Chapter 8. HHS Facility Design and Construction _ HHS.gov.pdf

Home </> About </about/index.html> HHS Manuals </about/hhs-manuals/index.html> …
Chapter 8. HHS Facility Design and
Construction
Topics on this page: 8.1 Project Cost Monitoring and Cost Control | 8.2 Project Design
Review | 8.3 Design Guidelines | 8.5 Facility Security Design Considerations | 8.6
Partnering | 8.7 Value Engineering Agreements | 8.8 Commissioning Agreements | 8.9
Acceptance and Occupancy | 8.10 Accessibility Requirements for Persons with
Disabilities | 8.11 Architectural Barriers Compliance | 8.12 Design Build | 8.13 Design
Bid Build
Table of Contents </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/index.html>
An official website of the United States government
Navigate to:

8.1 Project Cost Monitoring and Cost
Control
8.1.1 Policy
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to the OPDIVS for monitoring
project cost on federally owned real property assets. When construction funding is
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as part of the
Department's budget, the maximum project budget is fixed and linked to project
scope.
1. Pre-Project Planning - The OPDIV shall ensure that the scope and cost of the
project is linked to the and the 5.2 Facility Project Approval Agreements
</about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/project-planning/index.html#5-2>. Pre-Project
Planning must be completed before a construction budget submission when
submitting the construction budget to OMB and Congress. Once the construction
budget is submitted to OMB and Congress, the OPDIV/HHS is committed to that
budget and scope. Adequate Pre-Project-Planning must be done to help ensure
that the project can be delivered at full scope within the submitted budget.
2. Programmatic Requirements - Once submitted to HHS and the project is being
designed by an A/E firm, programmatic and other changes (i.e., growth) must be
held to an absolute minimum.

8.1.2 Administrative Requirements
1. Procedures
The OPDIVs shall certify that the project is within scope, schedule and budget
based on the approved FPAA at each A/E's submittal. The A/E contract "Design
within Funding" clause must be consistent with the approved FPAA. At a
minimum, the A/E should submit a broad order of magnitude estimate (square
foot/meter cost) at the schematic level, a system's estimate at design
development level, and detailed quantity takeoff estimate at the contract
document level.
8.1.3 Guidance and Information
1. A/E - The A/E shall design the project within the budget and shall provide a
construction cost estimate at each scheduled design submission. The A/E shall
provide a narrative description of the methodology used in the development of
the estimate. If estimating software is used to produce the estimate, provide
summary details of the software.
2. Cost Consultant - OPDIVs are encouraged to utilize a highly qualified cost
engineer or estimator (in-house staff or through contract) to assist the Project
Manager and Contracting Officer Representative in monitoring A/E cost estimates
for major capital projects. The Cost Consultant should be fair, impartial, objective,
and effective in evaluating the cost reasonableness of the A/E's estimate.
3. Government Estimate - The final estimate will be considered the "Government
Estimate" after it has been reviewed and accepted by the Contracting Officer. This
estimate must include material, labor, and equipment costs and must not exceed
the construction budget.

4. Cost Estimate Format - It is recommended that detailed cost estimates be
broken down in accordance with the OPDIV's construction-estimating format. The
following indirect costs shall be shown as separate line items in detailed
estimates:
a. Sub-Contractor overhead and profit
b. Prime Contractor markup on subs
c. Prime Contractor overhead and profit
d. Sales tax, State tax, Tribal fees (or tax), bonds and insurance
e. Escalation cost per year
8.1.4 Reporting
Pre-Project-Planning activities prior to budget submissions, help reduce scope
changes and cost overruns. However, due to the nature and complexity of
construction projects, unexpected mission or unforeseen changes do occur that
could drive changes in the scope or budget of a project.
OPDIVs are encouraged to develop generic in lieu of custom designs to provide
flexibility and adaptability to deal with mission changes. When the scope or budget of
a project must change, the OPDIV will immediately report these changes to
and submit a revised FPAA in accordance with 5.2 Facility Project
Approval Agreements </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/project-planning/index.html#5-2>
(also see Changes for FPAA change approval thresholds).
8.2 Project Design Review
8.2.1 Policy
This policy applies to federally owned real property assets provide general guidance
to the OPDIVS for reviewing projects during the design phase. The OPDIV has the
overall responsibility to provide Government oversight for the design of an HHS
PSC/RLO/RPMS

facility. The OPDIV review and comment on the Architect/Engineers (A/E) design
submittal is vital to the success of the project. The A/E is contractually responsible to
design the project within the specified scope, budget, and schedule. This is not only a
Government requirement, but it is a common practice within the industry. The OPDIV
shall ensure that the A/E fulfills their contractual responsibility to deliver a design of
the approved HHS facility within Scope, Budget, and Schedule.

1. Roles and Responsibilities
a. Architect/Engineer - The A/E shall submit completed progress designs in
accordance with their contract to the Government for review and comment.
The A/E shall not proceed to the next phase of project design until written
acceptance of the current submittal is received from the approval authority.
b. Project Manager - The Project Manager (PM) may serve as the Contracting
Officer Representative (COR). The PM leads, directs and controls the
Government's activities as they relate to the design review of an HHS facility.
The PM is the Point of contact for the Government, the PM serves as the
Government's authorized representative with respect to communicating and
distributing comments to the A/E.The PM holds and chairs design review
meetings with OPDIV program and technical staff to evaluate design review
comments. The PM determines if the review comments are within the scope of
the A/E's contract. If comments are not within the scope, the PM will reject the
comments and does not forward them to the A/E.
c. OPDIV Technical Review Staff - The OPDIVS are encouraged to assemble an
integrated project team (IPT), which comprises of the COR, select senior
design discipline experts who have experience in preparing contract
documents to assist the PM in reviewing and evaluating the A/E's work. The
technical review staff should be very familiar with the A/E scope and contract
and should be allowed to interact with the A/E when it is appropriate.
Comments should be recommendations and suggestions to ensure the
success of the project. Comments that are directives should be avoided unless
items within the design submittal are not in accordance with the scope of
contract.

d. OPDIV Program Staff - Care and deference must be given to OPDIV Program
staff as the end-users, customers, and clients. However, they are not the A/E's
customer or client. The A/E's client is the Contracting Officer (CO) or the COR
acting as the CO's designated representative.OPDIV program staffs are
generally not familiar with the A/E contract and their comments may be
programmatic without consideration of contractual obligations. Still, the
OPDIV program staff are valuable stakeholders whose input and support
contribute significantly to the project's success. Care must be taken to ensure
the OPDIV program staff's comments are within contract scope. OPDIVs are
encouraged to establish internal procedures to ensure that the PM is the
communications conduit between the program staff and the A/E.
2. Procedures
The OPDIV determines the number of design submittals based on size and
complexity of the project. The Project Manager (PM) holds and chairs design
review meetings with technical and program review staffs at each specified
design submittal stage. The A/E and the PM shall certify that the Project is within
the Scope, Schedule, and Budget per the approved FPPA at each submittal. If a
submittal is found to be deficient and does not meet contractual obligations, the
Government must reject the submittal
8.3 Design Guidelines
8.3.1 Policy
HHS buildings shall be designed and constructed to be safe, healthy, functional,
pleasant, and to provide a safe, healthy, and functional working environment to meet
the OPDIV's mission.
The purpose of this section is to provide general guidance to assist OPDIV's in
developing design criteria for projects unique to their organization. Many OPDIV's
have developed design criteria for A/Es using in-house resources in collaboration
with HHS, federal, state, and local entities, as well as the private sector. This helps to

promote excellence in the planning, programming, design, and construction of HHS
facilities. OPDIVs are encouraged to continually review and update design criteria to
guide A/E's and OPDIV staff in preparing contract (construction) documents.
1. Procedures
Design criteria reflect the collective corporate knowledge and wisdom of the
OPDIV's design professionals based on history and experience that is
benchmarked against best practices within the industry. OPDIV's are encouraged
to use readily available industry design criteria for buildings that are common in
the practice of architecture and engineering. Highly specialized buildings may, to
an extent, require development of program or project specific design criteria, and
include features and elements that are generic in nature. Use of generic design
criteria avoids customizing spaces, functions, and operations to help maximize
use of funds appropriated for facilities.
The overarching design guidelines described below are intended to establish general
performance objectives for HHS buildings and facilities. The OPDIV Project Manager
should ensure that project specific objectives are identified in the Statement of Work
(SOW) developed to support the design effort. The A/E is responsible for determining
how to achieve specified objectives.

1. Environmental and Functional Needs
HHS buildings shall provide a comfortable working environment to support
optimal performance taking the following factors into consideration.
a. Arrangement of Space. Space relationships within buildings shall be planned
to optimize the functions being performed by the occupant. Interaction areas
should be provided within the building to promote collaboration between
scientists / occupants.
b. Access for Persons with Disabilities. Refer to the Sections 8.10 Accessibility
Requirements for Persons with Disabilities "Accessibility Requirements for
Persons with Disabilities" Administrative Requirements and Guidance and
Information, respectively, in this Chapter.
c. Illumination. Natural and artificial illumination shall be sufficient to meet
requirements of the tasks performed by the occupants.
d. Thermal Environment. Spaces must include proper climatic conditions to
provide a safe and healthy environment for work to be being performed.
Provision of flexibility and suitable control is necessary.
e. Acoustical Environment. New buildings and alterations shall be planned and
designed to limit noise to tolerable levels. An adequate level of privacy shall
be provided based on the nature of the tasks performed in the space.
f. Maintenance and Operation. Designs shall be based on user needs and
maintenance capabilities and shall satisfy the functional requirements for
efficient operation of the facility. Materials and products shall be durable,
easily maintained, and appropriate for the intended use.
g. Harmony with Environment. Special attention should be paid to the
arrangement of streets and public space adjacent to buildings. Designs should
include well-landscaped, inviting, and people-oriented space within
budgetary constraints and site limitations.

h. Regional Character. Buildings should reflect the architectural character of the
locale. Local building ordinances and zoning practices should generally be
followed. Consistent with applicable Federal procurement requirements, the
use of materials and products indigenous to the locale of the project should
be given preference.

