NAVFAC HAWAII

Design-Build at NAVFAC Hawaii NAVFAC Pacific Designer Builder Symposium 2010 NAVFAC Hawaii Capital Improvements Design Division

December 2010

Session Overview • NAVFAC Hawaii – Who we are, our relationship to NAVFAC Pacific

– Workload projections, construction contracts and A-E services

• Why Design-Build – How does Design-Build support our mission

• Design-Build – Design-Build basics

– How does NAVFAC Hawaii do Design-Build. – What are similarities or differences to NAVFAC Pacific.

• New Developments and On-going Topics – Desirables and Betterments

– Collateral equipment – Shop drawings required as part of Final design documentation – CCASS evaluations

• Related Sessions – Order of Precedence

– Sustainability – Panel Discussion

2

December 2010

NAVFAC Organization NAVFAC HQ

Echelon 2 Echelon 3 Echelon 4

NAVFAC Atlantic

NFESC

NFELC

NCC

NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic

NAVFAC Southwest

NAVFAC Hawaii

NAVFAC Southeast

NAVFAC Washington

NAVFAC Marianas

NAVFAC Midwest

NAVFAC Northwest

NAVFAC Pacific NAVFAC Far East

NAVFAC Europe

3

Commander, NAVFAC Atlantic

Commander, NAVFAC Pacific

RDML Kevin R. Slates

RDML Kate Gregory

NAVFAC Organization Business/Support Lines Commands

NAVFAC HQ

NF LANT

NF PAC

Asset Management

Navy Crane Center

NAVFAC Engineering Service Center

NAVFAC Expeditionary Logistics Center

NAVFAC Japan

NAVFAC Guam

NAVFAC Hawaii

NAVFAC PAC

Chief Information Officer

NAVFAC Southwest

Financial Management

NAVFAC Northwest

Small Business

NAVFAC Europe

Safety

NAVFAC Midwest

Acquisition

NAVFAC Southeast

Public Works

NAVFAC Washington

4

Capital Improvements

NAVFAC Mid-Atlantic

Horizontal: 1. Business Processes 2. Resource Allocation 3. Community Mgmt 4. Corporate Metrics 5. NAVFAC Program Mgt/Execution

Environmental

NAVFAC LANT

Vertical: 1. Mission Accountability 2. Client Interface 3. Project Mgt/Execution 4. Performance

Counsel

December 2010

NAVFAC HAW AI I - W ho are w e?

5

•

Established 10 March 2005

•

Highly diverse, talented organization

•

Large employer of local trade and white-collar expertise.



Approximately 1,600 civilians and 120 architects and engineers in the Capital Improvement Business Line. Added Air Force civilians & military – Oct. 1, 2010 due to joint basing.



Provides: engineering & contracting expertise, maintenance, repair, demolition, environmental, utilities (electricity, water, steam, air, & wastewater treatment), base development, maintains & leases vehicles.

Capital I m provem ents – Project Type • NAVFAC Hawaii is the Navy's single touch-point for most facilities engineering products and services in Hawaii - Some projects executed by NAVAC Pacific

• Provides service to Marine Corps, Air Force, and Army • State of Hawaii Area of Responsibility (AOR) • Wide range of projects: – Military Construction (MILCON) • Mission funded – provided directly to the command from the Federal budget via Congressional appropriation , multi-year process • Typically new buildings, large renovations • Awarded on stand-alone as well as MACC task orders contracts • Typically A-E contract document preparation – Special Projects • Locally funded > $400,000 • Typically renovations, can include new buildings • Multiple Award Construction Contract (MACC), or Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts • Mostly A-E contract document preparation, some in-house – Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (SRM) • Repair and renovation projects < $400,000 • MACC, Multi-trade and single trade IDIQ • Typically in-house contract document preparation 6

December 2010

W ork load Trends: NAVFAC Haw aii Design Projection 350 300 MILCON

Millions $

250 200

Special Projects

150 SRM via IDIQ Contracts

100 50

SRM via Shop Construction

0 FY10

7

FY11

FY12

FY13

FY14

FY15

December 2010

W ork load Trends: NAVFAC Haw aii Construction Projection

8

W hy Design-Build? • NAVFAC Objectives and Considerations – For Navy and Navy Reserve Military (MCON/MCNR), acquisition strategy goal of 75% Design-Build, 25% Design-Bid-Build. Policy set by HQ. – For MILCON and other projects, execution method is more flexible, local command decision based on workload, schedule, available funds.

