ents that did not dictate a solution. Over the pastfact , t he abandoiminicnit of TSFA/procuren ient specifica- 3 years , ( I - RE. has directed work toward developingtio)n method in favor co f a formal advertisimig .tdescr mptive performance specifications and the capability to nnain-specification mimethod wo ouhd iii any wa~ restrict com- ta m the desired aesthet ic appearance of (‘or~ s ofpetition and o cr increase coos i of industrialized buil d ings . Engineers facilities using t his type of specification.t hem> the regulation requiring such a conversion is CERL has foumid that use of per form ance speci ficationspree m pted by the fundamen tal need to spend tax ha s ac tually increased the number of competing firmsmonies in the “best interests of the public.” in programs , while maintainin g the functional capabil-

ities and quality of the facilities ,In response to a request by ORE) , (‘F RE prepared a

legal mnemsuorandu m doicunnenting these justifications Prerequisite 4. Revised Role and Responsibility of thefor con titoue d use od TSFA (Appendix I)and forwarded Participants in the Procurement Processit to t h e Directorate of (‘ivil Wor ks ’ legal coumisel forcrit ique and approval. The Civil Wo )rks legal counsel

Explanation. New processes amid new comm unica tionconcurred on the contimiued use of 1SF-A as long asstrategies required revised roles arid responsibilities.( I ) the industrialized building industry remnains non-For example , the mnanufactm irer becomes a major

standard to the point that no one descriptive designparticipant in the process , since he/she develops andaccommo dates the majority of in dustrialized buildings,

and (2) the reasons for the continued use of TSFA are produces the hardware and is in the best position todecide the most economical solution to the functionaldocum ented for that proucuretnent . -requirements.

TSFA does create some practical problems forI) istricts. Fva luating the suhm nitted technica l proposa ls Innovative Solution. CERL held a state-of-the-artis both difficult and time -con sum iummug. Although GAO syniposium wit h time mam iutacturers early in the projectwill not upset their technical determination “unless bot h to lean > what levels of perfor m ance were feasiblethere is clear evidence of fraud , abuse of authority or and to enable the manufacturers to have significa n tarbitrary action ” (se e 4ts Comp. Gen, 49 I 1968J , input into the project. Additionally, the procurementl0C .(’ . 40fi : B-l 616l3 ~August 2~~, 1967 1; B-l6577 l process chosen enabled the m anufacturer to be theF April 2M , 19691). evaluators are often concerned with prime contractor , as opposed to the traditional gem icra lpossible litigation as a result of the determinations , contractor. During the fo urth week of the advertisingThese pm a~ t ica l problem s may make development of a period, a midterm conference with representatives ofprocurement solution using t h e advantages of TSFA participating firms was held at the Louisville Districthut mn im i im izmng i ts disadvantages necess a ry . to discuss the performance specification and have the

manufacturers identify any areas which were ambiguousPrerequi site 3, ( - ‘.50’ of an Alternative Strategy for in the specifications. Prior to establishing a delivery(~ mmuni~’ating Project Requirements schedule , each responsive (with> minor modification)

firm was contacted to gather production and erectionExplanation. Prouviding detailed drawings and spec- capability information and to insure that the program

itications is the standard com m unication techni que used would not impose a requirement beyom >d the wi nunim igiii the conventional process which dictates only one bidder ’s capabilities. In all instances when a decisiontechnical soluti mn h owever , ~mny set of criteria may was required which cou ld impact the participating firnis ,resul t in a variety of different solutiomis. Thus , the each manufacturer was contacted amid given an opportu-per fon muu a nce com icept , emerg imug comrinuunication up- nity to) provide inuput into the project.

28

Prerequisite 5 . G o u f l/ , m n a t i o n i of Mult ip le (~o,ltraets W lR’ im deburietings were hueld wit h ORI) amid LouisvilleL)ms m r ic t t o o c o ) do m d i i ia tC ’ ‘ ‘ l e s soomis learmied ’ ’ I roiuu t ime

Explanation. f lue s t , i te c ot the art c ot immd u smi iali,ed u i ocgo .111c mIme ke~ pers uoii s mtm v o lve d thro c omg b m so ut t imebuilding is such that riot e v e c s t h i im o g is imm - s~ s Ieiim J’iie pr og m am i m w e me com usu lted againpoo rt l om u oil work out—out -svs ion n us o i i l l ~ red huimes a s~’p-.u iale cu t u t r a ct action , sImlc c mime ~s stem ’s imm a mi ufactun e ms.10 c c omi h y iii te m e ste d amid t m outed mum th me im s~ S m cii> Si co miCpeou p he tec h ibis mm mu ,i e ,m ’ .es mi s k , osh ude ooihic i s . uugi me t hm , i m MAJOR PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATIONt ime mmo ~ me. is e us a m > l h ijs ioo i i .u iud t hm, i I time hi emie t i t s of t h i i ’ PRc CELILJRESa ppico aci t gil-a l ly o ou i i s sco ~’ b o , u u j ~ m mt cu c ’a’,o,’ i i i m i sk .

Si nce S u) i i i o .’ p m c o c e o lu m cs pto opo used four th is pr oo grammiInnovative Solution. I f s pm og m a m n h ad two ) \c li . dT.o me deviated tmo u m uu mmo o rmmma l p ractmcc * . m o n p lc i m u em ut atmon pRmcC-

ac t i v i t i es 0001’ co ut - o o f -s ’, stem > > atm d comic imm -s y s t e mm > - Time dures were developed to faci l i tate time adoption of timec o r p s was ucs po o mi sihl e l o o i perfo nmu mmig the initial sim uip ie progr ammi - The fl ow chart docum enting ti me part icipants

site ~~o c i k (suc h .ms ‘ ma king a cheanimig. co mo struc t i m ig roads am id their act i v i t ies (Appendix A) m mid icates t h at i lmo istami d sidess .ilks and con nm ec tm mm g uti l it ies) , the w imim imug participants perto c r m n the same fun c t iom is as i’ . ~~~‘V ioUS

bidder was responsible for providim ig the finished humId- programs . The unIv major additions are tIme ea r lsmug imm place ORD amid L,oo u misvi l le District favo red this imivo ivement of all perso omis atid the assi gnment of atype cot tur mm key pro o c urei mi em ot. h owever , they tioted project managerth at m arty cof these facilities were being curistnmctedt.is t i’r than anticipated , so that sonic facilities would he The project mnmanager should have the a ut i io rom~ ami derected as mnoi c hm as 2 years ,iimead of reservoir comnp ie res pi.omosi lo i l i ty to gather the required information .t iom> Re vtsm mmg t l i~ contr act to make time bo uml dim ugs esta b lish imii lestom >es , and ma ke decision>’ based onm timeavatlable on demam id was considered , hut thus was u m i fo r mm i at ion wh ich bias been gath ered. Time per s cor ~ I to

determined not moo he a viable alternative . Louisville tim is po s i t oc omi shoouid also have dm ucc t access t o o l ) o s isionDistr ict a lso o s ta ted that com itract ad mnm m iistrat ioo n for a or I) istr ict Engimme ers or their co oor d i m mat oo rs ~ licmi makingc omum h m t ia t i oo n co o mustru c t mon s impp ly package typical of a decismo umi w lm ichm could potentiall y impact a programul .m ndust riahi,ed c oom i sm t uc tm o mm sh ould he simplified amid The project mamiager should he im ivo i lved in time programc la m tied , from >> its mt > cept io omm thm rough tim e c m m i s t r mo1 t l o cmm c o t time

protot\- pL’ t ac ilit~ our unt il comi>p letm ot i of p r c o d u 1 t lo ) n ofPrerequisite 5. ,ifa t rix Management t he required t ,oc i h it ies .

Explanation. I radit ionall y. activit ies and de1isions .-~ t 0 o o i l I ei im pour tam it a s pe c t of imm i p lement ing thiscoc c ur unihat e nai l ~ - h owever , coor dm n uatm oti .imnong tea m program um is to inso ure t h at the tumidin g identified hs theiuiemhers at key pu )m nts increase s ef f i c i ency. re duces conventional cc o m ls l ruct mo mu cost est imate is availa blen o msoim m dersm .ondimmg , amid is vital too lime suc~es sfu l execo m- The foh lowinug itemn s s bi oou fd be ha ndled with extremetioun o mf no sd processe s and tech n iques, care

Innovative Solutions Iii m u is pro )gm .in i. (‘or ps ,utid I - Time co)nt ract should he design t o o l as a cc i mut mn ummmgS ta tc pers um im ‘1 hav ing tIme rcspoomm s ih i l ity amid authority co uni ract un less the monies fo r the tof u projec t aret o d is c iss dii lere ti1-e s in requ i remn et it s arid to ) a m u u ’ oe at a vailable mm > time f i s c a l ye a m in wh ich t u e pr o og m. u o -> is hida cu nsolidated ptogram muet at kc’~ decmsm o o n-m nakimi gpommit s One u i t the m i ma in i reasoumu s l u or time success of the 2. ER II ~0- h - I paragrap h 7- ( 7 I 34 I”undc ,4 vailabli ’pm oogm .in l \S ,I’ that all key pe rso umune l I plaruners ar c h mmects . for I’ac ’inent shoold he refere nced tuur c uim i tmmmumn g comm-specification wr i te rs . bud get personmiel , C oost e st t m m mat o rs , t r a c t s Subparagrap h (e) siuo)uld have t ime pb or ; ms e ‘‘ mi melegal personnel etc - ) were invo lveot initially amid t i uro ughm-oout t he en tire prd o g ram n - incl uu i im mg the evaluatio n c o t the - - - - — — - — —

~~-— — —

- . - ~t o r exam omp lc . a I)esign/ I)evelo pmcnm I eaoio cons i s t mn p~ c iproposals . 1 he s t ,o t es of Ohitu , Inmdm a m o a , atid Wesm \ irg mn mia - - - - -repre sentatives t n oom u m each oorganm za tmcun pa rt ic ipat ing in i ho’provided m o ’g i~t ered am b i m t e c t s for time eva l uat m oomi hto a i d pr ogram chou ld he fourmned i c o bring organwam ioonc hm~imto insur e thia t t imc io ro ’ o 1 u ine nm m e lo t s were kimown amud that impact the programur am various stages m , o ~o’ rher as a unit.the acccpu .ub le do ’smgims wouu ld t ie readily .ip pm o uved by 4 ..( oof l t ract i , Engineering (‘comot ma ct I nsmr Uc t mc oois ” Changet ime states. 4 . !~R 1180-I-I (t)t ’partnmeni out I)efenae . N March 197

2°)

reiu >ait mc her c o t I- Y arid” mnsermed hetweem i the w m u md s Severa l mmua ~our tec hm >mca l advances were m ade m u the“during ’’ ami d ‘‘stihs&’quenut . p m uogi umn. Time m u moure imim purtam i l ou m mes w e me tI me m ro; ms s

purchase amid prouduct comm oil 7~ dent icahh y co o mu s t n ucted3. Whemi md e mm t i f v i mmg time amount out nioritey to he facil it ies amid time t r cat imiem mt ot tIme faci l i ty aest i met i c s .

-.mhlocated loom I-u ndo A i ’a:lahle Jo o r Payment , a sm imall It was time t mms t time that tIme (‘orps of I- ngmm >eer s hadportion o c t t ho se lwuds to i tall y availab le can he specified , part icip ated i i i procur im ig th is nutnher of faciliti es.kmu owmng t h at uther fumuds imave been or will be comii-mitted. This st ia tc ’gv is recommnemuded so as not toinflomence the f’irmsdeve lop imug the potential hid package .

Two> m ajor procedures wh ich> should cont m mmue to be usedin future programs are tw o - s tep forma l advertising andthe perf ’oorman icc sp ecmf ica t io ) n. CERL initiall y chose I. Insure that a l)ivisioon or t)jst riet wants iii do this

the TSF.-\ method because pemto on im m ance specifications type of program.

are the only design procedure which allows system �. Insure mhat one has command support.humldim>g pro ducts to compete without arbitrary restric-

3. If involved, coooperat ion co f the states is essentialtions. The omily IX)D procurement techniques available do not bypass them; maintain c o o o o r d m n j t i c u nwhich allow the use of performam ice specification areFSF \ and One.Step (‘ompetitive Negotiation. Since 4, For the lu st job in a region, performance spvcif’ica-One-Step is currem itl y restricted ton fa m ily housing, moon and two-step procurement are essentia l ( to c l l ouw -o o n

ac t ioons will requir e evaluation of the circumstances atTSF \ was chosen. Chapter 3 com mtai ns detailed discus- the time).sioofl~- of both procedures.

5. Sufficient volume is necessary to take advantage c o t

t he learning curve phenomenon to gain cost savings.

a. Seventy—ei ght units are obviously s a r u s i a c t o o r y -as borne tout by the Loumsville/ORI) results. Whether 2 0 0

-5 CONCL USIONS AND is enough is unde terornned.

RECOMMENDATIONS h. The benefits (c o os t savings) gained by voolumepurchase must be carefully weighed against t I )e oo co rd i na ’tion problems among s ta res and other agencies. ( 2 )scheduling and operation timing too accommodate the

Conclusions site preparation requ irement s and changes , u3 bondingAs a result o > f the Ohio) River Division (ORD) and financial issues , and (4 ) potential Operation and

Maintenance fund curtailment.sanitary facility programn , the (‘orps of I-ngineers wasab le to develop a methodology for obtaining facilities 6. Insure that a prototype facility is included and eval-

uated against the specifications in a site setting, nut amat Corps reservoir areas which can substantially reduce time factory.the costs of such facilities. The methodology consistsof performnance specifications , evaluation documenta- 7. I-or two -step procurement, a mid-term bidding

conference is desirable,tint> , and proocurement and program implementationprocedures. (‘ERL. OR.D, amid Louisville District devel. 8. The contract should spe ll ou ui on what basis theoped a list of items that require consideration prior to corntractor is to be paid.initiating a similar project (i-mgure II). 9. A follow-on maintainability report within a year of

construction of initial facilities is desirable.The objective of the ORD program was to reduce

10. Value Engineering will not be invo lved in mostthe cos ts of sanitary facilities wit hin the Division with- instances.out com promisin g the buildings ’ structural integrity Oraesthetics. All invoulv ed agencies agreed that this program I I . Initial jobs sho ou ld include Cl- RL as consultants ,was extremely successfu l. Previous costs of convemu-mm o mnally comm structed sanitary facilities in Ohio) RiverI)ivisiom namm ged I ru inim $7 5 to SI 00/sq ft ($80 5 to 51075/m m 2 ). Thu s pro o grammm yielded costs of approximatel y Figure II.Checklist loor potential users of industrial-$35/sq ft ($37 5/ mu 2 ). ized buildings for sanitary facilities.

30

A m t he cootuclusi t ot i of ’ step one out t ime TSi- A proce. gathered to ide i>t if ~ t he Dis t r ic ts with in a givemu areadoues, t i ne (‘oo r ps had five desigmi pruoposais that w o r e t h at can agg iegam e a sut f m cmemut voulume co t husi i iess too

•icceptah le t o o t the second phase of th e pro ocureim iemut utmotiva te mm idusmry to o resp uomud to atm RFTP. i-igure 1 ,~seo luemoce , Ar t s one c o t those su hmimi t t~ils co uld have won sh ows the data out> a map foo t anal ysis ut poten tialmime coummpe l it mciii - regiommal viol umne -

I here were no, res m rict mo mm s oomm t ime lype of m umau mufac - ‘ri>e da ta c_ a l l he a mma lyied w ithuimu Division> hou mudarmesmure r or mmmemhoud applied to t he co,nstruction/ereclioui our acrooss Div is uoom u boundaries. In most mm ms tanc es , wit lummu

o ut the taci l im ’, - ln>dustrj a lized bou lders were a l louw ed t > l)mvmsmo un hoounda rmes is preferred because of the proo -

co imm petc w i t h > c om mmve,mtmo o mmal builders. gramm i ’s required coor d m nat io o n - ilowever , j o t the absenceof sufficien t volume within a Division , several District

In conclusion, the sanitary facility project required requirem ents must be aggregated across L)ivisiomu

many inn ova t ions to s a t i s f y the necessary prerequisites. boumidaries to obtain t he potential cost savings. The dataIt is not claimed that all prere qui sites have been met , contained in Figure 12 indicate that t l>e groupings inbecause the necessar y continuity and repetition are Table 6 are feasible for future programs. Additionalreall y only met if the specifications are standardized groupings of Districts not contained in Table 6 may

and purchases continue over a period of time. Nor is be possible .

it proposed that following all of the prerequisiteswill insure success , because a bias , prejudice , or bad The next step was to analyze the feasible combmna-

decision at any stage of the process can nullify all other t mons with respect to the data obtained f’or the Dodge

positive et ’forts. However , the more success ful a project Digest to determine if there is potential co i St savings.

is at satisfying the necessary prerequisites for a healthy To facilitate this analysis . t he city index data po im nts *

industria lized huildim>g envirom imnent , the more likely were recorded on a map (Figure 13) and contour tines

that proj ect will yield the antic ipated successful results, drawn to conm >ect constant construction cost indexlevels. An examp le will help illustrate the meaning of

Recommendations the contour lines. If two contour lines are adjacent to

It is recuomnmended t h a t TSFA and perforniance one another and one is marked 80 and the other go.

specifications he used in future programs of iluts type. the cost index levels between these two points escalatefrom 80 to 90. as shown in 1-igure 14 . If a line marked

Ij oo w ever , because TSFA creates additional work for 90 is next to the contour h u e muarked 90 . the region

l) ismricts ,und raise s concertu over possible litigation as between t hese two h u e s is known as a ridge , and the

a result c ot the determ mnatüons , development of a cost index levels between t hese two lines are approx-

co o r mtmnu ing , open prequa lificatiu >n system is recom- im>mate i y the same .

mmi em >ded. Thus procurement solution would use theadvan~tages of TSFA (pe r forrm >ance specification) while If a city such as l o o t Woort h i , TX h a s arm index oof M(~.

nm u o nmm ou m/ m g i ts disadvantages. t he cost of construction > in New Yo ork City is approx-imately 25 per cent higher ti>an timat of Fo rt Woorth .

The logical question lou as k following the initiation Thus , if twit mdem m t m ca l bu ml dmmmgs are c_ c or mv e ntio n>all~of’ co n smru cri c iiu c o f time required facilities was “should constructed in New York and Fort Woorth , time former

th u s pro gra ms > i-ic ex tended t o o C orps-wide applica tion u” building can he expected to cost m ore, lime m n io r m natmoo mn

To answer h ums que s ti uomt . data were gathered on the in Figure 13 is valu able to u r planning f u tu re p n u rg m. imm l s .

mmui u i her amid type of sanitary facilities projected for because it identifIes thoose r e g i o o m o s whiic hi are ex per iem ic imug

construct ionu by ( orps of Engineers (‘mvi l Works District high conventional constru c . tuon cou s t s and are feasible

d u r m n g i- Y 77 and 78 and time Dodge Digest cost ~

for an off-site sy s t e m mus approac h to c o otu s truct i o n , wit hG-mstru o -t i’or m Inde x 5 for cities throughout the United potentia l high sav mnmgs. [iiose areas with > a lower coo s t

Stat es . h l m s too r ic a l data from the Dodge Digest were index are still feasible for coust savings , hut time savt i mgs

gat hered t o o dentily the 1975 local construct ion cost may not he as great as in h igh cost areas. ihe facili ties

index and provide atm imudicatiom i where high> costs exist m m the ORI) proogrann were within an area hounded by

a mo d mmmay he reduced , l Ime proj ect mo ii >s of the n umber of the 80 and 90 contour lines. Thus.cost savings are Itkehs

Ia cm l mt u es scheduled loon com istru c tion (Table ~~ were to be ach ieved mm > most .ioeas imm the country where

- ‘The Dodge Digest uses New York ( m t ~ as 100 , and oothcr5 1)odgu’ I) oxo U of Building costs and Specifications, 20tlm cities ’ costs are equated to it based on experienced coonstruc-e.l 0 Mc i ; maw - t hu I tn lo nm nati on Systems (‘o , 1975). lion cost,

31

sut t i c . mem m t lauli tv aggr egat io n and design unmf oun uuu u m s required to he aggregated to )( cost savings mm> the variouscam > he ou b t ammns - ol lime Dodge Digest cost umidex data regmo ims oof tim e coo um > try . However , t he projected data onsm i g~est that the S o o u th A t l a m m t it I) mvis io uu is nut expe r - time I-Y 77/ 78 c omu ifo rt station atid washmhiouse coom oslruc-emi t l i u g as tou gh a t o u s t oi l t . i o t h i t i e s us time Ohihu River I)mvm - i too m > pto ugrammu mrudicame t h a t there is a s uf t icm e i u t numumbe r

si co um , u mu dm c _ a t u mm g that sasi m igs t h e r e i i m av not he as gre a t . ut fac i l it ies w h ich cam i he aggmt’galed im m tuo a progra nm t forcci i i t om ua m moot > of the pm ouced u res used m mu t hic Ohm m o m River

Su it e t i n t s pr ou gn . um t i ~ as t he t mm st c o t i ts Is pe . a ddi tmu u mi a l D ivm smon i . It is re cuom i mmume nded t h at several progra mus tromm ida ta inm o st he gathered con the m> ui m r>h er c o t faci l i t ies time groups identified in Table 6 he initiated im>immi edi ate l y.