2. Safety, Health, and Security
HHS buildings shall provide an environment that is safe and healthful for
occupants, and that offers them maximum protection during emergencies or
disasters. HHS buildings shall comply and/or exceed international, national, local
codes to the extent possible in supporting the mission.
a. Structural Adequacy. Design of buildings shall be adequate for the functions
to be performed and the seismic, wind, snow, and other loads imposed by
building equipment, occupants, and their activities.
b. Protection against disaster. Design shall consider exposure to fire, earthquake,
or other natural disaster, and shall provide required egress and refuge for all
people, including the disabled, in an emergency. For additional guidance on
Climate Change see Section 10.2 Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning
</about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/safety-environmental-management/index.html#10-
2>.
c. Resilience against Climate Change. Design should address exposure to climate
change vulnerabilities: extreme heat, extreme weather, drought, flooding, and
wildfire. See Section 10.2 Climate Adaptation and Resilience Planning
</about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/safety-environmental-management/index.html#10-
2>.
d. Security. See Section 8.5 Facility Security Design Considerations.
e. Accident Prevention Design. Design shall be the result of safety analyses and
shall address unsafe conditions that cause injury, illness, or property damage.
f. Health Hazards. Materials and products with known or suspected properties
that are hazardous to the health of occupants and installers shall be avoided.
Only materials that are lead and asbestos free shall be used in HHS buildings.
This includes materials such as paint, adhesives, sealers, sealants, floor tiles,
etc.

g. Repair, Renovation, and Alterations. Design shall be accomplished to reduce
or eliminate hazardous exposure through astute selection and use of
materials and methods. Prior to any renovation or demolition project, the
design should identify any existing building hazardous to include asbestos or
lead, etc. (See Sub-Section 10.1.3.2 Environment </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-
manual/safety-environmental-management/index.html#10-1-3-2>). If lead or asbestos
containing materials is present, the contractor shall be required to submit
relevant management and abatement plans as part of their proposal for the
OPDIV's approval and send notification letters to the State regarding asbestos
removal prior to initiating work.

3. Economy
HHS buildings shall be designed at the most reasonable cost in terms of
combined initial and long-term expenditures, without compromising other
project requirements.
a. Site Adaptation. In many, if not most instances, a site has already been
selected before design begins; however, OPDIV design professionals should,
where possible, have a part in the selection. The design of the building shall
be sited economically and efficiently.
b. Efficient Utilization. The ratio of usable to gross area should be as high as
possible (without wasted space) consistent with program objectives as stated
in the POR. The design shall comply with the HHS Space Utilization Rate (U/R)
Guidelines per Section 5.8 Utilization Targets for Administrative Space
</about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/project-planning/index.html#5-8>.
c. Economical Materials. Materials, products, and systems of proven
dependability shall be used in the design or alteration of buildings. Materials
shall be as economical as possible, in terms of combined initial and long-term
cost and consistent with program objectives. To the extent possible, standard
commercially available products shall be used.
d. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis. LCC shall be performed on all projects as
required by
for capital assets. The analysis shall consider the
overall estimated costs of each program alternative over the life of. program.
In assessing LCC the assumed life of a new facility shall be 50 years. In
addition, during design value engineering shall be done to determine the
most cost effective, long-term solutions for the selected program alternative.
See Section 8.7 Value Engineering Agreements. Note that LCC/ Economic
Analysis, such as USACE ECONPACK, is required for FPAA approval </about/hhs-
manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/project-planning/index.html#5-2 %09%09>.
e. Maintenance, Operation, Repair, and Replacement Costs. Buildings shall be
designed, and materials selected, to minimize the cost of maintenance and
repair.
OMB Circular A-11 [PDF, 16.67 MB] <https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2018/06/a11.pdf>

f. Foster Maximum Competition. Buildings shall be designed and building
materials, components, and systems incorporated into the design to foster
maximum competition among suppliers and contractors.
g. Project Administration. Projects shall be planned and scheduled to ensure
effective and efficient design.
4. Compliance with Codes and Standards
In accordance with 40 U.S.C. 3312 each HHS building shall be constructed or
altered, to the maximum extent feasible, in compliance with one of the nationally
recognized model building codes and with other nationally recognized codes
including mechanical and electrical codes, fire and life safety codes, and
plumbing codes. Due consideration shall be given to all State and local zoning
laws as if the project were not being constructed or altered by a Federal agency.
The Government and its contractors shall not be liable for the cost of issuing
permits or performing inspections. The Contracting Officer shall insert a clause in
every design and construction contract solicitation notifying prospective
contractors of the statutory provisions of 40 U.S.C. 3312 (f) and (g).
8.5 Facility Security Design
Considerations
8.5.1 Policy
By Executive Order 12977 <https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/1995/10/24/95-
26497/interagency-security-committee>, dated October 19, 1995, established the Interagency
Security Committee (ISC) responsible for developing policies and guidelines to
standardize security at federal facilities. Accordingly, the ISC publication, "The Risk
Management Process (RMP) for Federal Facilities, An ISC Committee Standard" and
associated appendices provide governing policies, guidelines, and a framework for
organizations to properly implement security programs driven by an iterative risk
assessment process. ISC Standards apply at all government-owned, leased, or
managed facilities; or those to be constructed, modernized, or purchased. EO 12977

was amended by EO 13286 <https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2003/03/05/03-
5343/amendment-of-executive-orders-and-other-actions-in-connection-with-the-transfer-of-certain-
functions>, dated on February 28, 2003.
The HHS Physical Security Policy (PSP), latest publication, is the primary governing
HHS policy document for establishment of an ISC compliant physical security
program. Accordingly, the HHS PSP outlines and guides security applications in
facility centric programs and project management. Consistent with the HHS PSP, all
HHS facility programs/projects shall be planned, designed, and/or constructed
(includes modernization) in accordance with the current issuance of the ISC RMP
Standard.

1. Procedures
a. Consult with PSEMS </about/agencies/asa/psc/physical-security-emergency-
management/index.html>, or the designated Security Organization during the
initial planning stages of a facility project and throughout the process.
PSEMS/the Security Organization shall be part of all project review boards
and/or committees.
b. Consult with the local Facility Security Committee (FSC) (for multi-tenant
facilities – HHS, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Social Security
administration (SSA) etc.) and/or Designated Official (DO) (for single tenant
facilities – HHS only). The FSC/DO are the approving authorities for any
security related decisions, including implementation of countermeasures
(CM) and security risk acceptance that may be associated with a project.

c. The FSC, DO, PSEMS, and/or designated Security Organization will review the
most current Facility Security Assessment (FSA)/Facility Security Level (FSL) to
determine what if any security impacts, or risks are associated with a given
program or project.
i. An FSA and FSL must be current within 3 years for FSL Level III, IV, and V
facilities; and within 5 years for FSL Level I and II facilities. If a current
FSA/FSL documentation is unavailable, then contact PSEMS, or the
Designated Security Organization for assistance. A new FSA/FSL
determination process will be needed in these instances. Even when there
is existing FSA/FSL documentation, it still needs to be reviewed and/or
revised based upon the proposed changes to mission, tenant, locations, or
other similar factors.
ii. The FSL considers five factors: mission criticality (importance of the site to
HHS mission), symbolism (site target attractiveness to a potential
adversary), facility population (changes in occupancy), facility size
(changes in government rentable square footage), and threat to tenant
agencies (local crime statistics and adversarial tenant relationship with
the public). Additionally, considerations are given to intangible factors
such as short duration of occupancy, reduced asset value/reduced
consequence, and costs associated with reconstitution of the facility when
determining what if any security risks are acceptable.
iii. The facility tenants have the decision authority to approve the FSA/FSL,
decide implementation of security CM, and or accept security risks
associated with a facility project. Specifically, these decisions are made by
"designated tenants" through the formal FSC voting process (in multi-
tenant facilities), or by the DO, or designated representative in a single
tenant facility (see HHS PSP section VIII).
iv. The FSA/FSL includes risk assessment documentation, which annotates
the necessary level of protection and associated CMs that must be
implemented based on the outputs of the FSL determination and risk
assessment.

d. If the Necessary Levels of Protection (NLOP) cannot be achieved due to time,
cost (cost prohibitive or non-cost effective), or other constraints or limitation,
the FSC/DO must determine the Highest Achievable Level of Protection. This
mitigation or risk acceptance process can only be approved by the tenants
(FSC/DO), in consultation with PSEMS, and/or the designated Security
Organization.
e. For new construction, PSEMS, or the designated Security Organization
determines the preliminary FSL, conducts an initial risk assessment, and
provides CMs recommendations to the FSC/DO and/or project team for
approval. The FSC/Project Team approves the CMs recommendation.
f. For existing facilities, a periodic risk assessment is conducted by PSEMS, or
the designated Security Organization and CMs recommendations are
approved by the FSC/DO. An implementation plan is developed by the
FSC/DO in consultation with PSEMS, or the Security Organization, and when
the NLOP/CM cannot be achieved, an interim and/or long-term plan to achieve
the NLOP is established and documented. This begins the process of
programing future project funds and/or incorporating security upgrades to
future modernizations/renovations.
g. During modernizations, or renovations, previously "not achievable" CM may
now be achievable and need to be considered. The ISC RMP is applied in the
planning and prospectus development phase. Any addition, or extension
must comply with ISC RMP Standard. The FSC/DO in consultation with PSEMS,
or the designated Security Organization determines if the CM are to be
implemented, or risk accepted. If an addition to an existing building is 50% of
the structure on a GSF basis, then the entire RMP/FSL/FSA will be re-
examined.

8.6 Partnering
8.6.1 Policy
The purpose of this section is to encourage "Partnering" as a best practice on HHS
construction projects for federally owned real property assets. Each OPDIV shall
consider developing and implementing a partnering procedure for all new and
renovated facilities that meet or exceed the Capital Investment Review Board (CIRB)
thresholds identified in Section 3.3.2.1 Approval Thresholds </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-
facilities-manual/real-property-planning/index.html#3-3-2-1>.
Partnering is designed to create an agreement between the Government and
Contractor to work cooperatively as a team, to identify and resolve problems and to
achieve mutually beneficial performance and result goals. The expected benefits are
achievement of contract goals, lower contract administrative costs, improved
problem solving, and fewer conflicts. Participants in the Partnering process must
include the Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer Representative, designer
(Architect/Engineer), and contractor; but may also include end user(s), upper
management, consultants, and major subcontractors.
Partnering Agreement(s) must be consistent with all applicable FAR requirements
and the controlling Government contract. Partnership agreement(s) do not waive the
Government's or the Contractor's responsibilities under "contract disputes"
provision and process required by FAR 33.2 and the HSAR, Subpart 333.2.