Advantages of Design-Build:  Shorter duration from initial design to contract award than traditional Design-BidBuild (DBB)  Fiscal year obligation. Difficult to reprogram a congressionally appropriated project. Limits to additional program area and cost.  Less contentious, partnership.  Suited for standardized building types, or conversely technically complex projects requiring non-standard design and construction. 9

December 2010

W hat is Design-Build? •

Design-Build is a construction project delivery system where design and construction are contracted with a single entity known as the design-builder or design-build contractor. A “2-party” agreement.

• Typically, a General Contractor is the prime contractor who subcontracts a design team. • By contrast, Design-Bid-Build is a traditional “3-party” agreement between separate design and construction entities. • Design-Build is defined by the contract, not the format of the Request for Proposal (RFP). • The RFP describes the project requirements and is a contract document. • “Design” is the construction documentation that the project is constructed from. The project is not constructed from the RFP. The Design-build entity prepares the construction documentation. 10

December 2010

Design-Build Process

Requirements RFP Design-Build Contract Completed Facility 11

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build

• NAVFAC has been utilizing DB since the late 1980’s • NAVFAC’s Chief Engineer in FY2001 initiated a single Design-Build Procurement Format – Create common business practices across NAVFAC – Utilize Navy and DoD Criteria, Standards, Specifications, and lessons learned – Utilize Uniformat as a basic information structure – Develop performanced based requirements

• Navy chose to create one Design-Build Master (NDBM) request for proposal template (RFP) that covered as many building types as possible – Template versus identical RFP’s

– Flexibility within template

• Continuous improvement and evolution 12

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – R esources W hole Building Design Guide

www.wbdg .org/ndbm

13

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – 6 Part Form at Proposal Forms & Documents PART 1 PART 2 General Requirements

PART 3

Project Program

PART 4

Performance Technical Specifications Prescriptive Specifications

PART 5

PART 6

Attachments 14

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 2 GENER AL R EQUI R EM ENTS

PART 2

01 14 00.05 20 WORK RESTRICTIONS 01 20 00.05 20 PRICE AND PAYMENT PROCEDURES 01 30 00.05 20 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS

01 31 19.05 20 P OST AW ARD M EETI NGS Table of Contents

Division

01

01 32 16.00 20 DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS DOCUMENTATION 01 32 17.05 20 NETWORK ANALYSIS SCHEDULES (NAS)

01 33 00.05 20 CONSTRUCTI ON SUBM I TTAL P ROCEDURES 01 33 10.05 20 DESI GN SUBM I TTAL P ROCEDURES 01 35 13.05 20 SPECIAL PROJECT PROCEDURES 01 35 29.05 20 SAFETY AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH REQUIREMENTS

01 45 00.05 20 DESI GN AND CONSTRUCTI ON QUALI TY CONTROL 01 50 00.05 20 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS 01 57 19.05 20 TEMPORARY ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS

01 57 19.01 20 SUP P LI M ENTARY TEM P ORARY EV CONTROLS 01 74 19.05 20 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT

01 78 24.05 20 FACI LI TY OP ERATI ON AND M AI NTENANCE SUP P ORT I NFORM ATI ON (OM SI )

15

December 2010

PART 2

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 2 Part 2 Preparation •Part 2, General Requirements are NOT BOILERPLATE • Do not download from Whole Building Design Guide website. • Many NAVFAC Hawaii specific requirements: – Safety, Environmental, Client (PHNSY and IMF, MCBH) • Many project specific requirements: – Post award meetings, design and construction submittals, quality control

– Even for MACC contracts that have General Requirements in the basic contract, substantial amount of editing required for each task order. – How Part 2 is prepared depends on the type of contract and who is preparing • AE prepared: MILCON, Special Projects • In-house: SRM

16

December 2010

PART 2

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 2 Part 2 Preparation AE prepared RFP: • Differences between NAVFAC Hawaii Design Managers, not everyone it does the same way. • MACC RFP’s will be essentially similar to stand-alone contracts – all applicable sections should be included. • Generally, NAVFAC Hawaii will provide edited word documents without header/footers. • AE’s should confirm with the NFH Design Manager. • MACC contractors note that task order requirements supersede basic contract requirements.