Table 5rwjectsd t)ivmaion/Diatrict FY 77/78 Comfort Station and Waahhouae (‘onatruction Program

Number of NumberContact and Comfort of

DtV ISIO 0.S ANt i t ) IStKI CIS: Phone Number Stations W aalmhouae, Remarks77 78 77 78

L S Airi ly I ngiruet’n t iuvisicon ,Lower Mississippi Valley

U S Army Engineer District. Memph is l . nv iru nmenta l Reso urce Section 0 1 I I t pro ot eet222-3857

U. S Arm ) Lngineer District , New Orleans Recre atmoon Resuource Management 0 I 6 2 3 pro jectsBranch 687 -11 2 1 X493

U,S Arm) E ngineer District. St. Louis Project Planning Branch S. 6’ 2 4 • Inctud es 2278- 2 122 vault type s.

2 pr oojec.r sU. S. Army Engineer District , Vicksburg Environmental Analysis Branch 44’ Cont 14 Cont 3 projects

542-4544 4 projccm s‘Includes 18

- vault type s

U. S. Army Engineer Divisio n. Missourm RiverU, S. Army Engineer District , Kansa s City Basin Planning Branch 6 33 4 25 8 projects

758-3403U. S~ Army Engineer District . Omaha l-ngineering Design Branch 17 (‘ont S Cont I prooject

864-4468

U. S. Army Engineer l,iuvo s ioon . New England t.nvironmental Analysis Branch I 5 I 0 7 projects839-7552

U. S. Army Engineer Divisio n , North AtlanticU. S. Army Engineer I)istrict , Baltimore Project Planning Branch 0 8’ 0 I I projecu . ‘in,

922-4970 ctudcs 3 vaultty pes. foot in-ctuded I bathhouse (water-borne )

U. S. Army Engineer t ) os t rm c _ t , New Yo rk Environmental and 1-conomic s I • 0 0 0 ‘located atBranch 264-4662 West Point

U. S. Army Engineer District , Norfolk Design Branch 9’ (‘ont 6 Cont I project.- 924-3757 ‘includes 5

comfort s ta-tions withshelter , does

not include Ibath house

U. S. Army Engineer District , Philadetphia Design Branch 0 0 0 0597.4753

32

Table 5 (con ’t )

Number of NumberContact and Comfort of

DIVISIONS AJ” lL) DISTRICTS: - Phone Number Stations Wsskuhouaes Remarks77 78 77 78

U. S . Army Engineer Divmsioon , North CentralU S Army Engineer t ) istr uc t , Buffalo Environmental Resource Branch 0 0 0 0

473-2454U, S Army I ngmneer District . (‘h icago u Pro oj ecm t )eve lo opment Branch 1 0 0 0 I prooject

353-65 17

U S. Army t - ng mtm een Dist rict, De m roo n t Project t)evekopnment Branch 0 0 0 0226 775

U S Arm y Engineer i ) cs t r ic . i - Roc k Island Operatio ns Branch 22 0 0 0 I project360-6332

S Army I ngincer District Sr Paul Project Operatiouns Branch 1 0 1 0 2 projects725-756t

U S Army I nguneen Div is moon . N orth Pacm t ic(0 , S. Arm) I ngmneer Dmst nut - t - Portland Recreatioonal/Pl iitmning 7 Cont 6 (‘ ont 5 proJects

Sectiom 424 -44 51

U. S Army Engine er District, Seattle Civil Design Section 7 Cont I (‘oft 3 projects399-3445

- Arm) I ngmeer t ) istrm c t . Wahla Watts Land Use and Environmental 13 2 0 0 7 priojectsSection 442-5310

U. S Arm) I- to gm neer Divis ion . Ohio RiverU S Army l- .ngm necr Distr ic t. Huntington Tech nical E ngineering Branch -ORD 8 20 7 4 ‘Includes It

684 - 3025 vaul t7 proj ects

U S Arm) l . ngi nee r O ustr mc m, Loou usv it le Tech nical I ngineering Branch ORD 0 t 1 0 I project684-3025

S Arn’iy I- ngineer Dis t r uo r , Nashville Technical t- .ngmnecring Branch . ORD 3 2 0 2 5 projccrs684-3025

U S Arm) t-ngm nec I.Jus tr ic.r Pittsburgh Technical I.ngineenirig Branch ORD 2 6 0 0 2 projects684-3025 ‘Includes 4

vault

1. S Army ingisoeer l)uoousion. Soo ut h AtlanticU S. Army t- .nguneer District, (‘har lesm oonc Environmental Resource ttranch 0 0 1 0 1 project

677-4258

U S. Army t ngm neer Distric t , Jacksonvi lle Recreational Section 4 2 0 0 4o tocat flood946-2400 contro l pro’

je ctsU S Army I- ngtneer Distr io m Mobile Environmental Resource Branch 21’ Cont 7” 2 “same faciti-

534-2654 t ics coontinu edon lY 78 ,includes 12

vault typeU. S. Armny I nguneer t) is irm ct , Savannah Recreationa l Branch 18 17 9 9 3 prooj ec ts

287-8325

U. S. Ar my l.ng ineen t ) m s tr icr , Wilmington Master Plann ing Section I 10 I 4 2 projects

U. S. Army t n r 010o -o ’r t ) ivi sio n . Sou t lm Pacific

U S Army I- n ’nncem I) istnict, Los Angeles Envir o onm ent al Resource Branch 3 9 2 3 3 projects798 -5413 (77) . 10 pro-

jects (78)

33

Table 5 (con’t )

Number of NumberContact and Comfort of

tJ tVtS IONS AND DISTRICTS: Phone Number Sta tions W aalsh ouaea Remarks77 78 77 78

S Arn i I ngmneer t ) t s t r k t . Sacr amento Operations Branch 5 4 6 ~ 4 projects44 8- 2326 (77 ) , 2 pro-

jeers o7M

U S Arm) Engineer I) ns irmc i . San I rancusco o (‘ivil Design Scctioon 0 1 0 0 Plan to con-556-8 978 struct 5 resu-

dence (singlefamily)(o~ Iproject

U S Army I. ng ineer t ) mv ms uo .on . Southwestern

U S Army E ngineer District . A lbuqu erque I- nv mronment al Resource Section 5’ (‘oft 2 Cont ‘include 2474.3577 vaults; 3

pro jects

U S Army Engineer Du~trict. t alv estoon E nvironmental Resource Branch 0 0 0 052 7-63 1 2

U S Arm ’ r- tmneer District , Little Rock Envi ronmental Resou rce Branch 14 4 (m m ) 0 0 7 proo (eo t s740 -575 1

U S . Army En~ ,ieci !) istri it . t ort Worth Pro~~am Deve lopm cnt Branc h 6 n/avail 0 n/avail 4 projects334-389 2

1°. S . Army Engineer ~ m c tr mci . Tulsa Environmenta l Resource Branch 10’ 26” 0 4 ‘Include 7736-7878 vault , “In-

ctud~ 24vault; 2 pro-jects

34

- c.~

I

1 $ :~~~ -‘I m

~~: ~~~~~

:~~~~~~~~~y .,~—r\,--.,. 4)I t .._—~ /rI ~t’

I /•~—, I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ — -L /‘

~~ ‘-‘~~~-~L—~ ~~~~~~~~~~ 0

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3

.2 ,

0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~‘~~k~i714 5

c~W ~- 2 c ~,-S’~L ~ \ 1~M ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~

L~~~/ / ~t ~~~1 7 / ~~ . 7~

—~-_~ ri\~~ J

a.

36

Table 6l)ivision and District Groups of FY 77/78

Const ruction Requ irements

Number ofGroup Faci li t ies

(; ro .oup -\ N orth Pacific I ) iv i s i oo ni 36

u_ ;roo up B Sc ou t to I’:oonik t Onv i s no to 41

Group ( Missour i River t O r v i s n o o n ‘00

;r000p I) Omaha 22

Ka ncsa ’, Ci ty

Rock Island 22tOTAL 112

Group I k~cr isas ( ci) 68

t ulsa 40

Little Ro ck 14

St. I coun s 17TOTAL 139

(;rooup t Vickshurg

New Orleans 9T O J A L 67

Group (~ Mobile 30

Savannah 53TOTAL 83

up II South Atlantic L) cvcsc oo to t I

Group I 1 ulsa 40

1.itt le Rock I 4rOlAL ~4

______________________

go ~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ e2

Figure 14, Examp le contour lines.

- 4 7

APPENDIX A: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION FLOW CHART

~~rnIi,~

.—--

PAL,~~gj~7~~

39

— 0’ ~5~~J t y ,, . ._,,,_ —

•~~~0

~~~~~

vs

~~~~~~~

>- 4 0 — 0—

4 0 Lc4, k< I•1 ~~~

—1

z

~~k 14,-

C

>~

_ _ _ _ _ _

~~ I~~~- --®

I—z

wL°~~~ I4-

I—

SUi> -J

-~

.4 z _ _ _ _ _

5 ’—c 5 v 000C w w

~~k1_~-~~

—~~ o ~~~ I— ~~~~~0 _ _ _ _ _ 0o~~c~ I-.

U 4,U)

01

~~

05

cn wLs~~0

-;1 .~

—1 z~~~Qa-

I-HIL~~I Liii

r_ ®~.- _1

w O_ _ _ U, U ) X

W a )

(~Ij \O W ]

40

COST 9 - PESTIMATOR Participate in Brief ong of~~~~1 Sum To$oI~ for Conventoono)

Design I Development Team j Construction Gov~rvvssentCost_Estinso te

_____________

Initiat e Development ofConventional Construction Forward Cost Estimate toGovernment Cost Estimate Proct,ement ond Project

Obtain Historicol informalion _____________ _____________

Consisting of Sonu tory Rec ve Step I Proposals frümlat hes Cost ~~ ~ I, Evaluat ion Board to DelermineMonth ond Year Construct Average Size of Comfort

Stot ion and Woshhouse s inProgram

___________

Develop Cost per sq Vt , andAdjust Cost per sq ft toPresent 0oy Amount forEach Facility

___________ ~~~~~~Ft on PiogromEqual to top

Historical

Oeterrrune Average Cost per 1sq ft for Comfort Station Nand Wostihouses and AvgSize of Dist. Facility

Recalculate CanventionatConstr uction Government CostEstimate

Develop Total CoiwenuenceConstructuon Cost Estimatefor Comfort Stat ions and __________________________

Washhousee Forward New Cost Estimate toProject Manager for Colculof Savings

Estimate Cost of Toto lNumber of Comfort Stot uo nsond Woshhouses UsingConventionot Cost

41

ID

SPECIFI CATIONPor tuc upote in Bri efing of WRITERSDesign/ Development Team,

Review Design Requerementsof Guide Per t Spec’s

I I

reRequire -

V Revuew Guude Sanitary Facilityents Id~nti~ol IDistrict(s) Performance Specificotion

0~

Incorporate Building Codes,N Health Codes , into Spec-if icati ons for Region ofCountry

Develop Supplemental Lustof Design Requirements

AreV Send Com pleted Specif icotoon sReview Indu stry Copobitity to Project ManagerSatisfoc ’

NAltDesugro Develop. PerformanceRequore- N Delete Non-Feasible Specificai.o.~s to Includeefits Requorement

Totol Degign RequirementsF4o5ibI~

VReady

Coordinate Additional for

Design Requirementswith Team

I t Forward Initial Draft ofSpecification to ProjectManager

2

42

12

Porttcipote in Joint Review

~ Specifications

Receive Comments fromReviewing Orgonizotioni

AreModifications Modif y Appropriate Paragraphs

or in SpecificationsQuestions

Valid

N

Sonitory Facility Per-focmonce Specifications -~~~~

Completed

Forward Completed Spec-if tcotion to ProjectManager

U

43

PROCUREME NT SPECIAL IST

I Participate in Initial Briefing ofi I Receiv e Conventional[~ ew~~i Development Team [Construction Cost Estimate

[~~ vww TSFA Procedure McxvO, [Obtom Funding Cutotion 7S8A , and Aesthetic LegalMemoron~~m for Fut .,ge

[~~~~~CQtuon

I lno l iote let Step of TSFA____________ ____________

LProcedurss ____________

Contac t GSA tF$5) t~ Evaluol,E~i stu ng Copobility to MeetRequir ement

[Hold Mid - Term Conference~ to Answ er RFTP Questions

IRequest Local PurchaseAutfuoruty or Waiver fromDefense Construction Supply

L~!~er, Defense Supply Agency 1i~~~~ propp oi~~~~~~~~~1

Period 2 Weeks , if Applicable

Develop Boiler Plate for tspLI and Step 2 Documentation

Receive Step I Proposal,

Are Convene Evoluotuon Board 4oci l o uoe s Identif y FSS Numbv for Step I Evoltuotuon 2