1. Procedures
a. Partnering
The Partnering process shall be clearly defined in the solicitation for offers
that advertise for the procurement of the Project. This process is based upon
the expectation of a mutual commitment between Government and industry
to work cooperatively as a team to identify and resolve problems and to
facilitate successful contract performance. The process is designed to be
mutually beneficial, providing the OPDIV with quality services, on time and at
a reasonable price, while allowing the contractor to operate efficiently and
earn a fair profit.
Partnering requires the parties to formulate actions that promote common
goals and objectives. The relationship is based upon open and continuous
communication, mutual trust and respect, and the replacement of the "us
versus them" mentality with a "win-win" philosophy. Partnering also
promotes synergy, creative thinking, pride in performance, and a shared
vision for success.
Partnering agreements represent a willingness and a commitment to resolve
differences in a structured and constructive manner.
Although formal Partnering is most effective for large construction
procurements, the same philosophy and process can be applied successfully
on a smaller scale by the OPDIVs.

b. The Four Phases of Partnering
The four phases of partnering are:
i. Communicating with Industry. The solicitation will contain a clause
informing offerors of the Government's requirement to use partnering on
the contract.
ii. Making the Commitment to Partner. This requires willingness and
support of senior management to empower participants with the required
responsibility and authority to make binding decisions. OPDIV Senior
Managers should lead the partnering process by reinforcing the team
approach to contract administration, breaking down barriers, actively
participating in the resolution of issues escalated to their level, and
championing the process. There is an initial investment of participant time
to make the process work, as well as some cost in conducting the initial
workshop.

iii. Conducting the Workshop and Developing the Partnering Agreement.
The purpose of the workshop is to build a Contractor/Government team
and create momentum that will drive the partners toward successful
accomplishment of mutual goals and objectives throughout the contract
term. Recommended elements of the initial Partnering Workshop include:
1. Introduce the partnering concept – share experiences, concerns, etc.
2. Build relationships - Team building exercise.
3. Set team Goals - What are we jointly trying to achieve through a
partnering agreement?
4. Establish accountability - How will we accomplish this?
5. Establish an evaluation process - What are the issues involved in
helping us to realize our goals? What metrics can we track to tell us if
the contract is effective, and our goals are being met?
6. Establish the process to resolve conflicts - How will we resolve disputes
to avoid hurting each other?
7. What are the specific kinds of disputes that we can think of now?
8. Develop a conflict escalation procedure.
9. Put it in writing - Develop the Partnering Agreement, signed by all key
contractors and contract administration personnel.
All future working meetings are conducted and guided by the
principles and procedures established during the workshop and
incorporated in the drafting of the initial Partnering Agreement.
iv. Making it Happen. After development of the Partnering Agreement, it is
critical that all actions taken are consistent with the Partnering Agreement
objectives. At the periodic progress meetings, checks can be made to
gauge how everyone feels about the value of the partnering agreement. If
necessary, a follow up workshop may be held to refocus the team on the
process and educate new stakeholders.

OPDIVS are encouraged to consult the Construction Industry Institute best practice
on partnering for developing their own partnering model:
and
.
8.7 Value Engineering Agreements
8.7.1 Policy
This section describes HHS guidance and information for value engineering (VE) in
Architectural/Engineering (A/E) and construction contracts for federally owned HHS
real property assets. VE is recommended for projects where the construction cost is
$1 million or greater. (See OMB circular
along with amended reporting requirements in
2013.) HHS recommends
an independent VE analysis by specialized consultant or Government personnel for
projects with a total project cost of $10 million or more.
Each OPDIV facilities office that performs technical management of A/E and
construction contracts is recommended to designate a value engineering coordinator
(VEC) to coordinate the OPDIV's VE activities. The VEC with formal Society of
American Value Engineering (SAVE) approved training in value engineering is
recommended. It is recommended the Contracting Officer, in consultation with the
VEC, to determine which contracts are subject to VE and for accepting or rejecting VE
proposals.
SP17-1 In Search of
Partnering Excellence RS 102-1 Model for Partnering <https://www.construction-
institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-practices/partnering/topics/rt-018/pubs/sp17-1> IR102-
2 Partnering Toolkit <https://www.construction-institute.org/resources/knowledgebase/best-
practices/partnering/topics/rt-102/pubs/ir102-2>
A-131 [PDF, 342 KB]
<https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/a131/a131-
122013.pdf> December [PDF]
<https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/fr-2018-03-06/pdf/2018-04445.pdf>

1. Value Engineering in Design Contracts
a. General – Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 48 requires the
Contracting Officer to include a VE clause in solicitations and contracts for A/E
services whenever the Government requires and pays for a specific VE effort in
A/E contracts.
b. Projects Requiring HHS Capital Investment Review Board Approval per 3.3.2.1
Approval Thresholds </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/real-property-
planning/index.html#3-3-2-1> – OPDIVs may obtain independent VE analysis from
specialized consultant or Government personnel. The specialized consultant
must be an independent party from the project A/E.
c. Projects with a construction cost of $1 million or up to the Division Approval
per 3.3.2.1 Approval Thresholds </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/real-
property-planning/index.html#3-3-2-1> – OPDIVs may accomplish value engineering
through the A/E contractor, a specialized independent consultant, or
Government personnel at the discretion of the VEC and the Contracting
Officer.
d. Sustainable Design Features – Integration of sustainable design features into
construction projects is mandated by law, regulation, executive order, and
policy. Specific goals are established in planning and early design phases of
every project. Many sustainability goals have benefits in that they reduce
external environmental impacts without providing direct benefit to the
project in terms of cost or performance. When sustainable design features are
being evaluated during the VE process, it is recommended OPDIVs take into
consideration these benefits in addition to all costs including but not limited
to direct/indirect, design and maintenance costs, etc., overall project budget
limitations, durability and performance considerations and their integration
throughout the overall design.

e. Regardless of who performs VE, the value engineering analysis is
recommended be done at the end of schematic design phase or no later than
the midpoint of the design development phase. In addition, it is
recommended the VE team include a certified value specialist team leader and
A/E professionals with VE training and experience.
i. When projects meet the thresholds for VE, it is recommended the VEC
proceed with the following:
1. In conjunction with the Contracting Officer, determine the scope of VE
analysis to be undertaken, considering the size and type of the project,
and document to the contracting file.
2. If being accomplished by Government personnel, it is recommended to
the appoint a VE team that consist of members with expertise in the
areas or disciplines to be reviewed for the project.
3. Upon completion of analysis, it is recommended to file a VE report.
4. It is recommended to maintain copies of VE proposals and supporting
documentation in the contracting file.

ii. The following information is recommended to be included in each Value
Engineering Proposal (VEP) whether done by the A/E, specialized
consultant, or Government personnel:
1. Description and Comparison – A description of the difference between
the existing and proposed design, the comparative advantages and
disadvantages of each, a justification when an item's function is being
altered, the effect of the change on system or facility performance, and
any pertinent objective test data. This may include but is not limited to
sketches, calculations, models, etc.
2. Specifications – A list and analysis of design criteria or specifications
that must be changed if the VEP is accepted.
3. Project Cost Impact – A separate detailed estimate of the impact on
project cost of each VEP, if accepted and implemented by the
Government.
4. Implementation Costs – A description and estimate of costs the
Government may incur in implementing the VEP, such as design
change cost and test and evaluation cost.
5. Life Cycle Costs – A prediction of any effects the proposed changes may
have on life cycle cost. Cost comparisons shall assume a 50-year
building life.
6. Benefit Analysis – A description of the impact of each VEP on the
Department's ability to perform its mission.
7. Sustainable Design Impact – A description of the impact on sustainable
design features, established sustainability goals, or third-party
certification.
8. Schedule Impact – The effect the VEP will have on design or
construction schedules.

2. Value Engineering in Construction Contracts
a. General – FAR Part 48 requires the contracting officer to include a VE clause in
construction solicitations and contracts when the contract amount is
estimated to be above the simplified acquisition threshold ($250,000), unless
an incentive contract is contemplated, or the agency has granted an
exemption. The Contracting Officer may include a VE clause in construction
contracts of lesser value if the Contracting Officer sees the potential for
significant savings.
b. Sustainable Design Features – Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECPs)
that negatively impact sustainable design features needed to comply with
EISA 2007 shall not be permitted unless they incorporate alternate provisions
that achieve established sustainability goals and third-party certifications.
i. Sustainability goals may have benefits in that they reduce external
environmental impacts without providing direct benefit to the project in
terms of cost or performance.
ii. At a minimum each VECP submission from the contractor shall include the
documentation required under FAR Part 48.
iii. The OPDIV will review and objectively evaluate each VECP and document
the contract file with the rationale for acceptance or rejection of the VECP.
If a VECP is accepted, the Government and the contractor shall share the
savings, as prescribed in FAR Part 48.
iv. Each OPDIV is responsible for establishing guidelines for processing VECPs
consistent with FAR Part 48 requirements.
3. Payment for VE Services
The payment for VE services performed by non-governmental employees is can
be used an authorized expense of project design funds. These services must be
separately priced in the A/E contract and are not included in the six percent fee
limitation for the A/E design services. VE services will be quantified in terms of
"level of effort" rather than as a deliverable.

4. References
Below is a list of the primary Federal regulations governing value engineering for
HHS projects:
a.
, Value
Engineering
b. FAR, Part 48 and Part 52.248
c. 10 CFR 436 subpart A – Life Cycle Cost methods and criteria contained in the
Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) rules.
8.8 Commissioning Agreements
8.8.1 Policy
This section describes the HHS policy and procedures for commissioning major
renovation and construction projects for federally owned real property assets. Each
OPDIV will develop, implement, and maintain a commissioning process for all new
and renovated facilities that meet or exceed the Capital Investment Review Board
(CIRB) threshold as outlined in 3 Real Property Planning – Owned </about/hhs-
manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/real-property-planning/index.html>. In developing the
commissioning process, OPDIVs shall utilize commissioning practices tailored to the
size and complexity of the building and its systems.
Commissioning is the process of making sure all building systems are installed
properly before occupants move in and serves to accomplish the following goals:
Reduce the number of deficiencies at completion.
Ensure systems are efficient, cost effective, and meet the user's operational
needs;
Lower utility costs attributable to efficiently operating systems.
Lower maintenance costs due to properly trained maintenance staff;
OMB Circular A-131 [PDF, 342 KB] <https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/a131/a131-122013.pdf>

Increase productivity of the building occupants because of properly balanced
ventilation systems;
Ensure a design for maintainability concept;
Reduce outages and down times due to better diagnosis of failures;
Provide well-documented and successful system tests;
Ensure all building systems perform in accordance with the design requirements.
Bridge the gap between design and functionality for HVAC and control design;
Bridge the gap between testing and balancing and Building Automation System
(BAS) design and functionality; and
Assist in achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) or
Green Globe certification.
Retro-commissioning, re-commissioning, and continuous commissioning for existing
facilities are addressed in 6 Facility Management, Operations, and Maintenance
</about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/facility-management-operations-maintenance/index.html>.