In-house prepared RFP: • Usually MACC task orders. • May only include edits to the basic contract requirements.

17

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 PR OJECT PR OGR AM

PART 3 Master Format

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 2.1 Mission Statement 2.2 Facility Function 2.3 Project Specific Priorities 2.4 Appropriate Design 2.5 Workflow Process 2.6 Special Design Challenges 2.7 Adaptability and Flexibility 3. SITE ANALYSIS 3.1 Existing Site Conditions 3.2 Site Development Requirements 4. BUILDING REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Space Tabulation (EXCEL form at http:www.wbdg.org/ndbm/download) 4.2 Space Relationships 4.3 Exterior Character 5. ROOM REQUIREMENTS 6. ENGINEERING SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS A10 Foundations D40 Fire Protection Systems A20 Basement Construction D50 Electrical Power & Lighting B10 Superstructure E10 Equipment B20 Exterior Enclosure E20 Furnishings B30 Roofing F10 Special Construction C10 Interior Construction F20 Selective Building Demolition C20 Stairs G10 Site Preparations C30 Interior Finishes G20 Site Improvements D10 Conveying G30 Site Civil/Mechanical Utilities D20 Plumbing G40 Site Electrical Utilities D30 HVAC G90 Other Site Improvements December 2010

Consists of 6 Chapters

Project Program

COVER PAGE

Cover Page Table of Contents

“Basis of Design” Data. Obtain majority of the data during the FACD/charrette. 18

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 w w w .w bdg.org/ ndbm

Browse Download: Individual parts, or entire template

19

December 2010

PART 3

20

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 2.0 Project Objectives – Sustainable design

December 2010

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 2.0 Project Objectives – Sustainable design

LEED v3: Updates ECB 2008-01 credit requirements. Feasibility of credits should be verified during FACD, or as early during RFP prep as possible

21

December 2010

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 5.0 R oom R equirem ents

Room requirements identified Part 3 and usually Part 6 – RFP drawings as well

22

December 2010

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 6.0 Engineering System R equirem ents – ESR

ESR’s organized differently than CSI format

Browse

23

December 2010

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 6.0 Engineering System R equirem ents - ESR 6.0 ENGINEERING SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS A10 FOUNDATIONS A20 BASEMENT CONSTRUCTION B10 SUPERSTRUCTURE B20 EXTERIOR ENCLOSURE B30 ROOFING C10 INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION C20 STAIRS C30 INTERIOR FINISHES D10 D20 D30 D40 D50

CONVEYING PLUMBING HVAC FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS ELECTRICAL

“Engineering Systems” correspond with PART 4 PTSs using the UNIFORMAT numbering system

E10 EQUIPMENT E20 FURNISHINGS

24

December 2010

PART 3

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 3 6.0 Engineering System R equirem ents - ESR ESR C10 Interior Construction - example

Uniformat Number: correlates to Room Requirements as well as Part 4

Do not delete unused paragraphs, indicate “Not Used”

25

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part3 Sum m ary

PART 3

26

•

Part 3, Project Program is project specific and the downloaded template must be edited.

•

Use the Browse feature of the WBDG website to assist editing.

•

Part 3 is the most important part of the RFP, conflicts between Part 3 and other parts are governed by the Order of Precedence Clause.

•

Often additional room requirements are referred to in Part 6, RFP drawings. This requires careful coordination.

•

Uniformat numbering correlates Engineering System Requirements with Part 4, Performance Technical Specifications. Part 3 ESR’s control how Part 4 is applied to the project.

December 2010

PART 4

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 4 Perform ance Technical Specifications - PTS

PTS’s organized exactly the same as Part 3 ESR’s

27

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 4

PART 4

28

P erform ance Technical Specifications - P TS

•

P TSs corresponds to P art 3 , “Engineering Systems Requirements” via the Uniform at num bering system

•

PTSs identify: •

Design Criteria (UFC, UFGS, Industry Codes, etc.)