Ab le to ~~ “ and Submit RequestPr~cured Ia GSA, Denver, Cola

GSAN

Receiv e Specification from Ar ThereSpec Writers Sufficl nt No ‘

~‘

22

W’O M~dif’21 cation,

N

23

44

rocurnent CotmPleleiY eath 1 [~~~:rc0hb0

~I1and Forward Information

L~~RespeCtive proposer

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

~~~oposOI$

[~~nfirm Instal lation TimeTable for Facilities and

[~ nolize 24

[i~ iote 2nd Step TSFA 1Procedures for Responsive

~~ 0p050l5

E~iceive Stds ~I1

1A~ard Low Rid controct 1[~ ft er Investigat ion of F~~j

[Advise Project Manager[!Inning Bidder

L~L

45

PROJECTMANAGER I I

Develop Operational Request CoriventuonalProcedures (Acttvit ies , ConstructionTimetable) for Sont ta r y Government Est imateFacility Program for Proqram

Conduct Briefing of Request TentativeDesign / Development Facility InstallationTeam and Pres ent T imetab le from DistrictsGuide PerformanceSpecificat ion and

_____________________

Evaluation Documents Develop List of Inpu tNeeds and Quest tonsf rom Manufacturer

Provide TSFA Manualand Legal Memorandums Ito ProcurementSpecialis ts Conduct Manufacturers

Meeting to Discuss

I Program

Br ief Procurement on I, DCSC Potential

Involvement Evaluate Industr iesCapability, Costs,

I Interest , Requirements,I Etc. for Protect

Ident if y * of Sanitary I ~~~~~~~Facilities , FundingSource for Program

____________________

I Discuss Industry— Meetin g w ut h Spec

Request Districts Writer s to EvaluateProvide Maps of Adequacy of Spec sReservoirs , IdentifyingLocation and Type of

____________________

Questionnaire Conduct Me:t tag with

I (Cover Program______________________

Requirem ents , Fund tngsObtain Site Conditions I Etc .)for Familiarization (NRequired for Program)

Evaluate TentativeMilestones and

31 Activtttss , R.vtse asNecessary

46

32

Receive Performance Forward Spec’s toSpecifications and I Procurement forEvaluation Documents

tmnc~

5iOn in RFTPfor Review

Check on Avalability of

Have [Funding SourcesModifica - Distributetions Been

Made to Guide Tailored SpecisPerf. Spec’s to Team Are

Members All Docu-2 N ments Readyfor Adver-

N Coordinate tis ingFinal Develop-

Establish Review ment of Req’dProcess for Spec s Information Vand Review Meeting

Give ProcurementI Approval toReceive Review Advertise

Comments from TeamMembers

Participate inMid- Term Conference

Assist in Modifica- 1Identif y Evaluationtion of Perf Spec ’s I/Modiflcat ~~ Paragraph with I Board Members jor )~~~~~~ _______________

\puestions/’ CERL and Spec J 1Writer ________________________\~/ aI i d /

__________________

I

f participate in

___________________ [ Evaluation Board

Performance Specifica-

Rea dy for Advertisingtton Complete and

IReceive Cost Estimatefor Program

47

Receive Revised Cost Conduct Meeting withEstimate for Cost Procurement and Con -Savings Calculation , tractor to Discuss Anyif Applicable Discrepancies

1 1Partici pate in Meeting lOve rsee Production ofwith Contractor Required FaIncluding Pre -Con-

ci l i t tes

struct ion Conf .Document “Lessons

and Cost SavingsI Inspect Prototype J Learned ii

f r o m Project

Facility

Transmit LessonsOrganize Prototype Learne d” and CostTesting Procedures Savings to CERL

Receive PrototypeFacility InspectionReport from ResidentEngineer

IConduct Test ing of[Prototype Facil i ty

I~~ cument F ind ings of 1Facility Pert Testing j

48

CERL CONSULTANT

Participate in Briefing ofL Design / Development Team

Brief Project Mgr. on allAspects of the program[~ncluding GSA ,DCSC Invol

Participate in Meetingas Required

____________

_ F_Review Material ~i.e~)Spe~i)~Evol Due,) as they are

L Availa ble ____________

~Specif y Where ChangesShould Occur inDocumentation

[Brief Evaluation Board on[Documentation Procedures

Receive “Lessons Learned[~nd Cost Savings Data

49

.,‘,—

~

...I.# -

CONSTRUCTIONRESIDENTENGINEER Participate in Brieftng of

Design/Development Team

Review Specifications andSupply Comments toProject Manager

Oversee Production ofPrototype Facility

Inspect Prototype Facilityper Requirements in Specs

Document Inspection ofPrototype Facility andForward to Project Manager

Oversee Production ofRequired Facility

50

STATEREPRESENTATIVES T

Receive Briefing of Programfrom Project Manager * J

Review Performance Specsand Supply Comments toProject Manager

Participate in Evaluation

LBoord _____________

Forward Final State Approvalof Winning Bidder

[Inspect Prototype Facility 1

* This Meet in.g Should Occur Subsequentto Team Brieftng

SI

DISTR ICTARCHITECT Participate in Briefing of 1

Design /Development Teamj

Provide Project ManagerWith No. of Facilities inProgram, Furidtng, Source ,Mops of Reservo tr ,Locationand Type of Facilities forDistrict

Provide Project ManagerSite Conditions if

Requested

Provide District FacilityInstal lation Timetable toProject Manager

[A~ view Performance Specsand Provide Comments toTeam Members

[Inspect Prototype Facility 1

AL

52

MANUFACTURERS

Provides IndustryCap abi l i ty ThruParticipation atMonufoctur•rs

TDevelops Response toRFT P J

~Supplies ShopDrawing to DistrictDesign / Dev Team

Produces PrototypeSanitary Facil ity

Negotiates on PossibleModificationsRequired

Produce the * ofRequired ComfortStations and Installif Neces sa ry

Has HasTotal N Yearly .,

, Place Required Molds /Contract Requirement Materials Aside for

Been Been Next Ye~~ Produc t ionMet Met

P ?Y N

Continue ProductionUntil Required * is

St Produced , Store Moldand Mat’I for LaterUse

Sto

53

APPENDIX B: .uie ‘n isis ’ ’ i.e ., w h ether they meet or exceed thePROCEDURES FOR UTILIZATION OF tit inimuin threshold .TWO-STEP FORMAL ADVERTIS ING*

Step two is then , in e t t e ~ t . an inv ita l i ’ ‘ii for hid ,si i ice bidders hid ott their own responsive pri p

1 BACKGROUND TWO-STEPAward is made Ii the responsive proposal with the

FORMAL ADVERTISINGlowest hid .

In Octo ber i ‘ 4 . (‘ l:Rl. decided I t > use two-stepfoinial ad ser t i s l ig to pruucu ’ s,I IO,ury fac i l i t ies or 3 SPECIFIC MECHANICS AND RULES OF PNO-ORI) Tw o-step ~~as ct it>sen largely because it ali >~~s STEP FORMAL ADVERTISINGI r the pa rt i c i pa i i t > i i u t al l building produets ’t ec hniques .not ;ust conventiona l ones. u examp le , there has I a lu le 131 pres e nts the spe~itic mechanics and rulesbeen an incr ease in induis tria liied buildin g product ! or consideratiot is liii I ‘ -s tep fru rnial adver t is ing usedtec hniques su~Ii us panel or modular builders. Procured in t h is program.correct l~ T i e s I)uulefl l iall 5 iii icr improved cost , t ime .and qua l i t , hct ie tj ts 4 SPECIAL CONCERNS

( LRI, resear c h ind ic ,utes that uric c u t the main re asoui s I Note that the bidder is being asked to prov ide afo r the pieseri t high ~t ust c i t buildings is the use of “tota l package .’’ The impact on wa ge rate . s appe .urestik sc procurement techniques which allow for the he that the I)avis-Bacun Act will onis apply to i i i -s i tepart icipat i i’ i i 1 only one building product te ch nique work and not to off -si te work , even t hough such o f t -t he c iiivetitio ital it st ick -built ’’ approach. Use of a site work is ostensibl y construct ion. I See (‘omp. ( en.more open. unrest rict ive procurement process alhiiss 5 B-I 4~ I)7~ ( 19ô3t: and 43 (‘omp. Gen. ~4 I.all potential produc is techn iques to participate. In 2. CERI. recommends holding a preprc p usa l con-this w.t~ the t ec- iu ia rke t tuu >.cs of ecuiii iurfl and quality ference during the proposal period (during the Iou rthrat h er th in an arh i t ra s , restr ict ive procurement process week ) to answer ~iiestioris po h iems about the RI’TP.determine the suilution. The end of this conference would u s > he a convcnie ii

t ime lii end the submitt a l ii corrections to the RITP( ui nveu t i c na l building product s/ tech niques are not Ir’> bidders Also , w i c e a corrcc t iuul i is su bm i t ted and

c~~j iu1i ’J in two-step. Rather , they at e m erely denied s uiuse~ ucnt i~ acce pted , t he Co rp s should send an adden-t he pt s iege of being lit a noihiurnpetut we posture. dum to alt prupuisci apprisulic them > 1 this correctio n !Ilc ipe t uul l y. slime inn ’ v a t l s i ’ con ve ntional si ilutioiis will rev isiim.resu lt - ( , iv e iu t h e c i i ’ >t f i L irs r r e s e i u t . however , au RCLont.ile r ld that co pies ot pertinet it page s otit udi i st ria hited builder w h ether ~ouie Iu/e d t imodu lar , or the c t e ie i iccs guides m.iiuuals 1staiuda rds that proposeiswhatever is iii I lie iii 1st ~ i opit iou s posit ion to sub i i i it are held accou r i t a ble for he p ri ivided on reque Sta low , I r’sp unsivc bid I however. w lii~ tu ev e m pruu’Ju~ I: ~ Recotnrnend , ii permiss ible . progress pavt t ie ntstec luiilq Ie submits the winning hid , the maximum c, ius t , wi th a c e r t a i l u percent (e .g . , 1 ( 1 percent) retained untilqui .thi ts - anil t i t u l V heuue f i t s ,in he guaranteed onh~ h~ ci iiut plerion.u s i ng a no nre s t r i c t i v e procuireinet if technique such as 5 . Ide nt i ts s i te s in s t e p one , and state that thetw t i s te p toi mai . ic t v e r t is i i ig . it i an u t ac t u i re r can view t h e m .

ti ld c nt i fs de lisc i scheu,Jule iii s tep tw o . It ’ desired .2 GENERAL PRINCIPLES /OPERATION OF TWO’It IS possible for t ittie of delivery to he an evaluationSTEP FORMAL ADVERTISINGfac to r .- \ i I tha t is required is to establish a dehiver ~

Siinpb~ pot . I ~‘> h .\ iS a l) 1>uc ure it ~et1t process which dat e s and prov ide Some evaluati u i iactc i r f o r each iia~hr idgc s the public acc iuuntahi l ity of formal advertising the it s u e d date esL ee ls or bet ters the establ ished date.w it h the ver s at i l i t y ‘i t negotiation. In .ucp one, request’> 7. I ontiitl advertisement spe it es that .i~~ ard willfur techn ical pr up s,ihs are solic ited pursuant to spec- he based on ‘‘puce and other I .i~ tors .

” One of theseif lcat iuuns/draw iiugs which establ ish a ininimuni cii ‘‘tither fac tors ” is the pr uu t e~ ted “tnalntenance and‘‘ t hres hohd’’ level of . icvcptahihty. Submit ted proposals iiperating costs. ’ W here the basis for the con ipuit at on

ire evah u ,ited by techn is.u l s-s pe rts to determine it they of a hid ev~ihua tion las to , is le ,u i~ spelled out in s t epm e , iii such ter nis as to give t h e bidder a reasonably

‘Prepared by ~.1r M I, ( u,rr umll , (‘IRE. I u ’g ,i -~ut~ is ,, r - April clear idea of how the esalu.ition factor will w ui k . thenf97 5 s u ch evaluation is valid (See lb ( ‘ tu lip ( ,c’i 3M() ( I

S4

lab le BISi ms - c t ic ~1 c’ s f ua ci mu, s and K ulcs iii I~ m m - Sic 1, I u irumial Sd su r t msi ng

Mcs han is~ Special Rules/ (.’onslderai imuns

Step On.

I I ’t ie RI l’P ui i , m % ),c iii the t cc rm imt a l e t T e r . kncmwn j s aI c u t ’ > Requc ’si f u r I L’c.’i i ru isaj Prum p icsai i t RI I P)

2. I tie RI IP must Cc mf l i ~ ifl, .ut inini inurmm 5ev’ u’e nc r ,cl ls ASPR 2 Slut I

a. Ifie t 5 ’ sT prac i uv.cf uk s lcsvr i pt i cmn c ut ’ the supp lies or se rc i ses S~~is ’ I f tu u rt has tu cen m a d e t im st,u t s’ requirements in as unres-required IOCI it t ’ .1 I ,c st u u c , i u cs pcmssi f ite so as Ic ens c t U l a e u ’ cc i i n p e t ut i cc f l -

\ccc pi .ct l lu ’ uliat ce ptabte para meters were baseuf as muc h aspu uss i f i le on I u nc T i lls and bcc na t ide needs . t i c cpcf ’uit f y , c l arbi-t r a rs - unneces~urv requirements have been removed or revis ed .

b .~~~~t ’ m ifica lit iii of ’ the i i i tent I c i cc m u d uet I lie proc urenns’n inc’ ste ps and the mc T i ns if lv i ,tvect

v . th e requ rreum ienis of ’ tire tec hnical prcm posal. ic., the beces’ Note- I i make an acc urate , thorough evaluation , perhaps mores,crs ds’ iai ls such us drawings , data , pr e s ent at ic m nu . c c., i t , he than ctm ncs’pt drawings, perhaps even working drawings shouldsicu nniited he re que sT ed ihe pitini us thai enough dat:t rOust be requ es Ted

I c c make an ac - curate , re liat tc eval uati t ’ n.

ci. I i t s ’ criteria or ev .t lu.iiiu ic t h e tec hnical pr c u p c usai , these It is important iii note ihat tec h nical urvalua uic mn s wilt he upheldshciuid m isi s t of’ design, m a nuf ac turin g , tv -sung, and pert ormn- by the i ;~~u ) ‘‘ unless there is c lear evidence c i t fraud , abuse c iance rec{uire ui len ls - authorit~ . t)r a rbitrary a c t i cm n . ’’ u 48 (‘omp, t e n 4> i ( 1 ~ r 5

Iii ( ,( 4 u u ( l l- l 6 l i l 3 iAug 28. 191>7): f t - t t u c 7 1 t I \ p rm t ~~I di(’q,

Ns’ve rT i ue le ss ill e ff c i mus shtmuld be maci c I cc perto rm .us accur a t eanti reliable an cc . u lu c .c r u t ‘n as possible - -5 , letter I rcm m I - I -

W u cr re l , ( t RI.. identified ( I Ri’s R’com mend a t mcc n for tuets ’ci ur m ica t team , S c u m e a(s t t t a t tt ie spec l l I s , u m i c n s ‘~ur rt a un an‘‘as’s u i u s ’ mcc .c t t s pleasing” requirement icr be eva luated t u~ a teamcu t a rchitects , t I c is I esi should be repea ted . in the evah uat mc m iisec t i c in its an eva tua I ion criteria.

(‘I RI. at s u m recc mrnme nst s that a l.cuse be used to proc ide thatduring tIre c ’. a I i t t t ium n , the eva lua I itun tea ri iii. , . if cm decor’>nc - cs’ tsa r ) • require r u t - tu iui t ier T u c supply t t’st iflg c r T i t lea lion uit he item in quc s l i m ‘n. tire team shcmulsf rn~u kc liii ’ req t i c ’ s tm cmr i f ycslie n us’ s c ’ s ssm rs Requs’sts ‘uhcuuld he cc i g r rc / . c tm i ‘I r u e c_ Ic m ” C Ithe pr ‘t”~’.c1 ps ’> uti.

‘u~ tui ,’re cr a req uire inent us made i c r a haLter tc m Pr cc it ic ’ l,ctccr ~ s’u ,’ rti l’ie’aiimun , ihe I il liucs cog c l , c ccsc ’ sl icumihd he used per3) Ccm mp ( cn 37~ ,

‘“lime ccmnli ’~us ’ ic mr du ll ~ub,nii pet’ ml thu I ihe 1st . Ic t Ire item uwh ic ii he pr mposs ’s to furnis ic u nche r I his s pec it ’ ic .1 lion ucmn f c c r u m st c u the sI , tcuu t ,c ic i s c mt tIre I l ist appr impriate res l imi g ucr cza n i , . iT io ns uI fit’ labe l mt tILted resting c m ru ’an r i / j t i c umis i shall he . i vc epled as,iir i urm ing i c c t fu is requirement -

In lieu cml I ir is )ahcl , lime cc uni r ims I c ur ru t s sut iurrit a wri t tent s r iii cc j i ii in f r m> mm r ar ms ic . m t ic cnally recognized testing age t ic -. uu ic ’u i u . c t e l S cc lui lupc ’ci and ccc nnpetef l t to perform su c Ii servic es ,tha i the (s late’ itc ’ rr i ) ira’ been tested and conforms to theSt and.i m c i s , inc luding methods ol test . c i t t tic I listed test ingc mrga fl i/su t im mri s u

e. A stat ement r hat the tec hnical proposals shall nmm t includeprices cir pric ing mnkmrm ati i in

55

Table RI ( con t )

Me’s ha uuu cs Special Rules /Considerations

I - t i c s - c t , c u e u,r date and hour i s which the primpo ca t ntust hue Sc u ie Sta te c lea r l y ~ tie t iuer or not late proposals will beres eicec i .uuicl the Lime l’echn ucah t’ t ; ~c cs j l s prc cvu s i ccm t in ASP R accepted. It t h y ’s are to he considered , there should be ncc m immn g

2iu i u 2,3 m imi c rep laces paragraphs 7 and ~ c mf Standard t ’ ui rmr i m the RI- ’TP inconsistent with such cons iderations, (See 5233’\ u (‘omp , Gen. 726 11973 1,

g S st a te i mm e nt t h a t in the sc’ s md step umf the prc u ’urementonly huls bjced upon technic at pr uc puc sa l s determined icc beacceptable . eifher initially cur us a result c c l discussions , willhe cu uns ucle red i c c m ,t cs.c r cjs ; amid ttu at each bid in the secondste p must be based on tIre bidder ’s own technical proposals

h -S s t . i Ic ’n m ent that ct t euc i r s are advised to suhu>’ it propucs sml sw hich arc ’ tut ly and c leart s tic cep i a t c i c ’ without add iti c)na lexpl.ination or c r r t c , r r t r a t i cu n . since the gtmve rnment may makea tinal deiern rinatic mn as to whether a proposal is acceptablem mr unacce pta tu he sc ileb on the basis of th - propo sal as sub-mitted and proceed wi th the se sc cn s i step without requestingfurther tnfmcrniation from a n y c c u l e r c c r , humwever , if the govern-ment deems it necessar s to obtain sulf iejent acceptablepruu po.sa ls to ,us ’>Lc re adequate price competition in the secondstep cur deems it c c mherw ise desirable in its best interest , thegovern m ent m ay, in its stile duscn ’ rion , request additionalun hom natuc ri t ronn c c l c i I rs cmi prm m pc sals which the gccvctm rn ment -

ccmnsic h c ’ rs reasona bls s ic ’ >se; ct ih le ci hieing made ac ci.’pltc ble byadcl i t i i mnat m l ur i na t i c m n a n t ymng or supplementing hut nothasuc ’at t ’ , c iiang in~ any proposal as submitted , and , for thispurp c u ’ ~- . the government crca ~ d isc us ’ > .mt iy suc h proposal withthe cc u ieror

i. -S statement if uat s’ae hu sc uunc e submitt ing an unacceptabletechnical proposa l will be sum notified upon completion of thetechnica l evaluation ucf ’ his p rc p csa l , and final deter m ination - . -

of such unacceptabilu ms

j A s ta t e ment either that only ccne technical proposa l may be Ncmt e A Icuw imid in the sect mnd step tin a technical pr c m p ucs .cIsubun utmc- c i I,’. each imf f eror dir that multiple technical proposals tcuund ac ceptat ut e under step one is elig ible ho r ass .c rc i evenma~ be subm itted. W hen compliance withi spccif ’icat icmn perm its though the hid a lsc c included an u utacc ep m au Ie al ternat ive ,utulmi , t i i c mn cmi essentially di f fer e nt technical approactr es , it is 46 (‘omnp. Gen. 807).genera l ly in the in re res t ui the gc mvern ment t c u authorize thesu hmissic mn I muliiple prcmp umsals, If multiple proposals are,muthuuri iec i , t he request shall incluc e the clause in ASPR 7’21 K i3 -

3 5 1cc , alt hmuug h l ice ;overnttie’nt’s delivery or performancere quirements are ic c i s’tat uati ,mn ti c T c c r s under step one, infcc r-mat lo n ab ,mu u those require m ents m a y be of assistance top m m m s ’nt i al bidders in deter m ining whe t h e r cit not t i m submita tech nic ‘ it p r cm p m ms a h A c cordin g ly, .c request for technicalpr cc p mms a ls may c on tain a s t a t e men t indicating what theGtmvern mnent ’s pr cu ha l c i c ’ em mn i ra c I delivery u,r performancerequirements will he [he statement shall .ilsm u advise thatsuc h iniccrm a t i m mn us f l i r t binding c~n the ( cc c v ernm e nt and thatthe (,osernunenr ‘s ad tual delivery cur pm ’ n t c c r m a n s s’ require .m e n ts will t i m’ con rained in invitat icc ns t um r buds issued u nderstep t~

4 Alter nm ’ cc ’ ip l c c i ihe p m cdp m isa t s

a I ve ry pre c au iumm m i shall tie m,iken to safeguard tectini ca l Note I rude sec rets and/o r paten is m ust be prote c ts -c l t I ,c v ,propm i sic ts aga in sr c l isch c su i rc ’ to unauthcc r t ,ed

~~~~ s c c r m s ever, recent amend m e nt s tcm the I ret’ d ums n oh I ntc ’ nm n i t i mmn Act

56

Table HI (con ’I )

Mt’ e ( m a mm a s Special K uk-i- ( ‘onaider ati ons

mnig ht cause sc mnne p ucutc lcu ns ‘I heretcc re check w i l tu legal c umunsefwh en requcci s i c m r cm i hc rs ’ RI I Ps are m ade Jane Liptc m n m l I8- 2 02-6 93-7070 / 7057 i. 0(1 legal ccc unsel , h a s been assignedt h e task c c l ammsw ening c i u es tu cuu ls sucf i as th iese at 0(1. lesel46 (‘c mm p. Gen. 34 ( I 966i s . ivs tec h nical prcc pci sal s straIt irewithheld t’romn public es.a nrm nat ic mn w here the proposat isdesignated “proprietary ” by the offcror either ora lly or inwr ut i ng. A l s c c see ASI1K 1 8-910.

b. techni ca l prcmp ccs. ils sub m itt ing data m a r ked in ac cc i rs h-a m mc e w i th ASPR 3- 51 )7 .1 shall him accepted and handled inaccor dance with the paragrap h

c . A n refer e nc e to price or ccc su shall be renuoved.

S I urth c r mnc cre

a. Ihe ctm ntru c t ing officer sha lf establish a time period within Ncc te : ‘tentative eva lu ,cticmn period is fro unu 3 Ju ly l?75 tcmwhich technical prc posals will be evaluated. ‘[he time period 31 July 1975 ,may vars f rcmm procurement to prcueurem nent depending on thecomplexity and number of prmiposiuls invuilved, h owever , itus essent ial th a t the evaluation ccl technical proposals by allpersonnel cmm nccrncd with the prumcuremcnt , as we ll as anysubsequent diseussium n with smmurces submitt ing technicali r c pcm sal s , be completed e~pcditiuuusIy.

b technical eva luation c ii the propc u sahs shall be based on thecriteria contained in the request for technical proposals andsuch eva luation shall n c m include cc urs ideration of capacity orcredit as defined in ASPR 1-705.4 . [he propo sals as submittedshall he cate gc uriz ed as either

- ( I i -\c’cc ’pta hle,h 2) Reascc nahty suseeptit ik’ to being made acceptable Icy

add mticm na l c n t c m r u r r a m u c crc c l i m i t s ing or supp le mmn ent ing, hutn cmt htiscc t i lts changing the prcupo sa l is suhmmitied , umr

ii) L’ na scc ’pt.cb le

An~ prm up,cs ,ml whic h modifies , mmr fails iii e c u m u t curi O to the essen - Note - l ime (‘m urp s dimes not have to go i cc cat egc ur 2 plc cp t msatstai l requtremen us or spc’ c it meat imu ns iii , the request for t ee tuniccu l but cur , m t i v e tie t ut ir i if th m er e arc enm uug ti c.c iegory I prcm pos .uts i c c

prum pu msats shall tr im cm m ncud s ’ re ’ci nonresponsive and categorized as insure acl ec luate cc m m np c t i tmccn.unacceptable It the contracting c , i tm c . e r determines that there -

are suflue ment pro pm c sa l s in c a m eu mcmr ~ I above tim ass t m rc adequatepm ice ’ ccm mpe i ml c u under step t w im and t hc , m t far t her t i inc . effort.anuh delay tm uni t ke ad dit io nal prc u pcu sa ls t ic cc ’pta hle and thereb yincrease c u m m petm l mc c u u w ccu i d n u t bim in tIre best inte re st it theri ver n mien t , t m - (she irma y pm mccc d d i rect l y wit ii step I w mm .(Hhms ’ rw ise , ti ne cmn urac i in g t uft set st ia l l request bidders underp rmm pcmc.uli in c ategmiry 2 uhove t im sutmunii addit iumnal infumrma-t ic in - sc mm ung fm mn ii t i m tine es t i n t practicable t he nature cml thedefk’ me ns me’ in t he pnm mpcusa l as ‘c utm m nitte d u r the nature c i t theaddit ic,nal un ii urm u m a t ic cur required. the con ing c it t icer min ayalso arrange disc ussimuns f u r this purpose. In initiating reque stsfin add it umunal intc,rmati . in , (he cum ntr a c ’tmn g officer shall f is anmpprcupria tim t mine i c c r bidders tmm c cmi u c luck ,f usc u c s s c c ins . ci any.

suh mm nn u t ill j ict i t l i ui lal int cc rr i nsi t j im n , .incl ine mmr pimrate suchm add)-t u m c i i , u h i n h m u r c m i . c l c c c m i ms p i n c t iheur ~mr um pumsaI ’ c as suhuniiied.Sac ii time 10 15 i c c c’ s t c ’nm leci mi i tmc ’ ilmscrei im m n mit t ime cumnt r ac mumcu ’cmtt iec r , It it me . , . t c l i t j m , nal m mn t i i r u um . i i u , m n i n d i um p c c m . i l s - c h as part c c i ii

~urm,pc msa l within time- final hint’ t us ed icy the c muntra e t i ng c i t me et

57

‘ - “ - c ~~~~~~ —~~~~~~~~~~ ‘ -

Table RI (con ’t )

Mechanics Special Rulesi (’ o mnsm d e ratum m n s

est ,m h lms huc ’s t hat the pr cpc,sal is acceptable, iT st~ali he so ta lc ’ -gorized. Otherwis e , ii shall tue c c t e g c u r u l e u t as unacceptable.

c t psc n tinal de tu,’ rr mn ina I ic c n that a technica l prcmpc ca l isUnas ce ptab ln ’ . the c mm ntrae t ing mmflucer shall prcm m npt ly r i cu lu ithe so urce submitting the prcmpc m sa l of ibta t tac t . ‘l’ he nu ut iceshall S T a t e that red 1st u rc 01 t ie’ pr cupcmsa l will ncc I he considered .and s t u d 1 indicate , in general ter m s , the basis for the detc’ ruuuina-

c m - t c i t im y m ti plc ’, the re’Jec t i c n us ,cs lu .msec t on failure to f urnislnsufficient iniccrm aticur i m r tin an unacceptable eng ineer mmrga t i p rc mac h .

ci - I c c rusmc f era thin c i t h,u IC c c tunics a I pm opnc stml s is governed b N c i t e - t i AU I eels I lucre 5 no rca ’ > umu I mr relu sung to c c c i i suder latet he pr n mee ct ure in “~‘st ’R 1-Sub pr c ; mccs tm ts . irui s i t i ce a u c c t l c.’ r c c r s t i c iu ld hc chic’ Ii, teL ‘‘ mu wh.i l

lime RI 1I’ ‘ c u s s , s I ,m ie c lea r l y s~’ l i ,c t t ic l )c) l ie~

s,cI

e Ii , as a result c c l t he c’s u l u a tmuun c c l tm .’c ) m ni ca l Imr t m posals . itat t ic , mc urecess.a r cc ct usc -cnn t flue t w c )— s t ep I cit mtua I ach cc ’ r I sm rig,a statement sc ’ t m t ing forth the full facts and circil t ristar ices shal lbt~ mrnade a part oh the cs m ntra ct tile , I- ,cch s c u urc e will he notifiedin w ’ i t ing ut the dis continuance and the rea scun therefore.When step ‘inc results in ncr acceptable technical proposals orc n l ~ one acce ptable t echni c al prcupc u sa l . the prcucuremen i maybe c.mntinucd h~ negmc t iation under the authority of ASPR3-2 10 .2 (liii. (But see ASPR 3 -21 ) 1 ,3 , )

Step Two

Upcrn completion of step mmne’ . a formally advertised proc urement in ,t c c c c m c i c r r s e with Parts 2 , 3 . and 4 of liii’> Appendixwill he cimnducted - im sce pt that inv i tatmu u r rs f u r t u cds

I Wil l be issued cu mi l) t im those sc iurces whost technicalp r c c p c c s ah s have been evaluated . c rc c i determined t c c be acce ptableunder s me p dune

2. Will include the p rccvusmccn in ASPR 7-2003.37

3. Wi ll pnumuuli nc ’ntt) state Ilua r tine sul) cp huc ’s or services to be N c c t m - ’ [he b idder ’s own detailed spc m c.. i l ica l i t tls wilt be incor-procured will be in m c d c mndanee with the spe c i t i c a u t cm n s and the pu tt Ied into tine contract and inc wilt trace t im comply wi thbidder ’s technical prcmpos.c l . as finally ,cscept ec l , unde ’r t he them n.Ied ) U m$s t for Icc hnict mh propmnsal . I hns should be accomplished intine’ itett i desc r upT i c n by -i prcuv is ion cuttstant i ,ihl y in thc ’form cci’this ’ fcm lliiwung example

Radicm antenna , in ,m c ccu rd m u nce with I sicc t ucu Nmm . ~~~~~~~~~ N c c t e ’ ‘the bidder remnauns liable for his solution es en thoughciat~~ch - (use other clm ’ddi’if i !iccPi of specifications the government icas ev ,iluaied it and found it “re s pccns i s e ”

as appropriate) and cur I t’chnical Prumposcu l ., (insertspe c -n / ic idm ”ntif icatson i f the l ’mc l c i t ’r ‘s ~uro~uc ,cal including anye m-c m s md d, m (hc reof am fc ,tal / c accepted) incorporat ed herein byrelen s- md c c ’ Ninth ing i’m n m . muc ec i in s n id I c c ii nie m I Prntpo tal shallc c mist l u te a waiver c c l any cmi the provisions c c i sti tch E’ > ht tuct (orsp ec u t i c a I c c f l s i .

d. Will f l int be synic 1cs iied usee Sec tm m m n I , P,nrl It) ) inn publicly~v c s t e c i iiimc’ 2 2 du I 2t ex cept thu , mI the names of firms w t c u c Ithave submitted acc eptab le techtr tca l proposals in the tirst step

c l two - ste p crrnal t i c i s m m r t i s u m m u m will be listed in t Ine ’ I ‘ommen’e/ I ucuimu ess /)gc i t i n the beneti t c i t pnunspecilve subc um ntra ctun ns inac c u m ni t ance ,n im h I 111(131, l a b 12 u

APPENDIX C: STATE~OF-THE-ART a. penfor matice specifications 1 2 3 4 5SYMPOSIUM QUESTIONNAIRE h. descriptive s peci t i ca t ic im us I 2 3 4 S

c. t’ixed design am nd specifications I 2 3 4 5

= high degree of interest, 5 = no ni t e r e s t

- W h at a mt ai ng eme tn l% does your co m pany make for 4. Approximately how litany days would be required( lie it tsl : i l la t i tm ii ci t your l im tu ts ’’ to ‘‘tcm ol —up Icu r a job similar to our pto grai ni ’~

- days ,Com npatny utilizes own engimneer attd crew.Company uti lizes own engineer and local crew. 5. Approximatel y how many units . sim ilar to those

— Company suhcont racts out entire job. identified in our program could be produced in a 6.None, Purchase r installs units. month period? units.