1. Procedures
a. Each OPDIV will develop a commissioning process utilizing industry wide
standards such as ASHRAE Guideline 0-2005, "The Commissioning Process."
The process should include an experienced commissioning provider that is
government selected independent 3 party entity, commissioning
requirements in the construction documents, a commissioning plan,
verification of the installation and performance of systems to be
commissioned, and a commissioning report. Commissioning should begin in
the early programming phases of the project and extend through the end of
the warranty phase for the facility.
.
b. Each OPDIV will develop a plan to implement the commissioning process. The
implementation will include staff training to ensure a clear understanding of
the process. Commissioning requirements will apply to any applicable project
with a design start date after the implementation of the OPDIV's
Commissioning process.
c. The OPDIV will continue to maintain the process by:
i. Ensuring that appropriate funding is requested within each project
budget;
ii. Reviewing the projects and process to determine if the aforementioned
goals are being met; and by
iii. Updating the process to ensure continual improvements.
d. OPDIVS should use their Subject Matter Experts, knowledge of each facility
and industry standards available to develop their commissioning process.
This document is general in nature and not to be considered a manual to
develop a commissioning process.
rd
The final version can be purchased at the
ASHRAE website <https://webstore.ansi.org/standards/ashrae/ashraeguideline2005>

Commissioning functions as an advocacy service to the OPDIVS. Rigorous operational
testing provides a high level of assurance that building systems are properly installed
and will operate within performance guidelines set forth in the design documents.
1. Quality Assurance for Building Systems

2. Commissioning affords the owner an unbiased expert's perspective of a building's
system installation, operation, and performance and provides for monitoring of
specified building system service training events. The commissioning process
does not alter the responsibilities of design professionals, installing contractors
or their vendors, but rather augments the efforts of all parties toward the
common goal of achieving a quality-building product. It promotes the delivery of
a safe, healthy environment for building occupants by turning over functionally
tested building systems with appropriate documentation and training for owners
and operators. Commissioning, with its quality management focus, should be
part of the project from its inception because an early start provides maximum
benefits. Commissioning bridges the gaps between the government, the design
team, the construction team and building system vendors using a methodical
process by:
a. Identifying and documenting the needs and the requirements of the facility to
ensure that the designed systems are efficient, cost effective and
commensurate with the identified needs;
b. Thorough review of design and submittal documents;
c. Ensuring that the systems installed are operable and maintainable;
d. Functional performance testing of the systems to ensure that they are
interacting and performing optimally;
e. Progress and coordination meeting attendance;
f. Resolution tracking forms;
g. System verification checks;
h. Start-up and operator involvement for HVAC equipment;
i. O&M and as-built documentation corroboration;
j. Specified factory service and off-season mode testing enforcement;
k. O&M training facilitation and recording;

l. Ensuring that the design intent, the installations and the O&M requirements
are clearly and thoroughly documented;
m. Training of the operators and the facility staff to ensure they operate and
maintain the facility per the design intent; and by
n. Integration of subsystems.

3. Functions and Responsibilities of the Commissioning Agent
The methodology for carrying out a comprehensive commissioning process is
organized by project phase: pre-design, design, construction, acceptance, and
finally post-acceptance. The functions and responsibility of the Commissioning
Agent during each phase shall include:
a. Share Information - The primary responsibility is to inform the General
Contractor (Construction Manager), the Government and A/E on the status,
integration, and performance of systems within the facility. The
Commissioning Agent shall function as a catalyst and initiator to disseminate
information and assist the design and construction teams in the completion of
the construction process. This shall include system completeness,
performance, and adequacy to meet the intended performance of each
system. Services include construction surveillance, spot testing, verification,
and functional performance testing, and providing performance and
operating information to the responsible parties.
b. Quality assurance - Assist the responsible parties in maintaining a high-
quality level of installation and system performance.
c. Observation of testing - The Commissioning Agent shall observe, and
coordinate testing as required to ensure system performance meets the
design intent. The construction contractor performs testing required by the
contract to ensure that the facility meets or exceeds the contract
requirements. The Commissioning Agent doesn't coordinate the construction
contractor's work but does verify required systems and component testing
has been performed by the construction contractor.
d. Documentation of tests - The Commissioning Agent shall document the
results of the performance testing directly or ensure that the appropriate
technicians document all testing. The Commissioning Agent shall provide
standard forms to be used by all parties for consistency of approach and type
of information to be recorded.

e. Technical Expertise - The Commissioning Agent shall provide technical
expertise to review and edit operating and maintenance descriptions for each
system.
f. Deficiencies - The Commissioning Agent shall provide technical expertise to
oversee and verify the correction of deficiencies found during the
commissioning process.
g. Acceptance - The Commissioning Agent shall work with and advise the
Construction Manager, government, and A/E concerning the date of
acceptance for each system for the start of the warranty period (if different
than the overall Beneficial Occupancy Date).

4. Commissioning Phases
Suggested objectives for each commissioning phase are outlined below.
a. Program & Pre-Design commissioning phase
i. Document initial design intent
ii. Develop commissioning plan
iii. Document requirements as specified in Owner's program
iv. Select commissioning Agent
b. Design Commissioning Phase
i. Ensure clear design intent documents are developed
ii. Develop commissioning plan & specifications, functional performance
test, and integrated system testing that is reviewed and accepted by A/E
firm and the Government
iii. Coordinate building systems with HVAC equipment & systems
c. Construction Commissioning Phase
i. Verify system/equipment start-up and operation
ii. Verify building management controls
iii. Verify Testing Adjusting & Balancing report
iv. Document all tests, observations, and issues
v. Verify system installation
vi. Verify installed equipment is maintained in accordance with O&M while
project is under construction and prior to final acceptance
vii. Coordinate as-built drawings
viii. Coordinate O&M training

d. Acceptance Commissioning Phase
i. Enforcement of Warranty
ii. Verify functional testing of all systems
iii. Verify all systems comply with contract documents
iv. Verify accuracy of final Testing, adjusting & balancing (TA&B) report
v. Conduct O&M training
vi. Complete systems manual
vii. Complete training program
viii. Endurance Testing - applicable for critical occupancies and complex
buildings such as Current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP), BSL-3,
BSL-4 Data centers and other areas directed by the government. During
this phase the equipment is running continuously, and the facility is used
as intended for a set period of time and it's monitored and trended to
observe all systems are running per design intent.
ix. Review and verify the contractor's commissioning related as-built
documents
e. Post Acceptance Commissioning Phase
Shall be done before the warranties expire
i. Continued adjustment, optimization of the building systems
ii. Maintain performance of the systems per the contract requirements
iii. Revision of as-built records
iv. Testing, adjusting & balancing of affected systems

5. The Commissioning Report
The commissioning report will generally consist of the following:
a. Detailed narrative of commissioning results.
b. Verification checklist data sheets.
c. Functional performance test data records.
d. System operation description and final design intent.
e. As built drawings/ shop drawings.
f. Final updated operation & maintenance manuals.
g. Training documents.
These records will be beneficial to the owner for as long as the building serves
its occupants. The records are helpful to the maintenance personnel that
operate and maintain the equipment. The records would also be helpful to the
OPDIVS should there be any question regarding air quality and working
environment.
8.9 Acceptance and Occupancy
8.9.1 Policy
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to facilitate transitioning from the
construction phase of a project to beneficial use and operations by the user. Areas of
particular significance to effective facility activation include inspection and
acceptance, warranties, training, documentation in operations and maintenance
manuals, and occupancy.
1. HHS activities shall normally take beneficial occupancy or use after a project is
substantial completion. Potential risks shall be carefully considered when
deciding whether to occupy or utilize a portion of a construction project prior to
substantial completion of the entire project.

2. HHS activities shall ensure that an effective management program is in place to
enforce the warranty provision of the contract for the benefit of the government.

1. Procedures
a. Safety Data Sheets (SDS)
SDS shall be required from the contractor in a separate binder. A SDS is
designed to provide both workers and emergency personnel with procedures
for handling or working with a particular substance. SDS's include information
such as physical data (melting point, boiling point, flash point etc.) toxicity,
health effects, first aid, reactivity, storage, disposal, protective equipment,
and spill/leak procedures. These are of particular use if a spill or other
accident occurs.

b. Inspection and Acceptance
Contractors and Lessors are required to maintain adequate quality control
systems and perform inspections to ensure that all work conforms to contract
requirements. The Contractor and/or Lessor all should maintain complete
inspection records and provide them to the Government. All work shall be
conducted under the general direction of the Contracting Officer and is
subject to Government inspection and test before acceptance to ensure
compliance with the terms of the contract. Government inspections and tests
are for the sole benefit of the Government. They do not; relieve the
Contractor and/or Lessor of responsibility for providing adequate quality
control measures; of being responsibility for damage to or loss of the material
before acceptance; constitute or imply acceptance; or affect the continuing
rights of the Government after acceptance of the completed work under the
contract.
OPDIVS are encouraged to have one or more full-time Government inspectors
on large and complex construction or design-build projects. The presence or
absence of a Government inspector does not relieve the Contractor and/or
Lessor from any contract requirement, nor is the inspector authorized to
change any term or condition of the contract without the Contracting Officer's
written authorization.
The Contractor and/or Lessor will, without charge, replace or correct work
found by the Government not to conform to contract requirements, unless in
the public interest the Government consents to accept the non-conforming
work with an appropriate adjustment in contract price. The Contractor and/or
Lessor will promptly remove rejected material from the premises.
If, before acceptance of the entire work, the Government decides to examine
completed work by removing it or tearing it out, the Contractor and/or Lessor,
on request, shall promptly furnish all necessary facilities, labor, and material
to support this effort. If the work is found to be defective or nonconforming in
any material respect due to the fault of the Contractor and/or Lessor or its
subcontractors, the Contractor and/or Lessor shall defray the expenses of the

examination and of satisfactory reconstruction. However, if the work is found
to meet contract requirements, the Contracting Officer shall make an
equitable adjustment for the additional services involved in the examination
and reconstruction, including, if completion of the work was thereby delayed,
an extension of time.
The Government shall accept, as promptly as practicable after completion and
inspection, all work required by the contract that the Government determines
meets contract requirements or that portion of the work the Contracting
Officer determines can be accepted separately. Acceptance by the Contracting
Officer shall be final and conclusive except for latent defects, fraud, gross
mistakes amounting to fraud, or the Government's rights under any warranty
or guarantee.