•

Field Verification & Acceptance Testing

•

Performance & Quality of Facility Elements

December 2010

PART 4

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 4

P ERFORM ANCE TECHNI CAL SP ECI FI CATI ONS (P TS) •

PTS states how a “built element” must perform without dictating how to design or construct it. States criteria that applies regardless of the design solution. (e.g. Windows shall meet AT/FP, 175 mph winds, not leak, last 15 years)

•

P art 3 ESR : W hat you w ant in the project 

•

P art 4 P TS: How those elem ents m ust perform 

29

ESR’s are edited

PTS’s are NOT edited

December 2010

PART 4

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – P art 4 P ERFORM ANCE TECHNI CAL SP ECI FI CATI ONS (P TS) PTS C10 Interior Construction - example

30

December 2010

PART 4

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 4 Draft Uniform Facilities Criteria - UFC

Draft UFC’s apply to DB projects. WBDG “Design Guidance”

31

December 2010

PART 4

32

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 4 Draft Uniform Facilities Criteria - UFC

December 2010

PART 5 Master Format

Interior Coating Of Steel Tanks

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 5 PR ESCR I PTI VE SPECI FI CATI ONS

Section 09972

Section 11194 Section

Detention Hardware

13112 Cathodic Protection System (Steel Water Tanks)

33

Only use prescriptive specifications (UFGS) when performance specifications are not practical. Intent is to have zero or minimal UFGSs. (Sections shown are for example only.)

December 2010

PART 6 Master Format

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – Part 6 ATTACHM ENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS

Permits Record of Decisions (PROD) Form

Geotechnical Report Site Survey: Asbestos & Lead Paint Reports Drawings & Sketches

Attachments may be: 8-1/2 X 11, 11 X 17 or D-Size Drawings

Others as required 34

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I Bridging Docum ents

•Bridging documents are included in Part 6 as attachments. • Bridging documents are considered prescriptive requirements. • If included, they need to be carefully coordinated with the other requirements of the RFP. • There is not a set “percentage of design” that defines bridging documents. • When bridging documents should be considered: – When a specific configuration is important – When Historic consultation is required prior to award – When price will be a factor in determining award

• Does not preclude changes after award

35

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster ORDER OF P RECEDENCE The contract consists of solicitation, approved proposal, & final design. NFAS Clause 5252.236-9312 and UFGS 01 33 10.05 20 (Design Submittal Procedures) determine the precedence in case of a conflict. In the event of conflict or inconsistency between any of the below described portions of the conformed contract, precedence shall be given in the following order: a. Any portions of the proposal or final design that exceed the requirements of the solicitation. (1) Any portion of the proposal that exceeds the final design. (2) Any portion of the final design that exceeds the proposal. (3) Where portions within either the proposal or the final design conflict, the portion that most exceeds the requirements of the solicitation has precedence. b. The requirements of the solicitation, in descending order of precedence: (1) Standard Form 1442, Price Schedule, and Davis Bacon Wage Rates, (2) Part 1 - Contract Clauses, (3) Part 2 - General Requirements, (4) Part 3 - Project Program Requirements, (5) Part 6 - Attachments (excluding Concept Drawings), (6) Part 5 - Prescriptive Specifications exclusive of performance specifications, (7) Part 4 - Performance Specifications exclusive of prescriptive specifications, (8) Part 6 - Attachments (Concept Drawings). 36

December 2010

NAVFAC Design-Build M aster – M odel R FPs

37

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I Acquisition Strategy •ACQUISITION STRATEGY INFLUENCES RFP – DETERMINATION OF HOW THE CONTRACT WILL BE AWARDED IS A KEY CONSIDERATION AND WILL DIRECTLY IMPACT THE DESIGN PROCESS AND CONTENT OF THE RFP. – WHAT TYPE OF CONTRACT WILL BE USED, STAND ALONE, MACC (WHICH ONE), SMALL BUSINESS – MACC TASK ORDER RFP’S: CANNOT BEGIN TO PREPARE THE RFP WITHOUT CONFIRMATION OF SPECIFIC CONTRACT TO BE WRITTEN AGAINST. THIS IS MORE OF A CONSIDERATION FOR IN-HOUSE RFP PREPARATION THAN AE. – TWO BASIC STRATEGIES ARE: 



38

BEST VALUE LOW PRICE TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE (LPTA)

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I Acquisition Strategy • ACQUISITION STRATEGY – BEST VALUE:  WILL