2. Please indicate the maximum delivery distance your 6. Do you have a willingness/capability to providecom pany desires. - miles. different exterior finishes?

Yes 3. Indicate your interest in responding to: No 2

59

- ~ , e c . ,v i ’ - ’ ’ — ‘ - ~‘_#‘ - ‘ - ________

APPENDIX D: S . Pr nvidc a hreakd uiwn of projected comt ’or t sta t lsu ttBACKGROUND AND t i e e c l ’ > nuver the t ie d live years. Use attached sheetPROCEDURAL QUESTIONNAIRE t it led /~~c i/ ( ’ c ’t( ’c/ ( , c m f u c rf ,S’tat iu,p t ,\‘eeuls The sum total

shinuld corresp unt id t c c the number idetu t it ’led to OhioRiver l ) u v i su cu t i pers tnnel. Sec exa m ple on preceding

The fo lhu iwim i g q ue st ict t t m ia ir c inas hcctt developed to page.iihi aun hac ’k gruiutt d iin huu r mali ot r on ) cu l i n rcc reatic ,t tala reas , relate d procedural m ethods , and com fo r t station 6. What pe rt c m i i~ige c ut the pr Icc t ed con itort stat ions

t ’.uci l i t i e s (both presetit and pt u uj t ’c’ t t ’d I. Please answer has had the fuel and water inputs identified?

the Ic u l l u u w u t i g dlut ’s t mi m is on a separate sheet and reference fuelthe appropriate question number. Use the attached waterforms w hen ati sss LI itu g questions 3 . 4 . and 10,

7 . List the most cotnmcun theft , vandalis m - and m isuseReservoir Procedural Methods problems c c cmi I t c h t i tug ci i mtcir t stations. Identtt t ~ nature ,I . Will re s ervi i i m , (‘iirpx personnel arrange Ion s ite t re ( Iu iet ncy. attd extent of damages.um l ’pJ r u t ii ut u c ( I i u mit id at icu n. waler supply. waste piping.

8. W hat percentage of ’ t he proj ected comfort statione lectrical , ~ .u tk ~~:iys , e t c . )facilities need to he accessib le to the physicall y handi’

2 , Will r c s e u v u t u r ( c u m p s personnel he able to ~~ capped? Revtew ER 111 0 . 1 . 1 (32 dated 10 March 1972before responding I cu t his question. II’ possib le . identifyand/or construct co mfort stations?t h ese corn I ur stat ions ott the sante form completed for

3. What state . luica l, or iither codes and regulations question ~ 5 , using the “additional information” area.

are :ipplicahle Ic r t h e ccunstructi on of comfort stat iot i 9. What is the expected life of a comfort s la t t u i n ’taci l i t ie ’s? (Please s i t e full reference ut it is available).

Recreational Area Informat ionComfort Station Facility information 10. ldetiuI~ ott a topogr aphic map of the reservo i r , the4 , i’m ‘vIdL ’ a breakdown of all existing comlort sta~ locations of t he proposed comfort stations. Identif y the(ions at re se rvu uu m s i tC - Use attached sheet t i t led: I ’.xisting location ott the map by a dot , with a kt te m , a number ,(~urPuJc ir( Stations, (Se e example below.) and another letter beside the dot, For example:

EXISTING COMFORT STATIONS

Si ns MF5 a d c M u s iA i ’~ iK i S mMi ~~ i

A,A, ~~ a-a - S tu l ) t I RuN

M ~~~~. < mI) mitTOTAL NI MIII H 4 La — — t Nl - OR M-\ l IO N1) 1- s’rATloNs L) .~ ~ La ~ Z

~a ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I—”W ITH S t ( ’ t l ~ -I t a-a

~ FACILITIES > ~ 0 u.c ~ < I-’ X ‘~~ ~~ 0 ‘~~ z ‘

~~ ~~ ‘~~ ~~ ‘~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ,c O

A 7 I 3 t 2 2 2 3 0 4 3 u i 0 0 7

B 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 I

10 S $ 1 1 1 I) 1 1 0 1) 0 10

I)

60

I.c i c a t u u i t r mi t cmiinf cu r t s tat io n . ‘Y’u ’~ Ncu

seats 1 2

Site ty pe . scat ciuvens (lids) I 2floor m tunted 1 2

“ ‘~PI213 “ Idem uti fy ing number within wall hung 1 2

s i t e I j uu~’ caIcgor~ - h ush valve I 2vut t e c u mu s ch rina I 2

Referencing letter lii category cast iron I 2c it quest uc t i S answer sheet , cast aluminium I 2

stait u less steel 1 2I I . . -~ ie recreat i o tu al ,ure , is ~u uiuu iu i r I s ta t uu i t r s ever c losed b. Lavatoriesut tine public? It ’ so . please describe the ci ru un rustat ice s ( I ) Nit spec itic requiremet it t i c exclude an~in detail c u t the fixtures tu e Iu ~~

( 2 ) Indicate ~ huether acceptable or unaccept able.Design Requirements Information Ycs Ni

12. The c l u e \ t u c c r u s ~~l mic t i h’iillctw h ave heetu developed public access 1c m trap c leancnuts . . . 2Ii’ gather Sc c p r j i m i t ~s our s pe cut uc clesi gmt requ irements for manually operated tauce t s I 2cct t nfort s ta t ic i t ms All questions relate Iii possible fixture service sink I 2t \ ps’S There arc three pcu ss uf m le , it usw c rs per question : vitreous china I 2flu sp ec i t i c re quirement , se s , and no. You are asked to cast iron 1 2

identif y the appropriate ar tswer by either checking the stai n less steel 1 2prnvtded sp.uce c ur c ircling the code number. c. Urinals

( I I Ncu specific requirement to exclude am m~-t Pt nc specI f I c requirement arnswer will be interpreted of the fixtures listed below.

as meatting t h at any fixture which meets the perform’ (2) Indicate whether acceptable or unacceptable.alice re quirements will be acceptable by you Yes No

trinuglm type 1 2A t ’es answer will be interpreted to mean that this wall brung I 2

is t he only t~ pe cut f ixtu re which will be acceptable by Ilcior moutited I 2

s unit I ) iS i u~ stall mounted I 2vitreous china I 2

A t~~u J t i SW i.’i will be interpreted as meaning that cast iron I 2

u n d e r m m c i cmrc umm stances wi ll this type cut fixture be ca~I aluminum I 2

acce ptable h~ v c i d~ I)Is l u m c t sta inless steel 1 2Note: Vitreous china , cast iron , cast aluminum

Simtce all sut uu nit t.uk by m anufacturers will be re~ are c u mated with a notiporous material availablec icured Iii meet the satn se evi l of pc’ r tcmr tn : u nc e . the in co lors. Stainless steel is polished.pl u m s c c u u u s u c l c ’ t : i l i c m n s h tu mt ml d he tine comi figuration c u t d. Showersthu.’ t i x t un e. tt t Im t int s in nn rit ud , i t is hoped that all will ( I ) — N c u ted lumne ntent tc n cx~’hude ,utu ~ of theb~ c l i c c ’ked “no spec i t uc requirement ,” so that no tnat r- fixture s listed below.um t .it Iuire will be precluded front using a fixlure which ( 2 ) Indicate whether acceptable or unacceptab le.he has alread y incorporated into t he product. Ilowem’er , es Nutif )‘ c cur 1)ucc! r u c ! has a sp c ’ c ’iI u requirement, p lease individual stalls 1 2indicate mt column I 2

se If -clu is itig faucets I 2h cur c ,u~ ii ci t the following f ixture type , mui dicate if a manuall y operated faucets 1 2

specitlc u le su g tu requirement has been established. anti•sca ld mechanism I 2

a. 1 m u i le ts 13. Is there a color requirement for fixtures ?( I ) N i u speed mc r e q u i r e m e n t to exclude any Yes . . - I

c i t the fixtures h~low, No - . .2( 2 ) Iu uc t i ~.ite whether acceptable c mr unacceptable . (If yes , p lease id~ m i t i f y.)

6 1

- -

I I l)esc rthc carting actm s ties for c m u n i t ’u i t t stations lb. Have max inuum and m inim um dimensions andp t c t i c f t ’ cf b~ rese rvoir. ul ls t a mmc ~s been established cur hixtures in your comfort

sta (ions”I c I thue t~ CSt ’ t am need t i c enIar~e comfort stations -cunc u.’ t tu ~ c. Ii,u~ u.’ been co imsl t ucted?

Yes - - - IYeS . . .I N u u , , . , 2

(II yes . cite c i r c Unt t s t j t r c es , possible occurret ices , (It yes , please provide sketches wit h the dimensionsesan ni ples , aun d ex tent of 5tmammg e s ,) and distances indicated.)

(u 2

APPENDIX E: DISTRICT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS MATRIX

Requirement Louisville Pittsburgh Huntington Nashville

\ c ’sm bn e t ic \l. uieria l s a t i e t y V.i r iet~ ci t ittiage \ . umm ety c i t tmage I - he s a ih i m l i tv of chcu ice .N i t m ural uuuamIe r ial ~ expression us t tot c’X~ui d’ sSiu ut t iS High it uportaum eewit h dut,uhle de mt ra t tded , deintanded placed ott a e s th re tu e s .qualit ues. I light importance High tmpo ntan ceI’ xter i um r cu tl or place d tin .ues thu e t i c s , placed i)ti aesthetics .va ru t -t y .Rectamugular shapew i’h gab le rootsN detn.tnd tum tv a u i e t \ ofi t i ter t o r t i utus i ~c’Scur co lcm r.All units c a m u m u c urhe exa uct ly timesaute itttage -

Ih i~ Ii importanceplaced on aesthetics

(‘ c i t t S t ruction Labor (‘c ur usl r uc t mu um u per- (‘ o ns tr t ic , tuc > n to he (‘uni t ructio n to he (‘ cm r s t ruc t u i ,nn can1-orce fo rtt ted on Contr a ct pertormed by out. pet Ic r utted h~ out . e ither he dotte h~

basis. side pe rs mcm r ne l . side persc unne l. fist r ich pe rsuiru nic?Possible use cd wom k or through c iutsideprogru mmr s c u m m i t a c l -

\ l im mitetrance Sched’ \ I l c ~ minimnuittt I t u t t s cl e . m mme d I wu u to \1 , imntcn at ree ci us t is t it iits cleaned 011cc :ules and I ask s tnainte tt .u rm~ c- t h ree times day very hiuj i. as a te d,u~ by general

Riuut it ic t r ra itnten - dependit ug on usage . repair amid rep lace- hcus trr g du uwn,am t ice t hrc mug lu umutside t l l c us~ for ttstt uiunutr i uu u et r t cc is t s , \Uoss t i m mtnimumcc,ut t t r ac ( , t na m n ie n ,uu u , e \ l l uuss t uir untinitnutr i una inten at tce -

I nits c leaned usuall~ it uj m nt ertan c u,’ ,uincc 1 sia y , hut as Units cleaned h~tnuch as t lure e hucising du u s~ m m -

t i tmi c ’s d,m~ -

t i l ts c leaned byhuusi nmg d uussn .

lnspeeti iutu and \li mii tmimntn \l ininnuttt itt Mitutturun i \1 ,urmv si lt ’ s remoteSecur ity utis pec m utt , exis tence. ituspec tion. and tt rttuinr um inspection s .

Sc.huedules c u t ( sc t ) ni it s in usc 24 t i t m i t s in use 24 1 Inils opet i 24 Uts its opent 24t u i t u i t s - cl ay. hours ’day. houts ,- c l ay , hcu uius d:uv,Su.’ a s i mtm a t u sage c u t Se .m sci t ia l usage w ith Mun uit nu itt i of one Seasotn al usage withunits with .3S pci- a low percentage utnil per dam site low percentage opencent cut Un i t s open durit if the open all year. during the winter.

retnaining n peni in wiu t t e r . Winter usage cut

lime wirnt e r season, recreationa l t’aci l-(‘ buse d i i t nu t ’ c w i t t ier . it ies ut ‘ or ps s i t e s

ited by draining water is tnereas ing.and inlrnmduc ing anti-freeze into fixtures.

63

Requirement Louisville Pittsburgh Huntington Nashville

1 - uu ’ u c’ t i o mta l l u t e ears c ur h’u ’ r t nna mient wit h 25 c u rs , 25 years.I \pec ’ tc ’ c l e x t e r cut sl i u,’ll. trta intena nce .

Fixt t i res less ’undetert nitted ,

I .i’m ‘ mi t .irid \‘~, u m e m c u i t cu l t s . 1 m.xl u res are place d -41) perce’m mt c c i u mm il s \lm niituumn dimensionh) es ig iu dramun valves , by accepted dintuent - are t c u he Iiitaiu ’uf cut pipe ch ta se si cir a ge

t’le c t t i ca l c’ cmui t r o ls sm c c t i z mf s t a nc lauds c i t heltu st the ~~ y e ar sct at 5 ft I I S tn ) .shi cmii Id he itm acces - N milan iii ic t u l u c ’ r ‘ t ic od level.sihie to t he puhlm~ recott ut ne ncl.u t i c utus Spec . ial s pace Set

and i t us iu le the untt , Ra t m n glitters are .usidt’ h u t t t ta mmi ten —Ses~t’u .umt d w i t s -i used. . i t i c ’ u.’ supp lies.c cu tm nec tmc m ns are pre- Project s i t Cs estab- I lat rcl t cap shu uw emt e n t e d at the ends of lisined ati cmver a l l hetiches t i hea pipe chase - design ‘‘ t ht c t ite ’’ and c les ugtued with(‘ ut-ot T valves should res ist tn rux i i mg new impact loadinghe supplied f i r m units , in nuind,lavatories . Modular units

r e s t r u e m s ’d due l u

s t c i r . u gu’ problenns.36 to 42 in. (0.~

) t c t

1 . 1 t o ) I r c u s l dept h .

A cc c s ’ um h i hi iv to All units mmm u st have t’t itnin t un i cit onte -til should have the Minitnutnu of line perilairclicapped capability. tacul i t ~ per proje ct cap i f u i l m l u , project ‘ci t c ’

s u t e .

Soil BearingCharacteristics

h’ u u e rg v Inputs Underground I k’ctrical, under- ( tudergrouuid Undergrounde le c t r i c a l gri’urt d acs ess is d e c i lic electric.

preterred ; al l -cs ~ foroven he;ucl serviceFuture avaiIahi lit~cit em ie rg~ typemnight v .iry. aIIc is~f u r dii Is ’ r s ’ t t t sour ces

Water Iimputs Potable ,mt ud of Piilahhe and c u t Potable and I’u tab le atu d‘ i i t t i c ’ it ’ t I I ptes c ure s m u t t : c - ient .cu es stu r e S t i t t i c metit su t i u u.’ient.

c i t flu sh s.ul vt ’s . Ii,: lush valves.

Nc ’~ i’ss. uty h - i x t u t e sarid I- unctions

f i t I.auirtdry Smuuks , sj t .icm.’ c n n I um hs onl y I ubs o Im ’~ t m I ut us ont~tuna c. im m ne s. washhouset 2 Venditi g Sp ice provided Nun uequ ire nnu ent . No requirement \ c u r c ’c1 uireunlet tt.( ) 1)rinnkitug

t -ciu i u c t m u u u Outside Outside. Optional t)ptunnal

Requirement Louisv i lle Pittsburgh Hu ntm ” ~~on Nast tile

i - I I I s u i lilth .uu ic .et ‘y e s Vi , Nc c teu luu ir c’ tlncn ll , Optiona l .

(5) h l c il m u d (‘urld It t ~l u c c s s c’ t s ,c .u i I d u u u t i s I etm upered wj t eu i t t

~i, c tcc t ‘y es , se II- c mmnt ru dlc d. i t t I , us .u i cu u i c ’ s . ‘.h iu i ’ , s er s ‘ls ’~~- self -cuunitro lled.

I ~‘ Sell -(‘losingI- ,iucet ‘i c’s , Yes, Nc In s lu uu ss e rs ,

( 7) Ant i S~ald I c’rit pc ’tc ’J Waler in Fetm upered s~ . icr in

Equipment N u requirement. showers . sl muiwem s. Nc u requirement.S ) Public I s c ‘t u - c , - in wash house

Outle t N mm shave , Nc u requirentent. Nc u requi retute nt ,(9 ) lI-and l) m~ cr~ l’ leu ,t r uc Paper Iciwels i- I ec ’ t r uc , h i c c l r i c ,

( 10) Speci al Flush-mounted Wcs with locked Sm a umm tess steel b l c i s ’,’ ccm t tu i c ’~.t u u , m u b rI lardwa te valves. tanks. mn mrrui rs. c lea n imue

( I I ) o t h er I ’ l u i c i t di : muu ts , F l i uu m t drai ns , sta in- Flush valves.less steel mirrors.

Qualii’~ andcontrol of:( I ) Lighting Electric. 30 fe . , lntenu iir lights on 24 l’lec ’tr ica l, 30 f e . Phased lighting. 24 -

photcm -e e ll s attd hours provide exter - dive r lays . 10 f e , hour lug h m s . phc u t u -

ssA ’ i t et lmuig , ion entrance light, general. ce lls, trigger addi-

~l t I c , or k’ss . light t iuutta l electr ical -

in teriors. 30 I .c - phiot c uce l lsTitner, photocehls. .imid sv. t tc bue sswit d cc’s.

( 2 ) \ c ’tit ilaiion Power v enti l atu u r Pcus c .u .- m venti lator , I’c u s ~u.’r se tu im l a to r , ( ; nas - ut ~ ve r t t m l a tmc inm3) Tem pered Air Io 5(I ’~I~ I 1 ( 1 ( 1 ~0° I c c ic l I l 1 5 I i i” 1 I’ ” I I I ( I

( I t ) 1st I6~( )(41 A c i u i is t ics Sound sc’par .ut iinn Nci re quirement. N . requ:rement , \ c c rec luirettte nt -

hetweeu t titen ’s ami dV. u u t t t e t i S.