c. Warranties
i. Basic Warranties - It is in the best interest of the Government to have the
entire construction project warranted. OPDIV Contracting Officers shall
insert in full text FAR Clause 52.246-21, Warranty of Construction, into
construction contracts as well as design-build contracts. This clause
provides for the following: The contractor, whether a construction
contractor or a design- build contractor, essentially warrants that work
performed under their contract conforms to the contract requirements
and is free of any defect in equipment, material, or design furnished, or
workmanship performed by the Contractor or any subcontractor or
supplier at any tier. The standard warranty period extends usually for one
year from the date of final acceptance of the work. Contractors shall
provide warranties in a separate binder with points of contact names,
addresses, and all applicable phone and fax numbers.
ii. Adjustments of Basic Warranty/ Guarantee Period - The contractor may
request an adjustment in a warranty period based on completion of the
work and use of the equipment and/or system by the Government.
Systems that are utilized on a seasonal basis must be tested and used
through a complete annual load cycle. For example, if the final inspection
were held in the fall, the air conditioning system would not be properly
tested under full load until the following air conditioning season. The
contractually specified warranty period does not apply to latent defects.
The timeframes in which remedies for latent defects are possible is usually
much longer than the standard one-year warranty.

iii. Manufacturers', Subcontractors', and Suppliers' Warranties - The
Architect/Engineering (A/E) firm generally specifies product performance
characteristics that result in warranties. In many cases these warranties
are industry standards. All warranties express or implied, from
subcontractors, manufacturers, or suppliers for work performed and
materials furnished are enforceable under the contract. The Contractor is
required to obtain all warranties that would be given in normal
commercial practice; all warranties are to be executed, in writing, for the
benefit of the Government, and all warranties are to be enforced for the
benefit of the Government.
The management of the warranty process should be passed to the
maintenance staff operating the facility along with COR responsibilities.
This group of individuals identifies the actual problem through
troubleshooting processes and determines if it is in fact a warranty issue.
Then appropriate action and follow-up can occur as well as a documented
history. This staff also works with the Contracting Officer to resolve any
items in dispute and provide any necessary technical information to the
Contracting Officer for enforcement of the warranty requirement.

d. Occupancy
i. Normal Occupancy - Generally, the facility is occupied after final
inspection and acceptance.
ii. Beneficial Occupancy - The Government has the right to take possession
of or use any completed or partially completed part of the work. Before
taking possession of or using any work, the Contracting Officer should
furnish the Contractor a list of items of work remaining to be performed or
corrected on those portions of the work that the Government intends to
take possession of or use. However, failure of the Contracting Officer to list
any item of work shall not relieve the Contractor of responsibility for
complying with the terms of the contract. The Government's possession or
use shall not be deemed an acceptance of any work under the contract.
iii. Government Responsibility - When beneficial occupancy is affected prior
to full acceptance, a careful inspection of the area to be occupied should
precede such occupancy. Since the Government would be responsible for
restoration and repair of damage resulting from the beneficial occupancy,
records of conditions in both photographic and narrative form at the time
of occupancy are essential. While the Government has such possession or
use, the Contractor is relieved of the responsibility for the loss of or
damage to the work resulting from the Government's possession or use. If
possession or use by the Government prior to substantial completion of
the entire project delays the progress of the work or causes additional
expense to the Contractor, an equitable adjustment should be made in the
contract price, the time of completion, or both, and the contract should be
modified in writing accordingly.
iv. Occupancy Agreements - The Contracting Officer shall prepare an
appropriate letter to the contractor setting forth the extent of the
occupancy and its effective date and time. Lists of deficiencies and
omissions in the occupied area should be included. In addition, when
partial occupancy is required, an agreement with the contractor must be
executed which delineates facility service responsibilities (maintenance,
utilities, security, etc.).

1. Operation and Maintenance Manuals
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Manuals are essential to the activation and
long-term operations of HHS facilities.Provisions in the construction or design-
build contract should require the development of a consolidated operations and
maintenance manual for the entire facility in both hard copy and electronic soft
copy. A copy of the manual should be kept and maintained by the OPDIV's
facilities management and the operation and maintenance field office. The
manual shall include:
a. A copy of allwarranty's documents (hard and/or electronic copies)
b. As built/Record drawings of project
c. A list of all training requirements, training documents (especially videos) and
a roster of trainees.
d. All information necessary to optimize operations and maintenance of facility
equipment and systems.
e. Specific operational protocols for special and highly sophisticated equipment.
f. Standard operating procedures and parameters.
g. Commissioning results as a baseline for validation and facility performance
expectations.

8.10 Accessibility Requirements for
Persons with Disabilities
8.10.1 Policy
This section sets forth policy and procedures for all HHS – occupied facilities
accessibility requirements and compliance with the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of
1968, 42 USC 4151-4156, also commonly referred to as Public Law 90-480, and as
defined in the Federal Management Regulation (FMR) §102.76.60 through 102.76.95.
The Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) applies to any facility constructed, altered,
leased, or financed with federal funds that is intended for use by the public or may
result in employment of persons with disabilities.
The standard issued under the ABA requires buildings and facilities designed, built,
altered, or leased to be accessible to persons with disabilities. This act is enforced by
the U.S. Access Board and maintains accessibility guidelines under the ABA.
The ABA Guidelines cover new construction and planned alterations and do not apply
to existing facilities except where altered. Existing facilities built or altered according
to earlier versions of the ABA standards will not necessarily have to meet the updated
version except where they are later altered or renovated.
The Board was created and develops guidelines to enforce the ABA and HHS OPDIVs
shall comply with the ABA. The ABA Accessibility Standard (ABAAS) is the GSA's new
accessibility standard under the ABA and replaced the Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards which is available at https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-
standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards <https://www.access-
board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards>

1. Procedures

a. Assessing Compliance
i. All projects shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable standard
during the review of contract drawings and specifications (for all design
phases), and again at the time of the final on- site inspection of the
completed facility.
ii. The review of contract drawings and specifications and/or inspection
during construction at serves the following purposes:
1. It provides assurance that project plans are being reviewed closely for
adherence to prescribed requirements at appropriate design stages.
2. It provides documentation in the project file that the facility meets
mandatory requirements, or that the contract drawings reflect certain
omissions or deviations from the standards.
3. It serves as a guide to take corrective action by the project architect in
instances where the contract drawings do not conform completely to
the standards.
4. Where historic properties may be adversely affected, early consultation
with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation is advisable, to avoid delays in the design
process.
iii. To meet the record keeping responsibilities of FMR §102-76.95, it is
recommended that the applicable portions of the standard be used as a
checklist. A completed copy of the checklist should be placed in the
project file when the design documents are completed and a second
completed checklist when construction is completed. A notation in the left
margin of "Y" (yes), "N" (no) or "NA" (not applicable) opposite each item in
the checklist is sufficient.
iv. If Historic Properties may be affected, then see 9 Historic and
Archeological Preservation </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/historic-
archeological-preservation/index.html>.

b. Exceptions
i. Exceptions for specific facilities as defined in FMR §102-76.60 are:
1. Privately owned residential facilities unless leased by the Government
for subsidized housing programs, and
2. Any facility on a military reservation designed and constructed
primarily for use by able- bodied military personnel.
ii. Exceptions when the costs of alterations to meet accessibility are
disproportionate to the costs of the overall alterations are defined in FMR
§102-76.70 through 102-76.85. Documentation shall be maintained in the
project file demonstrating the basis of the disproportionate costs and the
extent to which the standard is incorporated into the project.
c. Waivers
i. HHS and its OPDIVS cannot grant waivers to the requirements. The
Administrator of General Services has the authority to waive or modify the
standards in FMR § 102–76.65(a) on a case-by- case basis if the agency
head submits a request for waiver or modification and the Administrator
determines that the waiver or modification is clearly necessary.
ii. All requests for waivers, supporting documentation, and notification of
final action on requests shall be placed in the project file. Accessibility
requirements cannot be waived in HHS facilities that are accredited by the
Joint Commission.

d. Inaccessibility Concerns on HHS Property
Concerns regarding inaccessible conditions on HHS property received by HHS
OPDIVs from employees or facility users should be resolved at the OPDIV level,
when possible. Questions regarding resolution of the accessibility concern
should be sent to .
Questions regarding inaccessibility received from the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB) will be forwarded to the
appropriate HHS OPDIVs for review and necessary action.
Inaccessibility concerns received by the PSC/RLO/RPMS at the
that require site investigation to determine validity or means of resolution will
be forwarded to the appropriate OPDIV facilities office for investigation and
action. An interim reply will be prepared and sent to the party submitting the
complaint (i.e., the ATBCB or the complainant) by the PSC/RLO/RPPS.
Upon completion of its investigation, the OPDIV facilities office will notify the
ATBCB or complainant, as appropriate, of the results. A copy of final
resolution shall be furnished to the . In cases where remedial
action is required, the facilities office will notify the HHS OPDIV official
responsible for operating or funding the facility of any standards violation,
and any necessary remedial action.
PSC mailbox
PSC mailbox
PSC mailbox