BE USED EXTENSIVELY IN FY2011 AND LIKELY FY 2012

• REQUIRES BOARD SELECTION • WILL INVOLVE DESIRABLES AND BETTERMENTS • CAN BE USED FOR MACC TASK ORDERS OR STAND-ALONE CONTRACTS  PRO: USED TO MAXIMIZE APPROPRIATION OR FUNDING  CON: TIME CONSUMING TO SELECT AWARDEE

39

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I Acquisition Strategy • ACQUISITION STRATEGY - LOW PRICE (TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE): – AWARD BASED ON PRICE – USUALLY USED ON MACC TASK ORDERS – CAN BE USED ON STAND-ALONE AWARDS – REQUIRES A PRESCRIPTIVE ORIENTED RFP (BRIDGING DOCUMENTS): COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES  PRO’S: FASTER, MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD AWARD PROCESS  CON: NOT ABLE TO MAXIMIZE APPROPRIATION OR FUNDING AS WELL AS BEST

VALUE

40

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •DESIRABLES AND BETTERMENTS: – Evaluated as part of the technical evaluation, in addition to price, to

determine Best Value for the government. – Typically used for MILCON projects, but not limited to. – Intent: Maximize appropriation with an emphasis on minimizing Total Ownership Cost  Desirables: Government stipulated  Betterments: Offeror proposed – Sample Basis of Award requirement: “ Offerors shall identify desirables and/or betterments that have been provided within their proposal while still remaining within the stated budget. A betterment is an applicable improvement/enhancement that provides quality and/or value to the basic RFP requirement” 41

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •DESIRABLES AND BETTERMENTS: – Desirables: • Listed in order of preference • Include criteria for each desirable in Parts 3 and 4. Very important to provide sufficient criteria, similarly to any other project requirement, and to coordinate within the RFP. • Sample desirables may include: – – – – –

Enhanced Commissioning Solar Domestic Hot Water Systems Building Integrated or Mounted Photovoltaic Energy Generation System Advanced Metering Improved Energy Performance – achieve energy consumption levels 40% below ASHRAE Standard 90.1

• May include other features not energy related. Must be within the scope of the project/DD 1391. 42

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •DESIRABLES AND BETTERMENTS: – Betterments: • Proposal Submission Requirements would typically provide guidance: “ …reduce energy/utility consumption, reduce the total cost of ownership, and/or increase the reliability, maintainability and/or accessibility of the facility…”

• Pricing shall be provided for each Betterment. – Would be used during the best value trade-off analysis. Technical evaluation completed first, then price.

43

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •Collateral Equipment: – “Turn-key” method for Design-Build is now preferred. • Traditionally, Govt or Govt’s AE have prepared Collateral Equipment (CEQ) buy packages and procured and installed. This is still typical for Design-BidBuild contracts.

– Only applies to Furniture, Fixtures, and Equipment ( FF&E) • Examples would include modular furniture, workstations, seating, filing, training and conference furniture, window treatments. • Would exclude certain types of equipment. Confirm with NAVFAC.

44

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •Collateral Equipment: – “Turn-key”: • Govt AE prepares a partial FF& E Buy Package – “60%” • This will be included in the RFP or solicitation package • Sample Govt AE SOW: For DB projects, the A-E shall include a 60% CEQ Buy Package submittal with the DB RFP solicitation package, which shall include the following : - Collateral Equipment Summarized List (Cost Estimate to include freight, installation, contingency and procurement fees) - Procurement Data Sheets (description of each CEQ item, vendor information, GSA contract number) - Catalog Cuts - Furniture Placement Plans based on the concept design

45

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics •Collateral Equipment: • Design-Builder completes the Buy Package – Assures most current user/client requirements – Assures coordination with Final Design, changes from the RFP

•

46

Buy Package must be reviewed by the client, FF & E funding source, and NAVFAC Interior Designer/CEQ Manager.

December 2010

DESI GN -BUI LD AT NAVFAC HAW AI I New Developm ents and On-going Topics

•Shop Drawings required as part of Final Design documentation: • CCASS evaluations to include Designer of Record (DOR) evaluations.

47

December 2010

NAVFAC HAWAII

Questions? NAVFAC Hawaii Capital Improvements Design Division

December 2010