-\ppluc.ihle I u muls ’s , N.~ I . ut u .ul eh e c tt icalSt andards . c u iul& ’ Inc. il and c l j t ~~

Ru.’c h u im r u ’ m m u s ’ m u t s Nc iu ue iden tj f i c ’cf , c cu c le s i t pc ms’;ihlc S i t ic. t state codes. Nu c tuc ,’ ic.lcnttt ied ,

Restrictions N -~ c.- identified , N ne icl c ’ t m t i t ied N mc ici u.’tt t i I~ed \uur id identi lIed

I.usc I c c u t S Wind load (a 30 Wit id load “ 30 t~ mid Im d uct ~ 30 W i mu d load u’~ 30lb/sq ft ( l4Ic ,47 kg lb sq It I I4 m 47 kg’ lb sq It I4i~ 47 kg! lb sc~ It ( 14(’ 47 k gnit 2 rn2 m t nt 2 I

Eq. icuad mimic. I q lunid none. I c~ load none, l’q. load trot te

I ‘ uinreri t l’mn hlemris V ,unda lisnt c i t tact l i ty V a m m u l , i l i s t t t is an V .ut ’udahts nt is ati t’ , mtmda h i s t t m i s a

nd I ) c I ’ m deS c u t large problentt at extreme pr nhlenn extr e unn e problem. prumhlettr -

Sevs- r t t ’, nn mt nm— fe e si tes m i r rc c rs t tm ur , t t u e .quemm l l y dam naged.

65

APPENDIX F : (6) I’ilc ’hued rc,muul s are c - , u m u c / u ’rc 1 a t uet u - ss u t ’, dueSPECI FIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS I uu prmuhlen is ci t heas~ st mow load attd life

c~, c l i ’ c c ‘ m i s i c l c ’m , u t ntiS.( 7) .\I I I : u cj i l i t uc- s c’ c c r u s i s t e nc d will li-ave ‘,mc a t c ’u In m e

1. REQUIRED FACILITY QUAL IT IES/ sewage dt’c p cus al uiri l) .CHARACTER ISTICS (~() Sh uelv u t ug shall he provided in a suipp I~ st u mragea. \c ’ ’.t t u s ’ t ic h i g h \ ‘ u bme a ie .u wit h a t im itt in iUn ul 1)1’ 2U lun It I Ii . I ml.

( I i b. ~ ic ’ r m u u t Tr e ,ut i ne uut I ft ((1 3 ml) mn w idth,(a ) I \ lc’ ru ium t inrisiues must he able to he I. lL nd mea p req uir emim d rr ls all I ,uc il i t ies m uiusi he

c’ c umn p .mt i hlc ss ith the du t t e r e u i s’ m u s u m cu u ca pable u.mf hc ’ um i c ~ accessi ble c u the hatrd icapped.uns ’ u u t s nut c’ac hm Distr ict . curr er t l I~ a cunu c - unit P~~

Si tc ’ muimnimu fli is tit.min-lb I ( c u lcr r .uui , t mat e r ial chi cu ic ’ c’ tu i r v a t v i n ug t , i i t i e i l

I u ) C , i t u u c u i s s r e m c ’ m . u l c l u ’ g. I m i c, ’ m 1 ~\ input t i re ttn aj c u t p o w - u source wi l l hcI s ’ ) Orugi uta l c I t c u i~c must he f lex uble. hut all e lec ’ t r u e u k , w ith uttdc rgr uiutud s e r v i c e . Al luiwance

units at a smt mg le pr (u lec ’i s ite ma’, he of sh ould he ut m ac l e f u r c cv u,’ u l u c i d service , hut tnaj nruithe s mu tmi e r t t a t u ,’i m l and color, p m e t e r r c - cl ,uc’cess u i u i t h ’ m g mu c u n d .

lu l l I ,s’t ter a l et i s ironment to be compatible it. I mx t uureswu thu is a mu m um uu ral ermv uu u mu ns etu t wood. I ll All l ix lil ies shou ld he dcsi gu u s -d to be varnci a/-lands , few built struct u i rc ’s , ge rut l~ rol lm tt g resistant , \~s~u special hardware Ihills . ( 2 ) Au ciutside c lmn mukmn g fountain wit ir water

I 2 ) Ini teruc ii Tm c.’zutnnetr t I.c iw enu phas is on ads- supply taut-el (s s - l I - d c si tu g I ‘cl i c di i ci he supp lied.t hetic tin var C IV demanded standard t i - (3) Hot w a t e r sehf ontrohled.tS’ r t d i n S . (4 ) (‘ c uu u l u u d l over w a ter beit ug lel’t cr t m.

h. ,~t uunt e itan cc ( 5 ) Public e l ec i m i~al supp ly interior.(I I Mm tmn inum n t ’nam tutenanc e should be allows - c l b r . (6) Hand drying (e lect t ic I.

mis we ll as ease u ut c’ Iea miiiig in shn cirte s t time. i. l_.ightnng(2) i lex ih m lutv cd’ rep la u celum e uul should be allowed. (I) 30 f.c. ove r l as a m u c r y -

(31 Hm se.dumwrt c’leanahmln tv - ( 2 ) ( ‘ mmiflrss ~ phot c ceUs and sw u lc l i n u t acee ssm hhe(4 ) I- looming material . it incit uded i t t a design to publue.

sc h i t tu tu - must be ex t retnel y durable. ( 3 ) I’m c uvmsuu u uu Ii ur supplemental ttatu ra l lighting.e. Sec n it t y ta~ il it ics u pen 24 l uc i u r s c l a y . but j. Ventilation

prc wns mu imus should be tnade liar I c kumu g on s e ai s uutua l ( I ) I’uiw c’r s’e rut i l at cm r. One per e u i n t t c c u t stationbasic ,, an d one pci was lu l rcuu is s ’ , \ lanual swm tcl i(I) Faci lit~ d cst~ m i m ind cht uic e c u t t ix t urcs s l i c u , i l d ( 2 ) P r u i v i s i c m m u for supp lc -met ita l natural ventila—

ta ke i t u tc u , mcu , c uu t i i pruuhletr u c u t v munda listn and t u c u u u ,. u l u u u ’ c i v c’ 055’ k. 1s,mmm h u u . m . u t u u r e

d. Building li fe t’x pc ’ c t , m m u c ’v perm anent faci l i ty. 2 5 - ( I ) Pr ’s u s iu c um (cu t heating c u t facilities in use duringyear life expe dtam ic~ . colder miunt ims (wit Ii tiiintm-al c iuts ide temp .

e. l.may mu ut c ra tu luc s i t 15 °F (.26°(’I l c d a level of 50°( I ) ,\ l l nnaiti controls e le dt r icuI ~ , water , c i c . Ic ’ 60° F ( Id ’ to l t ) ’ ( ’ )

sl iciuld he i t u , i c c u ,’ ’c ’cilu lc ’ lii the public. (2 1 .~Il lac i l i tm e s must he capable u t accepting( 2 ) I lcd ricu Iv. pluitibimig. building, sha ll follow iieat ittg.

most re s t mi umh i ve ‘ , i a t s’ c iu cl c ’ m u ’ unml .u tmn tus . ( 3 ) A iacuh i t ~ I i as ’ ut t g he-a im ing tnust he itt s u lated.I I I’rmmvisu i i m i it t S tu u ( a ge ol dail y ‘c uu i i p l u e s shall (— 1) l lcut i un g cc ut itr c n ls mn ius t he inaccessible i c c the

icc ’ pt c c ’ isis ’ it tnt mimi a rca mi mi c cessihl e to public publicii scm ’ ,

( 4 ) h ’ m c - s u .- r u t i uu t t of d. u m u u.u g c ’ I c ’ f i s t u i t c ’’, atmd plui mm ib - 2. SANITARY FACI LI TV FIXTURESi tm g due I’ sut ujc ’ c I mu ‘ in to I ri - s l in g te u im pera turesit -all be mmm dc I i i all m o unts, whet l ci in u s e or I lit’ tui lh c mwing t i x i u re s have been sel~c tc d for use iiiclosed during time witutc ’ m rt mc m mit ln s. time URI) S , umt ut.ui \ I mienli t y l’ru igr .um nu . They are based ott

( 5 ) W ater s pra y I rico he s I c uw u ’ u stall should not design cr i te mnim gathered I t utu ORI. - ORI I , and ORNbe ui im es: ted so that it entc ’ t s the dressing a. W , u s lub i c c~~~su,-ç

c immuu par tnn e tt t . II

h O

I h urc ’c shrc iwc r ut nt t s (um ne fur handicapped 1 ii t il ~ . d i m ‘c w rugs ‘ill (g u u s It~ c lcusedwith s ci m u p dish ‘cpu m u g Iprivate dress itig s p i t s’ i lint wa tet gs’ umc ’ ra ii it wit h ht’,’aI m nt g s~ stem ashetichi tneededlint aiud c’ u u l d w mi tet ( public water c tm t i t nc t l I II m amid cold wa te r siipp l~ t u m r all l , isa tuur ic ’sc’ ls it l i c’c hno c i k’ , ( t w u i t Nliu u . c m ’ , b r e.u~ii lavat uu n~

One scm sm ee s m t m k per stile l’ui wc -red exhau st s~ stem

11c m water gc ’u i s ’ i a t i u u ‘Toi let papen du s petrs c tc ( I i cubIc : rudl f i x t u r e

I’ huuc ir dra ins as needed per water ci’ ’, IIPc ‘we r ed t’ \haU s t system ~ atem su pply p ru i tec ted ) Ion :canuiig pun

V~ , um c. ’ u su pply (or nn mu ittte nar t c e only ( p r u i t ec t ’ pcisescd ) . hose bib nu pipe chase Hour d ra u mis a-c nee ded

(‘etttn ect uu ur piping and wiring as need ed Provisnomi for hand dry m mu g . uric eleum tt uc , iimindLigh ting 30 I’c iot - ca n dles dr~ er (vat i da l- reststa mi t Il leati trg sY ste m as t reeded Hattdicap grab bars as neededl’uhhic water control valves iii showers and S u ut ags ’ for supplies and replaceables in pipe

tcir lavatories c haseDrain in drc -s s i ru g area. (‘ tm ini ect ion piping and w . u i m i g as needed

(2 ) ~ c u u i c c ’nr Lighuttn g 30 fs uot .cantd les ‘ ‘ cs ’ u -c u muk , 10-20Same as above tc )c)t .cand les genera l

b. (‘omtt f mu rt Sta tu u ins and Fixtures I’uhlic um s c ’ e lectrical outlet 1c m cacti Lus a t m ~( I) Mc mi (2 ) W m uuu i c ,’n

Tw o w,um s ’ u chuisets (omre for handicapped) ‘1 inree w: u tem chi se ls (one f ur lm at uJuum ~upped IT h u s’s’ Iavatot is’s I hu ree lavatoriesOne t urn unal Nmu pk u m u disposal per waler Ch c use t

I c ‘u let partitions with doors fur water closets Otherwise same as above

67

_________________________________ -J

APPENDIX G : “1 .1 .1 1 )u ’ ’ u u ’ u c cut t iic,se fact l i t ies shall he ac’si m me tu ca l lsL E G A L M E M O R A N D U M ON phe m is i u ig , (‘ uuru b n ut m hml itv wi t b i t u e niatural s’ u i v l m c umumniu, ’t t tAESTHE “IC CLAUSE IN TWO-STEP is rec hunred. h’ac i l it i u,’s should present a harmoniousFORM A L A D V E R T ISING PROCUREMENT apl’c’ ,u t c u u i c e which blends wi th the park sc ,c’m ier ~

Suhiti uttals will he evaluated )c~ ii hut a rd t i c be des-ignate d by t he t~ .5 Au n m my Lngineer Distm m c i - b. c cuis-

LEGAL MEMORANDUM ville . Vu h e r c ’ t Ime i’orps c u t l : mi ~ mu uce rs rev mc w s ’ rs de~tert ilitme (limit mu pnupcused building is unat t ra umt ivc ’ -

I- RO\1 Mike Cmii mcml i Sb ~.l I ( “I “t h ic ’t us ’s s V s ’u i t luciug hm u m uCet i t ig all the standards below , it will( ‘ I- RI . Leg~ui ,‘ \ c i c , us uui (‘Iause in he j udged mu um u . mesp onnsi v c ’’

~( b Ss ’ 1ut s’ u nu hei 175 l w- c c .SI ep-\ u lv s ’ m Im su m u g I’uusu aitt t im c.’lmu uss - 1.1,4 . t he P ru u l u du5 ~m l of t h ic ’ par ty inProc iii s ’ uu mc ’ m u I qi uu ’s t n u tnu was j udged non-u c ’ spuu ris uv m. ’ h) a panel 01’

arc ’l iu cc It .

FACTS in October uI lY ”4 , ( ‘LR L arid ORI) decidedt i m use the contracting methums i knuwti m u - c two-st e p QUESTIONS PRESENTED: ( I ) Is aesthc -t ics a properi c c t u n ah ,:c ls ’ c ’ m t i su tu g tom the procurement of s:u i u u t au ~ and -acceptable ta ~ t u ’ m t c i c’m l c ’ mis a spec ’ubc a u u c c i i dens’ iamrd-ia c u l i t u e m~ t O t OR!) I w u i ’ s t c ’p w as chu c i sc ’ m i primar il~ due ing respotusivetie ss ’’ I? I Is c lmiu m s c’ I - I .4 at m acceptableto the belief’ that its use w cuU ls,l increase cu im npc -l ui u uuru c lause 1c m specify m u e - c i l u e t i c s ’.’ ( 3 ) Was the evalu miticun sit ’

tIre proposa l fair and mea sc unable?(‘LI4L research indicated that tine cc cuivent ional con-

t t a c tmm ig t t i s ’ t l u u u c ! c i t tc ’ r m n ,u h .u c icc. ’i t i su mug li m ited e l f c c l t v e SHORT ANSWER: ( I I .-‘tc ’s th et ics is’ a proper factor 1 cmdu umn ipeti tii ti to c ‘ nul ~ c ctn tv e nt mo na l building products. sps’c u t as .i mmt tu inu mnt requireme nrt . ( 2 ) Clause I .1 -I isThe high ly detailed design which accc uunpan ies a t o t miu ,m l an acceptable cla n-c c- tc i s ps - c m t ~ mi mi muc lluet ic requirement.adve t t i s ing pruicuremfleflt is a tc’S t r i d l i c tn on pre ngi - ( 3 ) T he proposal was evaluated fairly, and t he resultsneercd . nndustria h,cd product s whose design details ,ite were reasuur la i ’m h c’ without any cs ’udence u u t t ’rau d. abusec ’s t mu hhus)ned hetc i re at u~ priucurement .uct ion . The cm u i l ’ . c i f a uthcur i t v . dir ar h it t m ir v imc t ioti .Icc - u nique ii’ a llow n nd u m s t m ia tu , s ’d pr uc i uc ts to com inpei c ’w t t t iuuuu ~ cmusil ~ , perhi .u i m s pru ,thu h i tmvc - rctiiolinig, releartt ing. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:

mmd re : ‘ ‘ “ me n ing is the pent u urmnance s’ i mu ~ c.’pt. The per’ Qu estion ( I )t ccr tu at ice c o mi c. cpu let - c the pnciposer furnish tine design Im u ) The ae ’ c t t us ’ m mc t m u e tc i r us a critical t a c to r in anyami d technic iii su u lu t kutt s t o the ( ‘ cups ’ Pci h u t u tum m u u c , c ’ or huildimtg. (‘cnuv entioiral design strategy remains thef’utui u ic u n ua l r eq u i m u -mt ie t u l s , T h e tinil y DOE) c’cum ltract i ng favored strategy largely c s-cause it allows the cu ss i c rmethods whic h all uuw I c m I the ‘ ,m u h i~ uta uiomi c f proposals c hm eumt 1 m m tna mttt ain u control c ’ V e t the appearance of the

mu pen : i m m j r i c . C spec ’u f ic a tncuns are t w c ‘-s It -p formal building. This lack 01’ cmut t ro l c mf :mppc’a raui c c is a tnaju r.u ,iven ’m ’ c nr i ~ ami d u uuu e—s tep cunm pc - t i t Sc ’ t mc gotiaim on. S itucs ’ obstacle l u the uu u _ ’ re mus m_- d use ot industu c u /Cd buildingI R II tui I 7 lim its the List ’ m i t c u u u c : . s t ep to ott ly f ’am m m il y tech nus ulcig ~l ium uism t i g pncm j ec ’ m s . t w o - c l i p (urinal adv ert is i mm g rem ainedt he cindy nnm c ’ t h t i ud 1 m m m’mi m c\ m zn iu/ e the cuim pet it i onm mmntnon g [his’ 1)01) (‘c im is tnu dt mon ( ‘ t i ter umi Manual, IX)L)a ll hiuui ld mni g s c m l u i m c c t i s immd tu s m ri a l as well ascc u t u vc ’ mu t no ntmu l, 4 770. 1 M, recm c g uuu/i m ig the imp t mr lmm tu c - c’ u m t :uc ’s t b u s ’ t i c - s .

requires t hat:-‘ drawh ,uc ls t o tIme c isc ’ ml Iv, c c - s t e p is tine loss of

tm ,ui tm o l m ‘v o ’r t ine appearanc e in ae s ih uc ’ t tcs c) f tI me huilditig. ‘ ‘5-I . 2 lMh’R( )V I l > DLSIt .N All aspects c i t designVu lu i -reas iii d u u mu vc nt i c c uu . m b Pnu curettlenii th i s ’ (‘cmr ps has stuu uul d be carefully weighed h~ lite m tc ’ s u g tm s ’ rs withIc u t a h c c m m m c m i cm s ’ er t luc ’ mues thu u.- t uums of t Ile huuhditug it t CS p C d t t i c the tunclicinal requirements nb the project

ml ’ . f u r co nstruct iot i bid s . iii a lwc u’ s tep procurement and the local co ndit iucti s , hut p arr u ’u/ ar emphasisthe p r u m ) mc msc ’ ( it s ’vs ’I m c p ’ c t h u sulutiot i and , therefore , should be placed on architectur al design . ic/Ic c i c / / l i ’

u mm t rids the aest lie t ies , tat c mi ! arid arrangu-mc -nt.

c c u n u su urc ’ t lm; mt c um l u t im i t u s irs’ uesti ictical l y cms ’ee pta hle , \ l- .xce llence cii architectural design l ic m ild rankI hic ’ ( c t h is tuiserted tim e bulluwitig ~Imiu sc - (

~ I ~1 .4 1 in t he with ec0rumuii~ c if construct ion and t’unctionial eI’~tec ’ hnnn t cci l spe cit i c at c tus : t i c nem t c ) as prune tc i h um isu t es tom all military construe-

(dl

ti mim i pnoj ects . Ii should he rec’ctgniLed t i umi t good m s I mtc ’ss ’ u i ls the best , it ncnt cum i l~ - techni que t i m bridge tInec ic ~cu gmu shoes It mi t imply ,uidc-ci ex pense , am i d cmu nm o f t en tinne , c i u s t - c iualit~ a dvantages c ut i t u cre : usu , ’d c iun npe tn t non

m mc mli ecc ~t ummnn i es . m d that it he l moumves 1X)[) to set a w i th the tuec ’d t i m have arm architecturally acceptablehigh sta ndard tour arc h mitc ’c’ t um r mu h s hc s ig i u. Pumps -u desigtu dc ’si g ut.requires an at t ent t ‘‘nt to m m m c hit ec tural detail a um d ac i un icen t i f u r miii ~ , sthc ’tj c- solut ic tn ii,) time problem of (d I T i ue mc ’ lum n e , ml is accept -able i c c s peci t~ ,ues th e t icsmn i tc ’g i . I ut ig t h e m i vc ’ u m u t l desi gmn c i t t ine 1acilit~ wit h its as mu reqt iirenietrb in mi t s s c c ’ s m e p formal advertising pro-I uutn c ’ t iu tm r ,t I m s - c h u mic ’m net it s , c’ Ut o ’tt is’t it liii a building.