1. Guidance
a. The Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968, 42 USC 4151 – 4156, establishes
accessibility requirements for facilities designed, built, altered or leased with
Federal funds.
b. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 2010, establishes accessibility
requirements for employment, public services, public accommodations, and
telecommunications. The Act does not directly cover Federal or federally
funded facilities, which remain under the Architectural Barriers Act (ABA). Per
§102-76.60, the ABA does not apply to any privately owned residential facility
unless leased by the Government for subsidized housing programs.
c. 42 USC 4152 of the Architectural Barriers Act authorizes the Administrator of
the General Services Administration (GSA), in consultation with the Secretary
of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), to prescribe
standards for the design, construction and alteration of buildings (other than
residential structures, Department of Defense (DOD) and Postal facilities) to
ensure accessibility by persons with disabilities.
d. The U.S. Access Board issued the guidelines for both the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) and Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) requirements as the
combined document, "The ADA and ABA Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings
and Facilities" June 23, 2004. The guidelines issued by the U.S. Access Board
are not legally enforceable but serve as baselines for meeting ADA and ABA
accessibility requirements. Under the ABA, the "Uniform Federal Accessibility
Standards" remained the applicable standard until GSA (along with DOD,
HUD, and United States Postal Service (USPS)) issued new enforceable
standards based on the U.S. Access Board's guidelines. With respect to the
ADA, the guidelines issued by Department of Justice (DOJ) in 1991 remain the
applicable enforceable standard.

e. GSA issued the FMR §102-76 Design and Construction
<https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-41/subtitle-c/chapter-102/subchapter-c/part-102-76>
onNovember 8, 2005 containing the updated standard in Subpart C,
Architectural Barriers Act effective May 8, 2006.
2. Resources
a. The Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968 <https://www.access-board.gov/the-
board/laws/architectural-barriers-act-aba>
b. GSA FMR Subpart C - Architectural Barriers Act §102-76.60
<https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/regulations/federal-management-regulation-
fmr/i445613#idtopicx2x71439>
c. ADA Standards <https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-
sites/about-the-ada-standards>
d. Federal Government Resources <https://www.access-board.gov/guidance.html>
e. ADA 2010 Standards <https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-standards/2010-stds/>
f. Guidance on ADA 2010 Standards <https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/design-
standards/standards-guidance/>
g.
8.11 Architectural Barriers Compliance
8.11.1 Policy
Most Federal buildings and certain federally funded buildings are covered by the
Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968. This act is enforced by the Access Board and
requires that covered federally funded buildings and facilities be accessible to
persons with disabilities. The Board was created to enforce the ABA, which it does
through the investigation of complaints.
The Joint Commission <https://www.jointcommission.org/>

1. Procedures
a. Existing Facilities
The ABA Accessibility Standards (ABAAS) have been adopted by the
Department of Defense (2008), the General Services Administration (2005),
and the U.S. Postal Service (2005). ABAS covers new construction and planned
alterations under the control of the agencies that have adopted it and do not
apply to existing facilities except where altered or new construction of
facilities owned by an OPDIV that complies with ABA using an alternative
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standard, such as the Department of
Justice's 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Existing facilities built or
altered according to earlier versions of the ABA or ADA standards will not
necessarily have to meet the updated version except where they are
subsequently altered or renovated.

b. Complaint Handling
i. Complaints of inaccessible conditions received by HHS OPDIVS from
employees or facility users should be resolved at the OPDIV level, when
possible. Otherwise, they may be forwarded to PSC/RLO/RPMS for review
and resolution.
ii. Complaints received from the Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board (ATBCB) shall be forwarded to the appropriate agency
facilities office for review and necessary action.
iii. Complaints received by PSC/RLO/RPMS that require site investigation to
determine validity or means of resolution will be forwarded to the
appropriate OPDIV facilities office for investigation and action. An interim
reply will be prepared and sent by PSC/RLO/RPMS to the party submitting
the complaint (i.e., the ATBCB or the complainant).
iv. Upon completion of its investigation, the OPDIV facilities office will notify
the ATBCB or complainant, as appropriate, of the results. A copy of final
resolution shall be furnished to the PSC mailbox. In cases where remedial
action is required, the facilities office will notify the HHS OPDIV official
responsible for operating or funding the facility of any standards violation,
and any necessary remedial action.
Facilities not constructed with Federal funds, but which house federally conducted
programs and activities, are covered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
(29 USC 794) which is enforced by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). Effective May 8,
2006, the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) were replaced by the
Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) Accessibility Guidelines, codified at 36 C.F.R. Part 1191
(ABA Chapters 1, 2 and 3 through 10) (the ABA Standards and other ADA standards are
available at www.access-board.gov <http://www.access-board.gov/>).
For guidance and information contact reach out to the U.S. Access Board through the
following link <https://www.access-board.gov/contact/>.

8.12 Design Build
8.12.1 Policy
This section establishes Design-Build (D-B) as the procurement methodology that
receives first consideration for all design and construction projects that exceed the
3.3.2.1 Approval Thresholds </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/real-property-
planning/index.html#3-3-2-1> and are federally owned real-property assets throughout the
Department of Health and Human Services. Design-Build is the preferred method for
designing and constructing facilities owned and operated by HHS. Implementation of
Design-Build will help ensure that facilities development within the Department
honors the Department's commitment to completing priority projects with mission-
critical functions. The acquisition of design and construction services for federal
facilities using Design-Build shall follow the policies and procedures in FAR 36.3. Note
that Design-Bid-Build remains the preferred method for laboratory facilities by
several OPDIVs. Laboratories and/or other scientific facilities require complex and
specific designs that may not lend themselves well to Design-Build.
The Real Property Management Service (RPMS), Real Estate, Logistics, and
Operations (RLO), Program Support Center (PSC), Assistant Secretary for
Administration will review any exceptions to this policy as part of the project
approval process (see 3.3.2.3 Building and Facilities Project Types </about/hhs-
manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/real-property-planning/index.html#3-3-2-3>). Exceptions will be
granted for projects contracted under P.L.93-638, Indian Self-Determination and
Education Act, with tribal entities.

1. Procedures

a. Acquisition Planning
During planning of project delivery and contract strategy for all projects,
OPDIVs shall analyze the appropriateness of the Design-Build methodology.
The OPDIV Contracting Officer, in close collaboration with appropriate design
and construction professionals, determines during the budgeting and
planning stage whether it is feasible and effective to use the Design-Build
process. The OPDIVs should base their analyses on a best practice such as the
Construction Industry Institute's Project Delivery and Contract Strategy. The
OPDIVs shall include the acquisition analysis documentation with the Facility
Project Approval Agreement provided to ASA/PSC/RLO/RPMS. While D-B
procurement can save time once the project is awarded, the D-B process
requires more extensive "front-loading" of the project – that is, a more
thorough and rigorous programming effort and a more thorough definition of
requirements. In the planning stages of the project, the D-B process can be
significantly more labor intensive for in-house personnel than the more
traditional project delivery methods (e.g., design-bid-build process).Key
elements in the success of a D-B project include:
i. Development and continual update of a thorough acquisition plan.
ii. Developing comprehensive planning and programming documents based
on preliminary studies and documents
iii. Developing a request for proposal with a balance between performance
specifications and specific technical requirements, where needed, for the
type of facility being built. The level of technical detail included in the
request for proposal will depend upon the complexity of the project and
specific OPDIV requirements for construction. It is critical that request for
proposal doesn't include and shall not use a Design Package such as a D-B
Set, 15%, or any level of design document. If such documents are provided
as part of Request for Proposal at that point you are not using a Design-
Build Strategy. Additionally, the Government will become liable for Design
and Construction. OPDIVs should provide information from pre-planning
activities such as concept or schematic designs, which do not require the
Design-Builder to continue from those designs but are informative (see
section Pre-Project Planning).

iv. Preparing accurate and necessary planning documents that will become
integral to the request for proposal. The project team must secure OPDIV
and high-level buy-in of the programming documents ahead of time,
rather than making changes after award of the D-B contract.
v. Preparing realistic budgets to reduce the likelihood of scope reductions
once the RFP is advertised.
vi. Developing procedures and project controls to minimize owner-generated
changes. Owner generated changes can be particularly problematic during
a D-B project.
vii. Assignment of an integrated project team that can ensure during D-B
selection evaluations that the proposers have met the requirements of the
RFP with sound design and the D-B firm is qualified for the level of work.
The Government has the best opportunity for success by securing a D-B
contractor with a demonstrated track record and collaborative experience
in the type of project being proposed.
viii. Prior to advertising design-build services the OPDIV must ensure that
adequate funds are available to complete the design of the project; that
the Planning and Programming Documents and HHS Facility Project
Approval Agreement documents and statement of work are complete;
evaluation criteria are established and the government estimate is
complete.

1. Guidance on Design-Build Contract Formulation and Procurement
FAR 36.3 prescribes only the acquisition method for two-phase Design-Build
selection procedures and there is no guidance on the required clauses or contract
administration. Design-Build does not waive Federal law or regulations. For
example, the 6 percent fee limitation for basic design services applies and the
Miller Act requiring bonding applies. Refer to the FAR Matrix for the appropriate
provisions and clause under both A/E and construction contracts. It is
recommended that the provisions and clauses be written in full text.
Design-Build can be accomplished through various contract methods. This is not
intended to be an all-inclusive list, nor does HHS endorse a preference, but
provides the following information on the most common methods.
a. "Best Value" is a selection process in which proposals contain both price and
qualitative components, and award is based upon a combination of price and
qualitative considerations. Qualitative can be further subdivided as to
technical design and/or management plan. A qualification-based selection
process can be used in Phase One to determine the competitive range. Those
firms who are the most qualified are invited to submit a proposal in response
to the Phase Two RFP.
b. "Equivalent Design/Low Bid" is a form of best value selection in which
qualitative proposals are followed by a critique rather than scoring. Price
envelopes remained sealed. Each offeror receives the critique of its proposal
and makes design changes and corresponding price amendment. Revised
designs are evaluated for compliance, and then price envelopes, both original
and amended, are opened. Award is based on lowest price because the
proposal creates relative equivalency of designs.
c. "Fixed Price/Best Design" is a form best value selection in which the contract
price is established by the Government and stated in the RFP. Design
proposals and management plans are evaluated and scored, with award going
to the team offering the best qualitative proposal for the established price.