U’ S pc’cial emp hasis shall he placed on the quality Quucs t ii iii ( 2 )

of t ime arc hitectural design since it vitally mu t c ’cts t u e (a ) A es t i m c ’ Im cs is a difficult , if ntc .u i m possible .k c m u gecu I ~ - e s m c u u c umnics , uu s s ’ t ’ultres ,, , ef ’f lciency, attra c t- b m uctor to quantif y. Since archi tects , u me cer t i f ied prudes-u uu ’Pu( ’ ,s,s . and hica hilibv of most faci l i t ies. A primr me snomia ls who determine the aesthetics um b ever y buildingrequirement mt t he architectural design shall he the th ey design . having a pane l of arch itects judge thecj t I r u lu (i i c ’Flt ’cc of both t lm c’ interi mur and exterior of architectura l accept mmh ility um f various design s us both aba c ilities.” va lid cri ter ia mind evaluation process. To hold otherwise

denies t i us i em m lu t of the architects ’ traditional role ,Ih) lt idustrnaliied building products arc pre- qualillcaticmn . amid the authcir ity they exercise over the

engineere d. Theic c ’ t t i cue t i cy depends upon continiuity aesthet ics mi t buildings in the conve mit ionah process. Ifami d repetition. lndustria hi ,est products are not as f lex- this procedure~ clause is not valid , t hen no otheribis’ us coit tve nstiona l . c r mm t ’t pr c u d tus ts . adjustitsent to a procedure is valid sittce tutu cuthe r prof ess io n is trainedtn iartdated design w mth t details d i f t c r e uu t I’ronm the ir pre- and qualified and utiliied to make aesthetic determina-s’m mg mn reere d products wcuu ld he far mnome costl y for the lions over buildin gs.industnia hi.ed niatiufacturer than tom the conventionalbuilding meant , I i c r this reason the dese ri p.ivel y detailed (h) For these reasons , c lause 1, 1 .4 is an accept-sli s- c i t m ca t u m . uu s and drawings in mm formal advertising able clause to spc’ c ib y the aesthetic requirement.prcm curetu ue mt t te s t r ie t industmiahiied building productsI rum c mnmm pc 1 11g. Th is hi urders on violat ing t u e m t im is tbasic pr o cuu e u m mctu I law . wiri cin is i c c encourmugs’ cmim npetn- Questi sunu (31tiou ti }‘u~ niun uimn mii intg unnecessary re~irict ions . (See: 4 1 (a) While tec bm nica l evaluations should be asUSC 253 (,u I, II) t,’S( 2305 (g ) : ASPR 1 -300.1; ASPR acc l imate mis puussth le. mio tec itnical dclc rtn inatic mu cant he

-I 21 ) 1 Ia ~. ,mtid ASPR lb. 107 ,1 ‘‘proven” in t iue literal sense , given the utikns .uwtu s inphysical sciencc ’ . Rath er , t ime accurac y of evahuat ic m ns

The cin l~ pr mm u.c m t s ’ m t i e mi t niet luiumj s whit- It aliow it idcis - depenids upon prc i ha h i hnl ms ’s . with factors s uuc. Ii as thet mm a hiied humlding prcuducts to cci n npete equally with quaiif icatic ns of the evaluators being .ini iti t luence onc u n ruv ent ium m ia l pn it o l iu c is i t s ’ t w u u - ’ c lep i cu m nna l • im bv s ’ mt ising time priihahility., i t i c l mi mic -ste p co nipetituve t m c ’O c ti uu iionn. One-step ’s useis cti rrent I~ rest mucted t i m tmt rn i ls h ousing projects. Largel y for tI ns reaso mi , time (,enera l Acs ’ui ut rt ing

Ott ice wi l.l tip hcn ld technical ev mu luations ‘‘untie - c s there isj c i mii.u x uu i iu / s ’ c c mmu tpet i t icmn, t wu u-step dices not im pose cle ,u u evidence c u t fraud , abuse of aut Iiorit~ our an c ut m ,u u s

t u m m m u - t u t t c - t i u r n u a l , .unhit ra ry desig n c , mmmstn ai n i ts on time mot ion. ’’ I4~ (‘cum t mp. Gen 40 1968J - 10 ( , . ( ‘ . 406 ,proposer - rallier , it list s mu li l } Is t uin ic t imin ra l nc - qu in t - - 15-161613 ~Aug. 2~s , 19671 B- l657 7I lApr il 2~~, 1969 1,)mi ients %~ tut bo ’ this encu iurages cuimpetit ion, it Is’,ivs’s no

c unt i r cu l ovet aesth etics ahsenut (s ic ) a cm len a amid lb 1 N u t wily was there no “traud , abuse ofaut iior-insiceo j m ir t s u s hi ms cL uu sc I .1 .4 . it~ or ar hui t a r s evaluatm um n ’’ conce m tt inu g this proposal .

th ere also Were no lesser errors such as simtrp le neghige itce.(c) lb c Lu ims ~’ I I 4 is riot a valid s pe cm imcation . thct i A m entire week was spent by a qualified team to cm ure-

the (‘orps wuuuld mm ml u s e t w m u - - I s p inn the I’uture since it bull y evaluate proposals for respon siveness espec iahhsus uiu ps’ rattve that t he u iw n ne nich it ’ nt him -c sonic s ’ um ti t ro l aest h et ics , Time evaluations were fair , reasonable, ami du u v s ’ m t ime ;Ipps - a rmu tu c e of thi s ’ building. (‘ lami su - 1,1 -4 professionall y cuu nmpeten it.

tm ’)

APPENDIX H: MANUFACTURERS’ 3, After notice to proceed , how many calendar daysCAPABILITY QUESTIONNAIRE will be required to submit a quality control plan”AND REPLIES

4 . If you were notified that your proposal was accept-able , how many days would he required for you tosubmit a bid?

MANuFACTURERS’ QUESTIONNAIRE 5 Tuu determine costs, would you need to have theactua l site staked?

I. After notice t ic proc eed - hiuv , t nauu ~ calendar dayswill be required t i m commence ss m c n k ’ tm 6, What length of time do you anticipate will he

required to complete your foundation work?

2. Al let award of contracts , i mcu w mamny calendar days 7 . What length of time do you anticipate will hewill he required to prepare and submit for approval required to complete the Brookville L2ke facilitycomplete tinial design docunnents and specification? after approval of drawings and specifications?

MANU FACTURERs’ REPLIES

Replies to Length of Activity Questions (length in calendar days)

FIRM Ohio A.G.I. Mosser APSCO KDMBuilding Construction ConstructionProducts Company Company

QUESTION

I 10 0.5 days 10 days 10

2 30 14-2 1 days ,~ hOdays 30

3 5 0-5 days 5 days 5cc,

4 3(1 5.7 days .2 30 days 21 days

S N0 NO** ~~‘ N0 NO~

6 3 days 21 days ~. I 0 d a y s~’~ 7 days

7 ó0 d a t s 55# 3Odays Iess than 60

* Not required , it anr ex t r .u was detined such that m c c i - hard pann , or IS - to 20-in. (0.4 to 0.~ m) tree s are additions.

** The general area wt th mn m lot ’ yd l i lt .4 ml is s uithici ent,

+ An ex t ra ‘ch uc )tJI d he ide nm t i t i c ’cf w ith contingencies

‘~~‘ Vim t f u no rock or hard m m m i

~ Fabrication cou ld he c ic nu cl uct ed mis Immund at ion work is being co m pleted

70

APPENDIX I: LEGAL MEMORANDUM pnui c u r ei i me t nt t c ’e im mmi ques available which a lk uw four theON CONTINUED USE OF TWO-STEP u i -c c’ of t ime pc r t cu r i m ma nce s pec u b ica tn iu t i te c h mu i c ~uic ’ were

FORMAL ADVERTISING Is h ’ A amid ()t ie SR’hu (‘oummm p cm m t nyc Nc gc t i m. tm mnm Ni 0)

l’lie t u im umn a l advert is ing pu e’~s did nn iut m i d could notadequa te h m~ accumm n i utr uu d , u me I lie pert ort imance -c pc’ct t it-a-

I I t I ~dh \lt )R \ Nl)t mM lion ic ’c’li mnic l Ue . i c ul lcu wi mmg ns a tumore detailed d u s s u - c s m u u m u

oh t h ese c’ u tm i c lu s ucut us

I’ ROM \luke (‘mirru i hi SUBJ 11 I ( ‘ontt inued Use onf - -Nature of Industr ialized Building Products. It isius t n i a h-( I ’ R I , ic ’gmi l Tw’ m m S t e p I c m m u u u . u l ,

ized building products arc ’ pre-enmg ineered , “on-the-,~~,I Vi 5 i ) 1 Adverti s im ig in

- shelf , products w hose design and (cc l u nmn s al details5 Mmus h c~ ( I’ uture Procure’ ‘ -are established prior to any procuretnent a5tnon . Beitig

men ts c ut Indus- - .

industrialized produc ts. the I micto ry macloners - w u c m kc ’r Str imh mzed Sm u t mu t a rv , . . ‘

-

Fac iluties bcy ORD. traiiling, materi als orders, and existing shcup drawings- are all geared to tIne existing prom duet a pne-e ngiuieered

building. Th ere are many such industrial buildersFACTS: capable of de liverinm g a I m u m - c lued building prm >dunc t up

to 400(t by sotne estimn iate s , ,-~mu j each proprietaryBackground. h- mi Is in the project , appr ox inm .uts ’h y 20 building product is unique m m sotr ie fashicun to l w )

September I ’ m ~4 (‘i-RI. undertook an investigation nrtanufa cturers ’ products are exact in eve ry tec hnicmilob the cuptinm iutt i procure m ent procedure to ) use in arid design detail. Wh mu l then would he the result ofexecuting a procurement action for a large group of imposing upon that industry a h ighly detailed de~ct u pindustrialized smun utary facil it ies , For time reasons Live specibt cm at usi t i amid drawing ’?a rticul m mted in later paragrap hs. two-step formal adver-tis m nug I 1SF \ I was ide nt u ’ ed as the optintumim mecl it m i que. In all probability not even one of the industriaht ied

huildiing produc ts would rmratch exactly t ime details mit1mm ear ly October cu b 11)74 . a personal visit was made the descriptive specib ’icmu lions and drawings. A - c a resul t ,

to the m u t t ice cml Pete ippolitou . then Chief Ccu unsel I mum tb a mr ~ one of t he industrialized builders wanted to hid(‘uvil Works mit O(’l’ After the presentatnon mit (‘ERL’s on the project , lie/site wou ld have to undergo t-u)S Ii~ -

legal and t e c h mu nc m u h mem i s c i t i S to use l’Sl’A , Mr . lppoliuu perhaps prohihnttv e , retoo ling, relearning, and redesmg mi-cuuu mc ’urred that it was t h e correct procurement tech- ing. This detailed design is aim arb i t rary r es t r m t - t i o t mnique Iou use . w hich unnecessaril y incrc.ms es the cums t to t h e goverti-

nient and resI n ets counn i petit ion wh it-ti vi u i cc m u sider

I Im eti oti 17 October 1974 , a letter entitled “Pro’ that:c,uirenienil Mc -m h~ds for Industrialized Sa n i tary Faci lities ’’

was sent by [)r (,orc icun m Baghy cut (‘ERL to Luciemu I - The particular detailed design is hut o)ne sc uhu-Guthnrie , ( )( I I s’c lmui ical Mc mnmi tor for the imndustrialized tion , atnong an infinite nt uutnher out possiblesan it a t y progrm nitm , The letter stated t h at ( ‘URL had so lut iu m nus . to time Corps ’ needs : -

chm,scn thus ’ 1,51 A m it - t hud ,us well us articulating thebasic r em i siuum s for su ch choice, 0( 1- concurred in 2. ‘flit- ulmajor ity cut this ’ pie-engineered hunld itmg stine ch oice , are of a design which , in all probability, meets

the Corps ’ needs; mindi- mn -ally, in April cut 1975 , ( ‘ S RI prepared a “how-

to-s in-it~’ maui ual b i c r I i mu i u s v th l s ’ i)ts lr ict in the use of 3. There is anot h er techniqu e the perb o rnmar mcethe 1SF’ A m ethod winnie procuring buildings. l’he ccmn cept which can tram islat e the ( ‘ci t ps tmee dsintroduction summannieul ii ue key reasons I or usimig t o ) t ine Iruildirig industry w ithout arhitraril stime I SI’ A mi ne thuu ud. restricting conmipetition and increasing susls .

Reason for Choosing TSFA Method. ( h-Ri, chnose t ine Time ( c l ips ’ om ission is to tt mamia gc tIme building pro-I Si A m t ie th tcmd lmo ’ cmu ui sm .’ th is ’ u c t u i ~ de’~ieni t euJmiii q uuc - ce -c s in sui~ li u wa y -as t i m mu l c t - a i im cert aint built- leatu cue s

,ivmumI mi hl , ’ t m u , , l l um w i u u d t i s t m u , m l u i c ’ c I t r mi i ldt t tg pr u m u t ou c t s t im at thi s ’ best mt ( m m line public. I hu t - sc ’ hui l t— le m utu r es arcc mu m npe t o’ w it l c i iu l , m u lc t tn . i i ~ ne s l r t eu i ru nus was time per- usually stated in time heginnittg tat the 1)1) Form 139 1 .i mnnmt ) , i m nce s ;t o- , u b j s m i t i u m n n tech it i i u i mie. \ u c c h the ~u t i h~ 1)01) ,it m d Im m m u ts ’ c ’t Deve lopnnen m Brochure St-age ) as gc- t m e m a l

71

end -results ‘m u ic ii as ‘‘BOQ t o o - c t be .m i t t -year hui ldm mtg . ,uses where , in time mupi n m i on m u t tine buying m i c t uv t t y ,capable c ub inousi ing 2~ lt mcmi ,’’ ( ‘uu mmver t unmg tho e desired the dc ’smgtm pri)h iet ut is well within thu s ’ capabilities ofend-results into -u u h etm u m leci draw ing with cts ’script ive a nunnnher c u t cuim petent firms h aving design staffs.speci flca t i uumms is hut c ut ie cto’sign str ateg y lii use u ru put ..tu.mse will he made -against a penf iunman ice pe c u b m -.uc qum rm m ig the end ’ res uhts at thus ’ hcmst cost to time public. La t um un annul limo’ des mg mu details left to the cu m titr ac t i r -

Ibsing the m e mf , rmnta t ice cc miu co ’ pt is S’ o’t amicut her designm l uu mi u m s way ml is possible to ) gc- t Cotit petit iofl f u rte ch ntm nque. llm cer tm nmn u m lmu , u l m u i l us , m m ca mi be a bet ter i te t tu s c it specialized mi n ihitary usmige . hut such cotinpe-technique to use i t t pr c m cu r mm ng products ! ser vmmm es . tition is necess’anily confined to firms which are

c i m ~~if uc ’ u Cfl t to design ,und build equipment mnee tnn gInd mm - ci ri,uhui, ed buildings repic ’-c c ’ t i t products better the m ilitary perf su rmmi a miu e requiretnent . ’°

pr ocured via perfo~manee speciticalions than via the I Ernpbmmi s n s Added )conventiona l. dc- s c riptive design strateg y . And as timetol lowing quote from the 1)01) taken during Senate Failure of the Formal Advertising Techniqueto Accom-test imony undnca ies , performance specifications are ml modate Indus trialized Building s . Formal advertu ’ u rm g isbetter technique to ) use w hen pucucuring commercially a highly detai led procu memuietl l technique . Any deviationavailable products , c’,icIi w- i tiu utiique desi gn features , from its strictures converts the procurentent. act mu mm i .

ip c m t a t - t m . into a negc ut umu to ’uI action. As will he slmown t“Our pc’u.’ u t u c a uion policy is t w m u b u c l d , It is to state h~ time folhuwing cxa rtmple c . ml us not feasible or practic’

m mmd v our actua l t t nj muu nmu m tt need and t im de sct i lce what able to use a formal advertising technique to prcucurew e need So ;us to stitumulate maximtiumn conn ipeti t uo r i , industria lized hunidinmgs regardless of the design strategyF- c u r exa m ple , t here are occasions w h en the use m i t a used, h- cur the exat imp les . u ssu mu ute there are m it least threedesign sp eciflcm ui mu mu will muc eo uniphishi this result a s , industrialized huilding tirnms , A . B, ari d ( - each unmanu-f u r instance . w bm e r c ’ t he itettt was developed for the tat - turing an end’product with design features di f ferent( m c mvc r rumi le f l t mind can be ex act l y rep rod uuc u.’d by any than t heir com npet ito ) r ’s productscmupm ulcl e manufacl urer without further development.On other u uc c ,us mu mu ’ , t he use ut per t umr unance specihica- I - Use Perto nr mum in ic e Specilicatiomi Strategy A per-(ions may better assure compc’t it ion heut i~ obtained lort m mance specification states only the end-resultas. for mrt s t mm n c e , uc ’Iui - r i - the Gom’ernment requirement desired rather thau t the mmieans to achieve it . As such .can ht’ prier l ’u ’ any op m o ’ cu / a number of c i uf p u pp mc ’ri ’zu l/m ’ unless time iteut m being procured is a h ighly stable ,designed and availahie products . . . predictable end-itet m’i such as an automobile , you imnust- . - marty items of eqttipntent , such as tract o rs, ask the bidders to submit technical and design propo-ear thmoving equmptnent , l aundry equ i pnmu -tm t, amid so sahs for t he (‘ or ps to evaluate for “responsiveness to

tu)r th , are available on the cm mmercial m arket , Such time pertc) rmnar lco’ spec i f lca micnms. Otherwise , A couldul e mmis are com m erciall y uJm ’sj ~ ,tcy/ and each pnc/ pmm it ac ’- merel y smm hnn j t mu SI .000 hid , H a SI 0,001) hid , and (‘

run t ’s dt ’siym i di j lcr - c nwrkedly j ro un his competit or ‘s. a SI ( tt b .Uil() bid, licuw would the Cuirps know whatI u s l u m na n Ii b ,m Ctt l re r is t ui c ule d up to ) m uu mik s ’ equi prmtent the bidders are willing mu deliver for ti uat au ui c iunt?to ) his muwn desi gn a t md it wo u ld he ver y expensive Ihiuw could the Corps uc ’j e ct A ’s bid on aestheticsto require lim it 1 c m c’u i ! i s t r uc t Cc t uu ipn mt e nt Ut som nme gruiunds as was done in the pilot pro)je ct si n ce itconsmpe tltor ’s c m t i c ( , m vey miment desigmi . duuesn ‘1 even knmow wh at A is pro)tmiising to ) deliver ?In these case s , wi, use perl’or imu: mnce s pecufm o - atmuur i s s mi Amid d imes time (‘ imr ps wm mul t to wait until cu m mi t r a c t per-th at conn p et itnm in c-.ini he obtained f rom eve ry firm for unman ice to dis t-over .\‘ s product is totally uttaccept-which regularl y nmm ake s a stnmta hl e c uu m u n m ercial pro- able when it could have known this at hid evaluationduct Suit-h a spec ut isat i on J m u ,s ters c mrP m ~iu ’t i rim m mm t itt ie had they but requested Jc r i mpc ) sa l suhn t ittals?these situations a n d am i ‘, u is the favoritism whit-hiwould occur if we idmipied one ci m mtip a ny ’s c lmmngnt ( learly. in the case c u t in dustrialized huiidimm g pncu-or a (;overntmieu~m design ~i u ic i m was more nearly du c ts it is no)t acceptable (‘uur ps practice to mnnerel ylike the design ot c tu e c otm tp at uy t l u m i n m that mi t i uthiers. r e t - O u s t ’ c .c sh hid in response tm ) the adver mi sem nment mi t

Sushi a spc’. mticatio n i h s c u c l i ’ , uiml’u upm ’ -ial rm ’ tw - /uP i ~’ .u u m d perlormnance spe c itu cations or purchimise descri ptions .produe ticu , m Slan ting (‘m i t tS m mm c l , hence , re m u i l tu ’ th Wh at is additionally needed is the su hmiil ss ion fromlo wer /un,u -e% t i m the Cm nver mt mm me n m . Per form .1mm c c

specifications ft ~m h u eu u l i y are also used when no i —

-t lt’;iringn on l’r,ucunenno’nt Bef one iho’ Subcuummitts’c- innsui table com n nn ner c.tai itet is ii available and when Pro c ur c imu eni cu t the Senate Com mitt ee c m Armnmed ServIces ,there is m mci s!andardiie il (, u u sert itul eni t chesiguc In smi ~ h x . ~ I ~ t m 1960 . p ? m m

72

i mm d u s t m~ u t ts ’c h i tnu c.u l mnmid desi gmm u t u u h m u msa l s to t h e h . / m e n if t ime iso’ oh’ the “or—e qual’’ tec i m n uiqu im ’ i s

(‘ onps tom cv , m l miat i omtm of time pu b ic -cal -c m c - ’ q ucmt i s u vemne ss u m s l m b i e u t - t his ’ muies app im~ . utu le to il proper o’x e cu i t iu i tutin the p e t t um i u rm .u i i 5 -e Sl)s ’c i f l c . u t i i ) t i ’ c . ‘l’iue to m i r mal adv e m— c’ cunvcrt it t i c a pem tu mr m t nai i c e ccun cc pt apprcumu si m. *tising m eciut m ns h tu c ’ c l imes riot allow tour bite su ibt imissic in atmd fh iere tmu te , t h ere is mm c m pum ’~s ubu u i m t ~ c u b u i s uu u g a hramudsu ibset h uem il u’ . u l u m , m t u c m u m out ’ tec hnitcal amid ds’smg u i pruupc i - nmiut me w mml i ant ‘‘cut—equa l ’’ - I , mu u sc to h~ p~~-c t i t e perbcur t u i -

sais. Oni’, TS I A at md N it aiim iso thin s practice. ance c iu mm so ’pt Rather the use ot t ime “or -eq umm i - ~i.mus e

u m i s ’ re h m, i ui ,m kt ’ s m it e ‘,m i l mc u t . u t u o t t redundant , i t nmot Luunm-

I’eu c i t u t ta n m c ’o’ -cpect ho ’at to ns cmiii he u sed w ut i t a finsitig.t’omtn ia l aut s s ’ r t u s m m m g t ec ’ b m m u u c h u m e sol ic i t - tIme emid-i te m nm beingprume ured us scm st .mhle m u d p iedictah ie that t imere is lit t ie c . It is un ‘ea h us t ic t i m “know ’’ what i-c available

risk cut rc ’ cc uvuru e ami umn. icce pmah ie product. hu n exau inp le . atnonug mite mmmd .u~t taliz ed building t meld givett its s ta teu mf ’ the a r m , I cur exat n p le , t h eme were 13 indu str ial i zedI u.~ d . ( ,eume m a l \lotors . and ( ‘hut ~s iem cm i mm nnerely submithumI dit m~r timi ns .mt the (‘ERL synnposiunm to deternninea c , us tu butt mi ne s pum u t c e Ii) .m pet t o mmamice speci f icat ion

atm a ontumiui o hile , atmc l the cu m u u t racting c u f f ut-er cm i i i he t ime te.n smhi l t ty of the ORI ) industrialized sanitaryt i c i l i t mes prui lt ’ c I ‘s e t whenm promposa ls were eventuallyrelat ive ly sure of’ t ime cmmd .product s h e ’ll ret -ens-c . L i m i t c u rs um b uinu tted 5 n mo m nm th ms later , no t min is ’ mut the 13 f imn mis att o i un a ts ’ly , the nndo istr ia hi ,’,ed humldimig it mdustry us m m c m l

as stable -au n d predic t ubule us bIte , umn t c u mnsl ust my. time synt ip u u smu mu u w ~us .utnnoung the bidders. In fact . ( h R Ihiad no pm cvi US kutow iecig s ’ i it a u m y of the evetit uahhidde m s. Wh at it ( I RI. had pi~ ked time product cut onerime wording oh Public Law ( 10 t S ( ’ § 2305 [hIof time sy m posium atte n dees amid advertised it insteadne i nb ui rces time notion that fornma l advertising rtmust useof usumig the perf ’ortnanicc cmunce pt?mm lv t hose sps’c i t i c a t uu m s l r mut eg i e s which dcmmmand a bid

res ponse amid mmot a proposal u e spuu r us s - . hO t S ( § 2305 ( h) 3 1s t - a Revens s ’ - i ngmuueering St rmutegy ‘. . -~umu m t h ie rprow ides that dc’ scn ipt uve s t r a t e g s is reve lsc ’ -e rngmneering. Reverse-

entg ine e m mmig i’~ t ime pract ut-c ouf ds’sugnintg a ‘‘Ch inese‘ ‘ l i me speci t mc mu I l i u m Is Iii invitati ons j c cr bid s tnm list co py m i t a pr o p mte t m m r ~ product and then ads-eu t t s m uugc cut m t , uu t u time neces saty language amid attac i i tnet its , t h a t design . Where rime prouduct being sought is nu n-an d must he sutf ic ient l~ uie~c rt,it ui’ o ’ in lanmg c m.ig s ’ standard ati d conmtnerc iahi y available nit differingann d artach m mnents . to i perm m mi m full ammd t ree cont ipe- design so lontio ns . th is tecbmnique is obviously r cs t r u - tum ’ ot i t icun - If the specs m i an n nvut . mt on for bids do not insofa r as it includes amix nommt um nctm o m ia l desu g mi require-carr y time ne Les sm in~ ulc ’’um -rm ,mu’uu e language and at tach- tm tent s Im mu t essent ial to the mru mve rnm mi e m mt n ee d s ** F ur t her-mneni Is , or it thuos e j i tach n m u mennt ’ , are nio t accessible -moore . i t is mnmene !y mu muse to tnmask a “bramid -nianme ” buy.t i m - co m unpetent amid reliable bidders , t he imm vita- ] ‘ her etc irs ’ - all c i t the monies mu um d cun nsidc rations am icoilmu me dt i m) n is invalid amid nm m , mw ams i u u i . m ~ he uu u . uub t - ‘‘

a h c m v t ’ um nnder t ime ub usc t i s s uuumi c u b Ilium brand-ti -am in e stm :i ts ’gvapi)l

~ equ ally hero’ .