8.13 Design Bid Build
8.13.1 Policy
This section sets forth policies, procedures, and guidance for use of a Design-Bid-
Build (D-B-B) acquisition strategy for federally owned real property assets.
Traditionally, D-B-B acquisitions utilize two or more separate and discrete contracts
to deliver a facility. One contract is for design by an Architect/Engineering (A/E) firm
and another for construction. Under this arrangement there is no privity between the
contracts. The designer who develops the plans and specification (contract
documents) cannot direct or supervise construction. Some project delivery methods
mitigate this disconnect between design and construction with use of CM,
Construction Management Contract (e.g. CM@Risk).
The procurement of architectural-engineering (A/E) services is qualifications based,
in accordance with FAR 36.6 and the requirements of the Brooks Act (40 U.S.C.1101-
1104). The Brooks Act "declares it to be the policy of the Federal Government to
publicly announce all requirements for architectural and engineering services and to
negotiate contracts for architectural and engineering services on the basis of
demonstrated competence and qualification for the type of professional services
required and at fair and reasonable prices". Construction can be procured using
sealed bids in accordance with FAR 36.1 and FAR 36.2. Construction can also be
procured under FAR 36.214 Special Procedures for Price Negotiation in Construction
contracting.

1. Procedures
The following information is provided to assist with the planning and
implementation of Design-Bid- Build projects.
a. Request to Utilize Design Competitions
The OPDIVS shall obtain permission to utilize design competitions from the
Program Support Center under the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Administration ( ).
ASA/PSC

b. Pre-Design Procedures
Prior to advertising design services, the OPDIV must ensure that adequate
funds are available to complete the design of the project; that the Planning
and Programming documents and HHS Facility Project Approval Agreement
and statement of work are complete; evaluation criteria are established, and
the government estimate is complete.
i. Availability and Certification of Design Funds: Designs for new facilities,
replacement facilities, and building additions must be accomplished with
funds appropriated for the specified project. Designs for building
improvement projects must normally be accomplished with specifically
designated funds or with lump sum amounts appropriated for repairs and
improvements. Guidance should be requested from the PSC mailbox in
the event of questions on the appropriateness of proposed design funding
sources. In unusual cases where time is critical, and the
appropriation/apportionment appears to be imminent, it may be
appropriate to advertise for design services before the funds are received.
In such cases, the Contracting Officer should obtain a written statement
from the agency's financial management officer to the effect that
appropriation and apportionment of proper funds is expected within 60
days. Wording should also be included in the announcement to the effect
that the Department expects to receive design funds soon, and that the
award of the A/E contract is subject to the receipt of these funds.
ii. Planning and Programming Documents and HHS Facility Project
Approval Agreement: The planning and programming documents and
HHS Facility Project Approval Agreement (FPAA) define a large portion of
the scope of work and are essential to the A/E selection process.
Therefore, planning and programming documents clearly defining the
project scope and requirements should be approved prior to advertising
the procurement. An HHS Facility Project Approval Agreement must be
approved by the Department prior to awarding a design contract.

iii. Preparation of the A/E Statement of Work: The A/E Statement of Work is
the key document in the actual performance of the work. A well-prepared
statement of work minimizes negotiation problems, eliminates
ambiguities, and assures that the design will satisfy program needs. The
planning and programming documents should be incorporated into the
Statement of Work or attached to the Statement of Work to describe the
project requirements and concept. The Statement of Work should be
tailored to the specific design requirements of each project. Typical areas
covered by the Scope of Work are pre-design services, basic design service
and optional construction contract administration services. Email PSC
mailbox to request a sample Statement of Work.
iv. Evaluation Criteria: In qualification-based selections, the Evaluation
Board establishes criteria to be used in evaluating the A/E firms before
making the public announcement. The criteria for qualification-based
selections shall conform to the Federal evaluation criteria set forth in FAR
36.6. In design competitions the selection of the A/E is based on a
comparison of proposed solutions to planning and programming
documents or the design problem. The evaluation criteria will be listed in
the announcement, in descending order of importance.

v. Government Prepared Estimate of A/E Costs: The rules governing
preparation of the independent government estimate of the cost for
required A/E services are set forth in FAR 36. The estimate shall be
prepared based on a detailed analysis of the required work as though the
Government were submitting a proposal. The estimate must be prepared
prior to publishing to the System for Award Management (SAM.gov)
announcement. The independent government estimate serves two main
purposes:
1. It determines the sufficiency of funds to cover the project as outlined
in the statement of work. If the estimate indicates that the allocated
funds are not sufficient to cover the proposed project, the procuring
agency may modify the statement of work or pursue an authorized
increase in funding.

2. It serves as a guideline to measure the reasonableness of the A/E firm's
fee proposal. Major differences between the government estimate and
the A/E cost proposal, or the scope of services to be furnished, should
be investigated thoroughly. Major differences may indicate that the
statement of work is not clearly defined or communicated. Any
changes that are made in the government estimate or statement of
work must be agreed upon by both the Contracting Officer (CO) and
the technical staff and recorded in the CO's file. The fee estimate for
design shall not exceed six percent (6%) of the estimated cost of
construction, as required by FAR 15.404-4(b)(4)(B)
<https://www.acquisition.gov/far/15.404-4>. Other required services, not related
to design, must be included in the estimate but are not included in the
6% calculation. The maximum fee limitation does not apply to the
following A/E services: preparing planning and programming
documents; feasibility studies; measured drawings of existing facility;
subsurface investigations; structural, electrical, and mechanical
investigation of existing facility; topographic/ boundary/ utilities
surveys; special consultant services; the cost of reproducing drawings
and specifications for bidding and for distribution to prospective
bidders and plan file rooms; reproduction of approved designs
through models, color renderings, photographs, or other presentation
media; travel and per diem allowances; supervision or inspection of
construction, review of shop drawings or samples and other services
performed during the construction phase; and all other services that
are not integrally part of the A/Es design services.

c. Evaluation Boards
The OPDIVS shall establish appropriate evaluation boards to evaluate A/E
qualifications to design HHS facilities.
i. The Evaluation Board for architect-engineer services shall be established
according to FAR 36.602-2. It is recommended that the board include
registered professionals representing relevant architectural and
engineering disciplines. The board could also include members
representing the program users to be housed in the facility, operations
and maintenance, agency planning and other specialized support
functions. The agency official responsible for facilities will establish an Ad
Hoc Evaluation Board for each architect-engineer contract.
ii. Duties of the Chairperson - The Chairperson of the A/E Evaluation Board
for all contracts will assist the OPDIV Facility Manager or designee in
appointing the members of the board. In addition, the Chairperson will
call and preside over as many meetings as he/she deems necessary to
complete the selection process. The Chairperson will also recommend the
assistance of other technical personnel (non-voting technical advisors)
who may make a substantial contribution to the evaluation process. The
Chairperson will also develop the final selection report for approval and
inclusion in the contract file.
iii. Competition Advisor - In the rare event that a design competition is
contemplated the OPDIV shall appoint a Competition Advisor. The
Competition Advisor serves as the sponsoring OPDIV's focal point for the
design competition. The Competition Advisor should be a registered
architect who holds a senior position within OPDIV or HHS. The
Competition Advisor may be hired from the outside if HHS does not have
qualified personnel available for the assignment. The Competition Advisor
will: prepare the Competition Announcement; assist in the preparation of
the Program of Requirements; establish eligibility requirements and
register the competitors; assist in the recruitment of board members;
establish competition security protocols; and establish the presentation
format for the competition.

iv. Design Competition Board - The board should be composed of nationally
recognized registered architects and engineers including senior HHS
design professionals. The board members or their staff are not allowed to
compete for the project. (See Design Competitions when used.)

d. Design-Bid-Build Procedures
i. Public Announcements - The Government shall make a public
announcement of any planned A/E selection. See Paragraphs
Qualification Based Selections for A/E Services and Design Competitions
for additional information.
ii. Evaluation Procedures - A/E firms shall be evaluated and rated to
establish the competitive range. Each evaluation board member shall
review the information submitted by each A/E firm and rate the firms
individually. When the members have finalized their rankings of the firms,
they shall be tabulated and summarized. Contact to request
asample Selection Evaluation Form. From this summary, the firms within
the competitive range are selected for interviews. At least three of the top
firms thus selected shall be notified and scheduled for discussions
(interviews).
iii. Interviews - The evaluation board shall clearly communicate to each firm
the evaluation criteria, time allowed and key A/E personnel that should
attend the interview. Firms should be allowed sufficient time to prepare
for interviews. The topics must stay within the parameters established in
the announced evaluation criteria in the public announcement. At the end
of the interviews, the board members shall rank the interviewed firms
again, using the previously established ranking criteria. With the approval
of the OPDIV Facility Director, telephone interviews may be conducted
with A/E Firms for small projects in accordance with the Short Selection
process described in the FAR.
iv. Selection Report - The selection report shall be prepared by the
Chairperson of the board and signed by the Chairperson and each
member of the board. It shall include a list of the most highly qualified
firms ranked in terms of relative qualifications. This report shall document
the extent of the evaluation and the considerations upon which the
recommendations were based. The report shall be submitted to the
Selecting Official.
PSC mailbox

v. Negotiations - Negotiations shall be conducted with the top-ranked A/E
firm. If a mutually satisfactory contract cannot be negotiated with that
firm, the CO shall obtain a best and final offer, in writing, from the
prospective A/E firm, terminate the negotiations, and so advise the firm.
Negotiations shall then be initiated with the next listed firm in the order of
preference, and this procedure shall continue until a mutually satisfactory
contract has been negotiated. If negotiations fail with all the listed firms,
the selection process shall reconvene. Promptly at the conclusion of any
negotiations, a memorandum setting forth the principal elements of the
negotiations shall be prepared for use by the reviewing authorities and for
inclusion in the contract file.
vi. Design Contract Award - After the selection of the A/E firm and conclusion
of negotiations, the CO shall award the contract. The contract and the
statement of work shall reflect any changes that were agreed upon during
negotiations. The contract shall set forth the scope, the period of
performance (i.e., the start and completion dates), a schedule of
submissions, and method of payment. The contract shall reflect the A/E
firm's assurance that it will provide a design that can be constructed
within the Government's construction/renovation cost estimate.