2. I - c c .u lb ra um d-N.m itm e S im a i o -gv O m u c c lesi g mu ie cbm mmmque is to s ui tnto ’how 4i u uuums s ’ w imu c i n i r i dmistr i au i ied huuldiung ~~~ hc ’ ui i c o u i u ’ Icc W o uc lo ‘‘ mum c - i u i.iI , ’’ t he spo ’c ib ic r t mn u st

r- ’ i d u ic t is desired u-cui .u ll y via .ini m n t c u m n m i a l . proha hmh u. det’ ~ ... im_; ci us that uniu s m mc- eituato’d. Ket.’ula t ncutn s rmm ct u m nc’ tb u. m i

illegal , pmeq ua huf icat ion of kn o uwn i systeumm s .uu io l t h em’ dfl C - ‘ wha m it is ” ire the m-sso ’ tmtc a t “sa lme nt ph~ sit-al, f u n o tmm m uu ,u l ,cuI her ctu.c T. i c i erist uc s of the n o t c’ rent-cot prmutt ut-I s .’’ u So t’

unmc reIy m ma m nme that sy sm etn m in a procur etmient. lb ‘ ~~ ~~- ~~~~~~ Fai lure 1c m Ibm tt uese “sa lient char ,ic te nmst icc ”

lohl owitig rules mmm d co )n n c id e rmi t i c mnis app ly ti m tine ui - c ‘ us n e s t m u o t m o o ’ cmi ’ cc mr m m po ’ tut i o n and rec lum re’ . cans’o’ l t m m i iu cn i t t thecml this tec h nique. I t l it 3M ( ‘onnp. (.0-n. t45 ‘i’ms , 7it (‘cumu i p. tieun, .~9 I ~1 Y~~8 h i

ftcso’ “salient tunu. um mc nal ” it- ,mtun o’s are in the nature c ’t neu m nal

a “Ii is .u p r o umem m io ’ ntt u m ’ c i tm m mq mu e cmi ’ lm m st ne s m m r t I~’ rt mn m nanco- sl im s In l , m c r , it t hc~ umn t mccte ‘mu nn . mm mv d esign, t i a r , m c t e rIstIo’s that mm nly ttn e brand-name or a “(‘hmnese ~ nps ”

whit - It us s t t t s t l ~ l imum iteo l I m~ regs i l,itmon, ”2 ASPR I - I 1 b ( u c m c uld m m mc - , t lime neq umr emnuc u mts . in is probably also re smn m o h o e cutsmu s s time t e c h u t u i i h i i s ’ mm nay he used “cnm ly wheun an adequato ’ eunmnpe’m i t i cmf l .mnd requinc’s ,c tuo t ’ I la t t uu n ut t he II R l4~ (‘mmnip.s pes i l ication or mm t tmm u r e c i t - l i m i t - i t pur c tu. m se ois ’scm i ption (en. 4t ,2

~I ~~~ - 8 ( , o ’. li i i

ca mitm o ,t bo ’ .u s u h l~ he mmia de avai lable h~ lI m o ,m uis oti ner • lnm .m spec t i t a n j u n d c ’ s c u i t m m t i 1 u a truck pn mmdu ced t~ mmn t ’th a n m reverse em mginee rintg . - - m m t i unme for t Im pm ocure- m m m c m i u ts uc mci r i-n - I tu e ( ‘ c cunpt ro lle n t ;eneral t ’cmu n d it lii he undulym nmenm l mo dem c,mmt i suu l enm m tnu n n ’’ c O r n, liii ’ itt ’ s c c u m u 1mc ’ i i n u c m n even th cm im g h tIne tru c k o c u c u i c t l i.u o ’e

been c i i i ml mc -m ted by ann y u’then nia nut’ao’t ci r on - since the proolucerw lnc ,s m’ ne~’ c iI. m m pr ,m dmic t oo ; m% ct , ’ soni t u o ’ d in the spcc ’itic - .m tm c cmm

I’ I SI c , h it - b S • m ’ m u u t c m - ‘ t t u . m m u c i N i mm , ’ cmi I c i i ~.ut m.m. uu t ucms j t mnhvIc,us l~ swc uu lot otcim m i rm a’ c lust lnc t c.omnipet it ivo’ udva nt ,mge c u u . c ’tI c - i ns , ’’ I/u, I .5’ Icr I’, crc , , I t i . / ems Rn ’m u, ’w , S , 1 14 . .5. , 4 liii ’ c u t m e t whc m wm muld tic ’ t c - ui ciured t m ret m mc m l , mo’dc’sm gn m - ct c , . t m c

m t m m b y 197 ii c 7M iu mmcc i lu , ’ opc- c m t i c , m l m , m m u 19 (‘ cumm m çm o ;c ’ n lIlt 19591.

73

4 . t o e mu Multiple Res’ c’nsc - - l nugu ric eri mng Sl n .ut c ’g~ . To Ability of the TSFA and NEG Procurement Techniqueaddrc ’ss time problo’nmm if desiguui nig onml~ iou’ fir mtt ’s to Use Performance Spec if ~cat t on With Subsequentproduct, a c it-sign stn . ut eg \ umss ’ c l in scinle (‘mum ps p u u u~o’c.N Propo5af Submittal /Eva l uat ion. The mw iemnatningfor ind ustrialized building is 1 cm descri pm u u. - e lv d c - c u t - ru procure unsetit m .- c iumiiquies . ISFA amid ( ot mi lcc ’l ml ye Nievery avaulable sv s tet t t and ,udv e rtu s s’ ,u ll of them us dci lend tf ie mm msel ’ v c’s h i u .m per to ) rm nat sc e spectt ’ica tmonacceptable prc ducts. The prohients with this technique strategy wimerei m u mmtt er t -s bum ml pa! us’s can suui ’ t i t i t t e~’hu mut c aiare: proposa ls mu c v , uh u:u t tc m tu by hue ( c m r p c , i t I t t t c t r t u i t u , u t c i ~ -

mltei r use is us’s t m i c t eul .a l’hie specil c m or designer m mu us t km mciw wiuat all I

possible design solutions m ut t ’ . h ’ v s’ii ml he does so - h m mc t m (m i s - — t s p Lo imm pcl i l i v e u i c g mu t i , i t u cm n i us l i m i u m t - . I it) m uss ’ ui

us highly uimuh ik c ls he onm l y knows thieims at the time mit only t ’.m mitih h umusnuig pro iects . 6 ‘l ime I R lttni l iu mg Nl’ ( • isdesign developmemit . not at time nm c u mm ment of a ds cr t usmnug . appli5a ble to nidt u i t thv mt umiu t . u ry s m u t u s t r u c t u c u t i hut also. \ uu d tIme use c u b any “or-equal” clause to cum od i t i l v e nt civil ‘,v u i m k~ cOnst ruc liotut hese concerns generates t h e problems is s uuc ’i,mt ed withthe “our -equal” c lause as d is cusse d a huuvt ’. I S b ’ A so mi s clo t si m ni lmur lv himnited by 1’.R I l-N U t .7

since it met condition (‘( I ) of the e nu c ’ ic mse d meniob. Th is technique is ino’ b f lc us ’ uu t :itid redundant - Why

have an expensive mnf ’m i r mn m nt i o t i sys et um requiring t - m in - ‘ii TYPES Oh” l’A ( ‘lLl’F Y PR()Jf’( 1 S St IIslant utn ii nu itori utg of an aummor p humus , m ,c~midi y evolving A Ill_ F i-OR I Si’ Oh’ iW O-S II ii l’OR5d A b _ A l)’o ER-industry, and w hy t herm advertise to industry a panoply TISJN(, I’R(X’LDURES.of their own desi gns, w hemi V o uu lilt harness the wholephenonuenon very simply. at hue time of the muc m ual . . I . \ ‘ .r m m u i u m s f’aci hit s types when perfommnanceproca rem neu it. by w’a~’ of pe rforn mance sps ’ c ub ’u~..m m u u iucs? s p e c i t i c u m o n s m ust he utilized to act -om nnmod -ate

industrialized cm ot ist ruction (building sys lenmi) com-e. Third, the listing and describing of , u I ts ’ : u u a i V S’’ p nerlt c , ami d comm i t - h u t s - ‘

leaves unclear winat the “Ininitu iuun needs” mit thegover nment are as required by law and regulation.3 As ex h) ues seu .I earlier iu ms ic ’r t he heading “i- ,cu lure ofit is generally accepted that different products m a y he Fort rm mm i .\.i c - u m u s imig i’e~ tu ui i q cu ’~ to ,\cc. ’ i)mniodatecompared scm as to chu ui cmse from thetn essential functions ir u mim u .mrja iized Builditugs . - ‘ time on im design s m r a l e un vamid characteristics to combine m m li i mim ic deocmipticun of available to procure indu strialized components ef’fec-the governrn ient ’s mininsumn needs.4 Uou w ev cr , t h e mumene tively, eff iciently, amid w i t h i n legal mind rec ’ uuIa t uur~solicitation c u t ‘ Chmniese copies ’’ c u t s’ .ir ui u ui s c bm ’ s m g u u structures , is the ~ u ’ u f ‘ u uu u auu c c ’ concepm Timer et curesolutions leaves eat-hi potential bidder or proposer the c tmni d i t io mm is mt m Ct.uruce rtaim i is t i m prcci so ’l~ w hm , u m the go ver mm mumen m ’s nmm inu umour n needs are . Time reum imlinimig con sideration was ,~ SI’R 2~5Ol and

2-S02 w iumc h del ineated the purposes acid ccund itionsIn con clusion , (‘ER!.. research ind icated t h a t the for site of 1SF °

~ . ( Lrauly mime pui tsu e pUrpc)Se if ’ ‘I Sl ’A isformal advertising could riot a t - c c imom imod ate a perf ’c u r m mm - tu m allow for tfic 5c i i c i m . u u c i i i c if t c chmuu ci proposalsance specif ication designm strategy w bu i ’ re u nm i mm mt ’ ms -s t e u h f i c uu m m u nu ci u sbr y v i m per lomniat ice specm f ’icmition s w h e r eparties s ui h tt t i t t t ’ i t techn ical p rimp cu s m u h- c in res pc ) mm s e lii mm md so ms- n it is im mt p racbica l I c .g ., restricted comupetitioti )the spec i bi u.at uu mtu s l- uuuther more . a lternate des ugm u to use descrtpt ivc s ps ’cml c , u t u c u m u s . l’his us prs’c is el~ thestrategies more am mnenah le t o the t um umal :idvert isinmg situation existing in the industrializeo! huilditug itudustr ~t ec l umm ique were ei th u s ’t illegal , inefficient , ineftec tive ,or, at best , redun dant ,

5 1R I lSb) ’ l-7 , 25 ‘~t , 5R ‘4 , I m ic i c i s c i u t ’ ‘‘ l~ )I) I’mc ho ’} and_________ Promcedur;nl Guidance m o m the t.lsc ol ’ ()ne-S mc’p (‘cnun pe t im ioc ’

3 ASPR I-I 2t l l i .o , IS ( omp. (,en 974 119 h i m 4 ’? ( ‘cm mr u p No’u , c mn i t i c u u i h i u m u m - ~- u c - 1 i b mm md I wcu Slo’p Forun.ct ‘ \ c t ou mmm s im m g

( ‘,en. 175 i 19671 , and 47 ( ‘omp, (;en 236 11 967) , ‘ ,-e a t s cu j g I’ r , c , mcu , ’ ,cio ’nt Pt- mm c ec t u uu i s iii t he Sc m t u c i s mt uc uu of I micil ities ,’’

( mmmc l i , u ,0’ n 570 I l m O i b b m . 2 C ( . t 4 t Im i’cc mm m t m . ~~~~~~ 529 u t )(m s i ‘cl c ’ c i c , i tmo u ti 551 ) I I&t I , 21) I) I- ( ’ 197 3,

4 See 48 Com p. (,emu . 44 1 mt - I4t c i t96KI; 47 (o mp. Gen . I/m d ., p Ii

409 am 414 (I c i t iM u 4 1 ( ‘uum mup ( u -f l 348 at 350 t1 96 1 ) m and 311 ‘l u m r m r v k ’ w w i t h t’t’Im’ lppc it i ! c u , Gener t (,‘mu unscl (‘cvi ir omp. t;en . 291 ‘at i’~~4 (1968 1, 55. i s t i t m i c e ,c t th e ( hiel mci I uucu u useermu , 21 Oct um be r 19 74 .

74

It is , of d c c l i i ‘mt- , imu us s u bie Ion t ime ( o m ps to use sof lvs’ u i DISCUSSION:t to u tmmh s l t - - cc t t pt i vv ’ s pecit u u ut icut i s amid ii; aw imi gs Bum mineut - - cu lt wu muj ld he the a t t m i t m .uu ~ mest n ict iom i t u m u l t c uimpctm- I I I ‘\~ disc u ssed ,uhc uvc , inn ten m uu s c i t the mia t ur t - ohlion of im mdu s tmm ah i i ed builders, ()ui I~ t ite cc itm v c m it ic um a l imidu sm rmal n ied h mmil d uumg product- c amid t ime net c s sj r ycma t ’ t c m l ‘‘ i c m mtag e ’’ e g t u t u.’ tu t cd t h e huiloiitug uuuduistr ~ uis ’sug: c -ct rateg~ Iu use mt ;ur -c uu m n mi g bitt - mn without hs’ungc umuil u .1 c i t m u t pt’ t s ’ f re t - Is 11 m m - c is, iii t i c t , t Ime i mm m I ~ segtl mem mt ‘‘unduly r e s t n m o ’ t u s c ’ ’’ 5ie a nh~ lime chmcuic e ot 1 S I t w , us

~ Iiiciu h a s hecut hidolitig iOu 1 m m - c t ORI) s ui mi fa iv Pm iu lecis . Cl- t I l t - c t I X 1 1 5 1 1 1 0 ’” , iX)l) psuiic~ omit hu’0 u nug p r uud us ts( 1 XI rs ’ss ’mirc lm indicated Ilimi t mhe s.c - c Ot hum tine of dub ls-tiitg desmgnm i i , mu , ms tern - c lu e s , 10 1 S(’ 230~ Ih I, t h euuimn d mni , i t t ’ h~ h igh cuu % ts oh’ san it m m r~ fac ilities imi the ORI) ato rv’ t tn emn tio mns ’d shc ur tc ui t mmn n gs mit u thm e r ds’sigit atmdw i-c hec,u ii-ce time u umubuistmi , i lm/ ec l segumiemit oh the building pm u mcu u t t ’ i tu c nt .iite mn ,ut iv o’s , .tSPR 2-~ () I , 5112 , ari d t imei rud u i s t r~ wa s -c~ tc ’ u t ua tuc .ul l y excluded l’r u n n m conmpet itiot i anal~ sm - c c u t O( I ( ,s’mier a l ( m m u m u u s t - h fur ( mod Wut rk s sup-

vta t he descri ptive de s u gum s uum mlc ’gs . Th erefore - in aIm ports thi s } ‘ i um th ns’mmno re . ‘he h’uhltc Building Service c ut

aue mmt pt l u lcuw s’r c u c s t s 1m~ alhowi nt g m ndu s trm ahm , t - uI the (mem ue rmc l Services ‘ \ c hu u mluosuuam u o n ( PBS c u b ( mS ~\ Ibuilders to m . 1 u um i ~mc mc ’ - t ime pet I mi r u m i m mn ec mipecit is,ut iuit i sperm m .3 v t - ac - c d urim ig time lame I d u o s s’ sam nui nmng time legalstrateg o us c h o sen, This u hs ’s ugn i s tm , i t eg\ required teas ihil it~ m m ? u s i n g a I Si- \ mm mt - t imod t m m procure buildingsiu hunit dis c u t technical proposals and, therc t o u r e . suh sv sts ’ mums lbs mt - sti l ts m m ? mite m s - c t - m m ili, e ve mmtu mm hlvje.iri\ inlet mime inmlt - mi t and pUr~ c mSC c u t h’ Si ‘\ . c umm t u ,urred ri by this ’ (

~ \ ( ) . indicated 1SF \ w a s an.u pprc ipmt a te pnmc. oirs’mnert t ituv’tinod . P115 m i t ( cS , ’\ cmiii ’

Tint’ relnainiuucr consideratu ium i so-as the future use of tmnues to Ohs- [S I A with sUc it - sS mu d withomi m pm m u t t - S I

151 \ ‘i i hi rsi glance. ASPR 2-5 1) 1 , to w i t hit its building pr u uj eo t s which invu m lsc buying itidus-tr ia lu,t-d su b m - c~ s It - nt is Via pe rfoniu mar mce Spet - it ic. i t tc ) n’c .

- ‘ -tnt i ihu}c ’ c li ve of t h i s nmemiuod tS to pemunit thedeve loptoeti t m i t a sui t t ic ’is ’ mut l y descriptive and I 2) The contmnued use of ‘[SE t us appn c u~ mnml t e f u r

n cm t unduI~ rest r ic luu. ’e staten ie mm I of the Cc v s - m m . tw o reasumn is

ment ’s re qu i meru usnt - - - sum the subsequentpr mm cure ml ’m e mm t s mna y be timade by cc i t uvs ’ntionai ( a I ( ,ivc mi mite s ta te cub the min t c i t induj st rialws’d

t’ortuia h a dv ert i - c umu g “ ‘ building products . ORE) does r u t pu ussess mint - infor~

flmatiomi .in i descriptive de uguu m tr m t eg\ t i c pnuucuir eindustrialized buildings in a highls comp em itivt - .

i m p lies that TS FA can he used smithy once . unt e s t r uc t ive fashiomi. Tite indust rma lized buildin gproducts are not standardized mind, thers’kcre , irs’

ISSUES PRESENTED: not amena ble Ii) ,~ii\ de scr ip t ive design d i -cc m pl mmu s ’

( I ) Wi - c ‘[SI A the mu m - ct .m ppncmpriate procurement ‘l’he numhems iub huilding b un iums are dtt ’flcu it to ktm c u.s

tec iu mmi que to must - in the (iRl) mtm dust mi a inte d smu r it tar s ’ sm nc e they enter and leave the tna rks ’ n scm quicki~t ’aci l mmi cs pruijec t , and

‘ One estit im ate places t ite number at arou nd 40111)

building co ncermis , [ hu t - n e n- c even disag reememm mahu.iut how to char m i t - te rm/c the var Ious industrial.

12 ) Is it legally appropriate to use the ISI’ ct pro. -tie d builders, Omit- c ia ss m t ic at nc m n indicate -c t lts’re cueumre tm m e ttl tech nique in t uture procumememits by ORI) ,, ,, ‘ - -

- - ‘ ‘ “close d and ‘open mm dust rnaliied humid et s .’~ rni uthi’r1)t’,t n et s b r im iol ust rma lm ,,cd sanitary facilities? ‘ - -c lassification based m m m i huuldmmtg mmmeth od , m m idmc ate d

t here are “pamiel ,” ‘‘hcux . ’’ ati dsu. elm ,” and “tu m mudon-SHORT ANSWER : h am ” systems . itt soot the industmia lnied huilditig

industry is h ighly volatile and non-standard , There-(l~ Yes , clearl y I SI -‘s was t he most appropriate fore , it is unlikely bit -at Otis the basis of only 13 bids ,

proc ure rtment tec hnique tm, mis t- nn the situation. ORE) now pm msNcSS es the ability to ex t - t - u umt - mu des .criptive desi gmi wh ich adequ ateh~ cmi pm u rs’s the

( 2 ) Yes . 151 A can he u us s ’ui again becaus e (a) t ime industr y . In fact , as pr iui )f of the ind um st r ~ -c s- mba -

cimm i di t num n t o t its tucut i - us e is m im ut yet m m m cm and (h) o’ve m u ti lity, mto t one m , f the 13 proposers w ere attendeesml t he eom t dmt im mmm were mi u t - t , uuluc ’r laws mind regiu lations ,ut th is ’ pre-hud symposium at ( ‘tm icag uu . (‘I RE - withmi more fu mmdm mtn ui ’ it tm i l tbi,mt m time mo m s ’ -ci,’ mu t s - Ius ’e it us~ulC in -all c u t its nest-arch o ut nn-. iutu itactur em mo ’ mntc i rma tio n.\Si’R 2 A(i I pree m nnpt thie rs’ g m i t i l u u m t i mt mss u ie , nm mo l and with mm pre-hid u.ym mmp ct s iutm l designed lou tv ’vc ’ ,il

teq u ime t h e v u iu ut i t i t i m.’d usc ’ c i t I SEA mm procurements whi m w uuld be time bidders , did not know ort c m r m m mc l os-d r ma u led hui ldim mgs . anticipate amiy c u b the eve imt tial bidders

75

- .‘

. ~~~ ~~

(b) l’vet m if it could he mirgu ied that the cc mndi ’ savimmgs enjoyed in the muniginal procurement.t ion for abandoning FSFA to use formal advertisinghas been inch, there is an additional reason to Placing precedents in perspective , clearly the pama-continue TSFA’ s use preemptiom i . In apparent m ount commsiderat iomm is to repeat the competitiveconflict with tins’ on e sentence in ASPR 2.502 at atmosp here which resulted in all bidders biddingissue , is the most fummda menta l procurement rule below the govern nmment esti tm nate wit h the low hid 50achieve max imm ’uum competition.~ percent below the es t im ’mm ate. This preempts time fact

that a (‘orps I)istrict might now have the capa b ihmm ~Mmuxin iutnm com mpet it iomi was achieved in the ORD to design an industrialized sanitary facility , Despite

pilot project amid the res u ltant bids attest to that fact , the proliferation of laws and regulations , t he henci mmimarkThe variables have not change d~ t he technical and guiding all procurement decisions renma ins relativel y thelegal reasons wimich pointed to TSFA is the optimum same as it did in I~~75;naniely , ”mnaximize competition .procureme n t techni que remain t he same. Adopting obtain reasonable prices , and assure ac eu muinta bility ut ’

another design strategy or procumeulment tec hnique at public officials f c r public transactions , ”9this point will probably not duplicate the 50 percent

—9(’cu mtumrnns c u io n c m (,c,vernment Pm- o urcrnen n . Re pu m r m c u t the

~4 1 US(’ § 2 53 1’a ) m 10 USC § f l u u 4 u g b , 10 usc § 2305; Cumnmmission mm Gomiernment Procurement , Waihington . I) ( ‘tcSt ’ R 1-300.1; ASPR 1-120 1: ASPR 18’ l07 . t P R 1 - 1 . 3 0 1 . 1 , GPo ~ S 2S 54)0O07I, Vol I, p I,

76

APPENDIX J: PICTURES OF BROOKVILLE LAKE PROTOTYPE FACILITY

I, . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~ ‘4 V .,

P ~“

~~~~~~

- ~~~~~~~ - ‘ ; i i

-

‘ - ‘I 1*

ii

“ I . ~~~~~~ _~~,“I.. -

‘

— ‘*~-‘

-

~r ”~~’~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ m ’ ““ c - .

~~~~~~~~~

78

LIII. Db ~ 1PiBt ‘ m,

A~ ’,, F., , c cc ‘5’. A “c ‘,~~ ‘ , ‘ , ‘ i l ’ A ’ . ’ ‘ .‘ ‘ - , ,,ci -, , , ‘ , c l , ’ ’ i i c f l

4 ’ ‘‘ 5i Au ‘, .r - a ‘ ,nu,rc’ ,,cc ,., “ -A c m - c - , A ’ ‘ c c ~~, c c r c

c , ’ c , c , . , ’ I c . c ’ c ’ i c - ! m m , u i c , c ’ . ’ , i , c , A ‘ ‘5 i ? , c r ’ , ’ c c H. A i ’ ’ c iu , i , i t’li did S. m , , c h ’ ’ c ’ ’ ’ ’ ‘1 - ‘ ‘ ‘ i d .c -

Icc c , ’ . . ,.A c ’ c A ‘. . ‘ ‘ c - m c v .11 idA ’ S . u c , . i , Ilmu cl cu li 1 . 1 , c , , ‘ c c c

A: c,, . . , c , u A , l u N I c i , , 4c , A cc , , c c ,

- I - , . ’ , - r ’ c ’ c , . A t 5 i u i , ’ i.O cc i’i’ c c n c , ’‘ ‘, ‘ “ ~, c , . c . , c . n u i s u , , i , ’ . A ,l ,. . ‘.‘ c c “ ‘ ‘- c c .

cc c , ‘ S c , l c ’ ’ . t . ’ ’A I l S c , , ,

‘ ‘ c i ’ m dA ’ ’ . c c . ’ , ,. ‘ It,

~ D-Ct~~- O In I” ‘ n c - c ’ , ic ’ ” d .c.

— ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ m i d ’ . u , ,. A ’ ‘ “ c c , ‘ cc . rc - . A ’ ‘‘, c - c c - u ml,- . c A ’ ’c ‘ i i P. ‘ m . . c c c c , c ’ ’ c ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ 4 ’

d i ’ , d i , A. - - c I ! . c . r c , A i’t ‘ c ’ ‘ , ‘ ‘ 5 , ii’ .A r ’ , . 1 cA l ’ S ‘~ ci~ A c ’ c r . A . T ~, c c ’ ~- ’ - ‘ icc

u, , m ,u up ~‘~~ h - 4 i ‘ ‘ ‘iA ’ ‘c u ‘ n c . ’, ~~

‘ ‘ ‘ , , , , , , c - , ‘~, c i c c

‘c. . A l ’ c ’i’ .’‘c mu ’c 0 ‘. ‘ ‘ . ‘ P

- - . A l ’ . / t A ‘ ‘ , , c . c , c , p ’ ,m lu— p c m - c ,, , ‘ -I, ‘ . m .u M c - ’ c , ., m c c c i mx AC ’ 0Ac. ’, -‘ A ‘ ‘ ‘ . ‘ i ’ 4 ’ c l’ i .

- ‘ A t ’ ” ~~~ ,~~jc ui , c - - , , - , , cc: 0

b - u . ..’ - . c , , , , , , , , , - ~, ‘5

- - - ,A c c c - ’ - ,m ’ ‘ ,c C c “‘,A ’ cc ’ ‘ A ‘ I ’ m s c O - ‘ ‘ c ’ A c c - ‘4 ,., so ’ , . . A - 335

- . -~~ ‘ . c ’ , , c . , , . ” ’c I . , c c - , , r O c ’ , ,.‘ m c , , , c - . .c - ‘ , lcm / ‘AO A T S c , , ’ , ~c m , i m , - . c . ’ .:’ ,

c c c c - c 4 ut us i c, c r , ju rc s dc ,

Ac - “,m , c I , t c m, u u , , c O . , .c i c ,, i ’ ,,,,i F t . ’ . . ‘,, r c m - : ’‘. c , - , c c ’ , c f l ’ i , I , ’ c c ’ i ’c i,,d’ci ’ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ c c ’ u, ’ , , , . , : ‘

, I’ c - r v c i c . Vt ’ ‘ ‘ 1 . i :

u I - u , , ,,, , V A - c m . (‘ ‘ “ c c ’ ‘ t ci c ’ , , A ,c

— S ‘ c i , ‘ c ’ ‘ “ mu . A c c l , - , ’ - Oil

c : i c , d c ’ ’,c4 , ‘ S ‘ , ..,~ c lcc crcuii c , . r,~ cc ’ - ’ — .

Ci ’ , . ’ , it -‘- ‘ ‘u i , ) ., ’ , i i ~. 1 , 1 1 4 c c . A,A S i c ’ , , ‘~~4 u u ,,,., - ‘ m u

- , A.- dcc A ‘ u, ,. - r e -T m c m o-c - ,scn c ’~~” c - - - , Ac ,

A , i r ’ .,, S t A , c c L c ’ c ’ rc .m ’-A ‘ ‘ , 0

P . 1c c , ’ ’ .,,, 4 m c r ’ ~ ‘ c - c , , , c’ [d i , A u ’ ’, u ii’c ’o’ c u / ) c A ‘ i ~~’ ,,’ - Ad- c- cc’,, - u m ci i c , r ,ccc t i , ’ c ’ i ‘ - c m - c , ’ - 5. ‘ ‘‘m ’ ’ c-c . ct - ui P .

mcdi, ,, - B t c ’ ,s. ‘ m -‘ d c l i ,- ‘ c . t - . r I m ’ , a d cc B’ c ’ l ’ i c r ’ i A ‘ ‘ T 4 . 5 c c - i , 1 4 5 , uu~ ic- -u c m l

I,, , u~- ; u u , , ‘ c ~~‘ , ‘ c. ‘ c , c c c d u u , , , c u I ’ ’ ’ A c ’ n’ St P A u c ~~~. ‘,‘ ‘. c ~- mc cc i., , c -

‘ ‘c A - ‘ m c ‘ “ c c - ,- P A u A l‘uurs i, ,~~ , c c p mu F’ u - , , - - WA -

ii,,’, A S dcc’, Ac,’:’’ u ., :‘,t. 05 lc’r~ “ ‘ ‘ ‘ , i c i c c~ t,c ’- ic ’ A A ’ ’ c ‘ cli ’ ,c , ’ . i ’ , ,-’,,i c ’- c c ,

A u ’ c , , h ’ l c , ’’ c c ~,’’,’ri ’. I c c A c ’ . ,,,,. ‘ . ,,cc , m ‘,c c~ c ,~’

- ml , , ,, ‘ ,., ‘ c’ ’ 1 ’ ’ ’ . , c . c , . c . E~ ’u’ A c , i ‘ Ac,, cc” - A, , ‘I

‘ ‘1 ‘ ‘ - c c c ’ ’ - ’ ’ “ A b c

- c : r u. ’ ’ ’ ’ A. ’ ’ ’ : - cmi- ,, ,, ‘- .,r ‘1301 m ‘ r , - ’ , , ,’ c ’ w’ ‘ c u ’ u ’ - /10’ ‘ —

‘ c , ’ ’ c ’ c : ’ i d c . ’ , , c , c r ’ c c ’ , u ,- cc ’. u’ , ii ( mi- c- ’ - ‘ ,u ‘ m u ’ mu Arc .

‘c ‘ , A 1- m ’ ’ i . T u 1’ I m r u 4 - ,t - cc c - - ‘ “ 4 - -

A t t I c - ( S i c - ’ , I cc c ~ c [ d i , U’ S ! ’- ‘ , - ,, - A mcc ’,l I,, u . ”

A c c4 4 c hu, . A: c -

S I T ’ S O i l , : d A I S i ’ i c c ’ .c r c -c ’ , -c~ ‘ii S ic F’ :,:, , ‘ cA.: .0 ’ ’ ’ , A ’ I ’ c - cur . , ,,,, I cc) , ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ , c i c I c ’ ’ i’ , ’ d s r i -n ’ .

‘ ‘ S ‘ m c ’ , - mc -~. ‘ ‘ Ic’ ’ A c i ’ ” ’ l. .‘. d ’ cA

F’ , , . , A u’uu r ‘ .., ‘,u,. “3 , .‘lc~c cO O ’ I ‘c c’,, , ’ , ‘ .4 s i n

,c ,Ha ,‘ ‘ u Au c , , tcc c t r ‘ c c , ? , ’ ’

A ‘ A, ‘ A ’ , - , ‘ ‘ 4~’ c

, c c ’ A ,~ ‘ O i l - 1 : I. Au

u ’ ’ , . , A ‘ ‘ ‘c ’ ’ c , c - f , I cc c jc - -

A i m ‘ ,d A SAud I F- r i ‘ 1 ’

- A, c dc c , , A ’ T i d L i i , ’ ,’ u A ’ ’ ’, scc ’ ic ’ 4‘ PS A c r ’ , i Am m i -p s A c . , , , , , ic,,, , “ A - -

‘ c c , ‘ 5 : ’ , ’ .- - - i i Ac~~y ‘ crc 1, -c ,’ iu c , i ~ u., ‘“ c i 5 c. ’ c c c - ‘ A ‘u cucu m

- cc ’ “c cc’ Ai rs c ” ’ ’ - tcc ’ , , ”A

Pc,c,,4 c c , c , c c , ’ , - i O u , ’ 4 ? ’ ’ , T,., O,c, 0 i c c cA ’ T ’b A’ ’’ ‘~ Ic,,,, .nm~u c ~~

A u , ’ , ,~~ . c _ , 5’ ’’ , ,~., , ‘,1 1c ’ r - . 1 c c ‘ c-c ’ , iO

‘cc ,, 14 c c ‘, ‘c, O A .c cc ’ , . ‘- ‘ ‘c P ’ c i ‘ ‘u’ ,, : ccc’ - ,- ,, c A c , ‘ ‘ c .

‘ ‘ I , , , . ,,~~,., . -.~. - -c c, - ‘ , ? , c , ., , , , r c ,,M~cndir I c ’ ,~ ‘ iic’er .1’’ ’, , c u r . , - ’ ’

- c c ’ ’ A? ~5~~j l j u‘ ic , ,, ‘ Sm,,O c A c : , , ’ , , ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ c c ’ cc., ic,r’c’fl t ,,‘ mc ,- ’ ’ - ’ c-c r c

A l! ’, ‘ ‘ i c,.c’ lii: A c ’ ,. ( ic i , ’c , A : ‘c- A ’ u c u d c i ’ .,’, inqu n,,’,’r’ccq Scc r ’c ’’ c 0 ‘ c ,

‘ c i 0 .cci? .0 ,1 I” ‘cc-,, c , , 5’ fb i

- ‘c cc , ‘ - ‘cAd- i cc - i l A I ’ P u u i t . r c c r m mc!A t ~~u, i i , ’ , ’ ‘ c m l i , ’-

US Ar y tn.~j ruee r Di st S’S cl”i”v t i’uti”eu’ m ’ i ’ u c t c i ( t U S Arc”y Ir,m r Di strictPric ’ ,’,- t u ’t .,~ ’c m c,5 Brj nch ~~cre ,ition,mt/l ’ l c nn icm cm Se sS iOn (.cr~~tIc’u,~ t 5r~n c hPD f.,.’cc 1 715

- i’ll’ (c cctor ” 5t-use u ’ , t’ o~ i - c )B.a t tm ~ore , MD 21203 m’ 3rt lA flJ , OR 91~~~ S.ny, uuuiia h , i-Ic fl40?

US Am” ,v Er u c l i c c e e r Di strict m’s ““ v Ei’.1~ineer ri s tr i ct i,u5 W ir y tn~~r i’c s t r t c tEovm r :c c-’ c.~cts t & Ecoumoucc ics C u , ’t [ ‘Sn - : ’ ? Sc ’ dct uo fl ~5c ’,Is’c t ’ [ . ’’Hng Ss’ct i :n

hrA ’c :ic F’S “ ‘ ‘ x C_ ’i iSS Fc ’Jc rc i l it : )26 irJer ,ct Pln:3 Seattle. ..cS &,, n s A ’ -.5cm, u k , Si 10001 ~‘ lmIc i~~!i~c1 , ‘cC 2u1401

LS A’- Eng ineer :‘cc tri ctUS 3” E’c g tneer DI str i ,‘ t IacJ [Sc and [ c c c i “c”~”ccuta m ( ‘S A r-nAy F’ çr :‘u st r 1Dc’scc’,, rrancs S W A t l u n [ ,cvironr ient3t Br803 P”on ’m St E uit.A i c’i 602 320 .‘,~ r tii , :s A ” qc i ies StNorfolk , VA 23510 CIty — County A irport Li- s Angele s , CA 90012

Wa I t e Wa lLs , WA ~~3s2US ct” ,’ Enu 3mneer DIstrict

‘ [‘5 S ’ c y Ec ,c t is tr ic t

Design 5’ - nch (S A rmy tcig tnee~’ ‘s tr ict C~ ,’ra tcO r m s [“A rm ,jiUS C,stt - - : u ’ T -Jse lecs [nu’,mn eer i cu g i”-ORD CS’S Ccip i’,,c “-all2nd Cci e~ t ,cut St ED Si-cr 2 127 Sacro’ccntc’ , 95814Philadelph ia , PA 19160 ‘~~m it 1ngt0iA . WV

US Ar~ry F r - :A r eer Distr i ctUS Sc y Enginee r District L’S Ac’ciy Engineer District : ‘u,il ~L c ,’ ’ .’ c Sect ion[ruvu rerui’ centat Resource Tech Engr Branclu -’:SD 100 Mi,An[ i s: ’ e c St

Branch ED Box 1070 San francis :A, CA 94’Cl17/6 I,iagra ~t

das h vill e , t~ 31202Bdc ff A ’ ?, NY 1420? L’S Army Enairreer D i s tr i c t

US Armny Eng ineer District tnvi ro nmentnt ResourceUS Ac”y Engineer District lech Em c g Bracuch-Sfl) 511 Gold Avenue, S W .Project Developruent Federa l Bldg P0 Box 1580

Bran ch 1003 Liberty Av e Albuquerque , A u dI 87103536 S. Clarke St Pittsburg, PA 15222Chicago , IL 60605 US Arccuy Eu, ,~ District

US Army Ec[dA,n eer District [iAvirA, u ,c s’’ct31 PesourceUS Arm”y Engineer :,is tri cc Environn.er ts) Rescjrce Br BranchProject Development Pu) Box 9) 9 Essayons BLsg

Branch Charleston , SC 29432 P0 box 1229PU Box 10Z7 Ga l veston , T m 77550DeErcit , ,~~ 48231 US Army Engine er Eus tri c t

Recre ationat SectIon iS Ar ty Erc;’rceer Distr’ctUS Art’cy Eng inee r District PD Box 4970 EnvirA nc ’ i:ntai ResourceOper ations Branc’t Jacksonvit l~ , FL 32201 BrCl ock Tou te r Bul -3 tn g Pa 5. - u 867k ’ c k Is land , U. 61201 US Army Engineer Li strict Lit Tl e Rocc , AR 72203

Environment al Resc’dcrc e BrUS A r ’ j Engineer “ c s t r i c t PG Box 2284Project Ope rat ion s Mobile, AL 36628 US S’icy C ‘A’”eer Distr l

Branch , (nA i ”m c co .pc .tal Ana l ysis s~1135, US Post O Y Y A C i A A Cu.iu,rtho,j~ u’ US A rmy Engineer District iO’r, ‘mA rth “ A ” StSt. P au t , Mu Ennirorenente l Ressdcr ce tic,aha, NB 64102

BrUS Ar ’ y Engineer District ~ Box 61 [dl Army Ecci -m ne er Di~~tr ’ctProject P I c l~~~~A~~ q Branch Tulsa . OK 741 cc ’ Envi roncu eruucr[ Resource2 10 corn ’ u �t , u 1.1 BrSt. Lou1 ,. MC kAlO t US Army Engineer District P0 - .. ., 17300

[nnc ronur’enta t Resource Fort Worth , A c 76 102US Ar m y E” j u r e e r ‘ - ‘.‘rict ‘~ c tmO nEnvir on ient~l [ d c v y ’c i s “r 556 Cl i f ford Davi s Federal BldgPD 8., 60 t’t- 5dhis , TN 38103V ’ c i ~ S’.,r’m, 5’ . 39130

US Ac’niy Engineer D is t r i c tUS Army Engm cic ’ du r D I [ d t r i : ’ t Recreation Resource Managemcnentli ,msln Plannin g Branch Brki’JJ [a,t 12th St Pu) S i r 60267

C uty, 5~ 64 106 Npw Orleans , LA 70160