vii. Design Contract Administration - Each OPDIV shall decide the
appropriate key staff for any project team depending on complexity, cost,
type of construction, etc. Key team members that may be involved in
design projects are: Contracting Officer, Project Manager, COR,
Architect/Engineer, and Commissioning Agent (if required see Functions
and Responsibilities of the Commissioning Agent).
1. Monitoring Schedule, Scope, and Cost: In addition to review of the
work it is standard practice for project managers to measure
performance of design projects using management tools that evaluate
progress with respect to schedule, scope, and cost. By integrating the
resultant data, useful information is derived which can be used to
determine the percentage of work complete for payment purposes or
to identify schedule problems, which require corrective action on the
part of the contractor.
2. Submittals: The need for submittals shall be determined by the
OPDIVs (see Procedures). The OPDIVs shall define the scope, process,
elements, and documentation of the submittal approval activity.
3. Contractor Payments: Contractor progress or partial payments are
usually made periodically (monthly) during the progress of the Project
or at specific submittal authorized in the contract. The amount of
payment is usually based upon the contract amount or an approved
progress schedule, and project manager recommendation to the
Contracting Officer for payment. From time to time, payments may be
reduced for cause, as outlined in the FAR. Approval authority for
progress payments rests with the Contracting Officer.
4. Final Payment: Contractor final payment is made at the end of the
Project when the contractor has satisfactorily accomplished all
provisions and requirements of the contract. The project manager
addresses design issues and reports any deficiencies to the
Contracting Officer. Approval authority of final payment rests with the
Contracting Officer.

viii. Pre-Acquisition Review (PAR) for Construction Contracts - The
Contracting Officer will take charge of and manage the project acquisition
and the construction contracting process. The architect/engineer is
responsible for the professional quality, technical accuracy, and
coordination of all services required under their contracts including
adequacy of the plans and specifications. The OPDIVs are encouraged to
establish a pre-acquisition review process to assure that everyone
involved in the development and assembly of the construction acquisition
package confirms that the package is complete and satisfactory. Under the
direction of the Contracting Officer, the PAR team should consist of the
Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer's representative,
architect/engineer, OPDIV's technical review team, and the Office of
General Counsel. It is recommended that the PAR team review the
construction contract to assure that all applicable provisions and clauses
are included. The PAR team should confirm that the construction
acquisition package is in accordance with the Facility Project Approval
Agreement (FPAA).
ix. Pre-Bid Conference - OPDIVs are encouraged to hold on-site pre-bid
conferences for all construction projects. The agenda will vary depending
on the scope and complexity of the project. For major projects, it is
recommended that OPDIVs use the services of a professional recorder to
record the proceedings and send each participant a copy of the meeting
record.
x. Submission of Bids or Proposals – Consistent with FAR Part 14 or 15, as
appropriate, bids or proposals must be submitted in accordance with the
terms and conditions of the solicitation, which shall specify a due date,
time, and location for submission.
xi. Evaluation of Bids or Proposals - If sealed bidding procedures are used,
the contracting officer will follow evaluation requirements of FAR Part 14.
If a negotiated acquisition, then the contracting officer will follow the
evaluation requirements of FAR Part 15, including the provision at FAR
52.215-1, which allows for award without discussion.

xii. Contract Award - Contract award will be made with reasonable
promptness upon completion of the evaluation of the offers pursuant to
the relevant FAR provisions and terms of the solicitation.

xiii. Construction Contract Administration - Each OPDIV shall decide the
appropriate key staff for any project team depending on complexity, cost,
type of construction, etc. Key team members that may be involved in
construction projects are: Contracting Officer, Project Manager, COR,
Architect/Engineer, Commissioning Agent (if required) and the
Construction Contractor.
1. Monitoring Schedule, Scope, and Cost: In addition to visual
inspections of the work and materials, it is standard practice for
project managers to measure performance of construction projects
using earned value assessment/management tools that evaluate
progress with respect to schedule, scope, and cost. By integrating the
resultant data, useful information is derived which can be used to
determine the percentage of work complete for payment purposes or
to identify schedule problems that require corrective action on the part
of the contractor. In so doing, the project manager is applying the most
basic Earned Value principles.
2. Submittals: The need for submittals shall be determined by the
OPDIVs, as required by the appropriate acquisition regulation, the
contract, and the pre-construction conference agenda. Typically,
submittals take one or more of the following forms: shop drawings,
plans, diagrams, catalog submittals, color charts, samples, mock-ups,
safety plans, testing plans, test results, disposal plans, coordination
drawings, production plant visits, as-built drawings, and other
associated information. Substitutions may be allowed only at the
discretion of the Contracting Officer. The OPDIVs shall define the
scope, process, elements, and documentation of the submittal
approval activity.

3. Contractor Payments: Contractor progress or partial payments are
usually made periodically (monthly) during the progress of the Project.
The amount of payment is usually based upon the contract amount, an
approved schedule of values, an approved progress schedule, project
manager verification of the value of work-in-place and stored
materials, satisfactory progress on the approved progress schedule,
and project manager recommendation to the Contracting Officer for
payment. From time to time, payments may be reduced for cause, as
outlined in the FAR. Approval authority for progress payments rests
with the Contracting Officer.
4. Final Payment - Contractor final payment is made at the end of the
Project when all provisions and requirements of the contract have
been satisfactorily accomplished by the contractor. The project
manager addresses construction issues and reports any deficiencies to
the Contracting Officer. Approval authority of final payment rests with
the Contracting Officer.

xiv. Acceptance: The Contracting Officer has sole authority to grant final
acceptance of any facility or portion thereof. Generally, acceptance infers
approval of all work, including satisfactory correction of all the items on
the deficiencies and omissions list. Acceptance of the contract work is final
and conclusive, subject to certain contractual conditions such as
warranties, guarantees, latent defects, etc. For this reason, a facility should
not be accepted without a clear delineation in writing of any conditions or
exceptions to the acceptance. Acceptance should not be granted unless all
close-out items have been completed, such as O&M Manuals, as-built
drawings, list of systems and equipment, attic stock, tools, maintenance
parts, etc., and that all specified operator/ maintenance personnel training
has been provided.
1. Warranties: The OPDIVs responsible for the Project shall appoint
appropriate staff to assist the Contracting Officer in the management
of the technical portion of the warranty process for the completed
Project. The OPDIVs shall determine the period that the project
manager remains involved with warranty management, before
transferring the responsibility to the organization providing operations
and maintenance functions for the facility.
2. Closeout Documents: All documents required by the contract
including, but not limited to, Guarantees and Warranties,
Commissioning Reports, Record Drawings, Operation and Maintenance
Manuals, and Training Documents, shall be provided as specified prior
to contract closeout. Each OPDIV shall prepare a format to assure that
all contracts are closed out and all funds are disbursed or de-obligated
from the project.
3. Training: Training of Operations and Maintenance Staff to operate and
maintain the new facility and sophisticated building systems and
equipment is very important to the activation of the facility. Provisions
for adequate operation and maintenance training should be provided
for in the specifications or in the general provision of the contract. The
contract should require the contractor to provide a detailed training
plan based on actual submitted

1. Qualification Based Selections for A/E Services
The Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) pertaining to A/E services were adopted
to carry out the requirements of the Brooks Act (40 U.S.C. 1101-1104).
a. The regulations setting forth the procedures for choosing an A/E firm may be
found in FAR subpart 36.6, "Architect Engineer Services." These procedures
apply to the selection of all architectural and engineering services, including
studies, surveys, and analyses. The purpose of this section is to supplement
the FAR subparts mentioned throughout the section and it should be read in
conjunction with them.

b. The Short Selection Process described in the FAR may be utilized for contracts
that do not exceed the small purchase limitation. The Board or the
Chairperson of the Board can make the selection of the A/E.
i. Selection by the Board - The board shall review and evaluate architect-
engineer firms in accordance with Board's functions, except that the
selection report shall serve as the final selection list and shall be provided
directly to the Contracting Officer. The report shall serve as an
authorization for the Contracting Officer to commence negotiations in
accordance with FAR 36.606.
ii. Selection by the Chairperson of the Board - When the board decides that
formal action by the board is not necessary in connection with a particular
selection, the following procedures shall be followed:
1. The chairperson of the board shall perform the functions required in
FAR 36.602-3.
2. The OPDIV's designated selection authority shall review the report and
approve it or return it to the chairperson for appropriate revision.
3. Upon receipt of an approved report, the chairperson of the board shall
furnish the Contracting Officer a copy of the report, which will serve as
an authorization for the Contracting Officer to commence negotiations
in accordance with 36.606.

c. The CO shall make a public announcement of any planned A/E selection. The
CO will provide a copy of the announcement to the Evaluation Board for the
file. The specific requirements for publicizing Federal contract actions are set
forth in the FAR. Announcements for design contracts expected to exceed
$25,000 must be published in SAM.gov, unless the contracts are to be
procured through an existing task order or other procurement process
through which the firms included in the procurement have been previously
selected through full and open competition published in SAM.gov. The CO will
determine the appropriate method and requirements for the public
announcement for each project. The announcement should be published at
least thirty days prior to the A/E selection, and the procurement schedule
should take this requirement into consideration.For contracts expected to be
$25,000 or less, the CO shall as a minimum publicize the announcement in the
vicinity of the project by displaying the notice at the procuring office and
publishing it in the local daily newspaper.Affected professional societies in the
area may be notified of the project consideration as well. The public
announcement should contain brief but clear statements consistent with the
requirements of the FAR. It should include the project location, scope of
service required, the relative importance of the significant evaluation factors
presented in descending order, range of construction cost, type of contract
proposed, estimated start and completion dates, and date by which responses
must be received. Any other specialized requirements (energy conservation,
phased design/construction, etc.) or limitations on eligibility (small business
or Buy Indian set- aside) should also be indicated. The amount of funding
available for the project should never be announced. The public
announcement should define what information the A/E must provide before
and during the selection process. The information to be provided may include
the "Architect-Engineer Qualifications" on SF 330 if the A/E firm does not have
a current SF 330 on file with the agency. The agency may also request
additional information, but the public announcement should clearly define
what information will be considered and what the evaluation criteria will be.

2. Design Competitions
A design competition is a method of awarding a design contract based on design
excellence. A design contract should be awarded to the person or firm who
submits the best design in the judgment of an evaluation board in accordance
with the rules of the competition. Design competitions are allowed under FAR
36.602 (b).
a. When the Department approves the use of design competition, OPDIVs may
evaluate firms based on their conceptual design of the project. Characteristics
that would make design competition an appropriate A/E selection method
include:
i. Unique situations exist involving prestige projects, such as the design of
memorials and structures of unusual national significance.
ii. Sufficient time is available for the production and evaluation of
conceptual designs; and
iii. The design competition, with its related costs, will substantially benefit
the project.

b. Design competitions can be open or invited. They can be one or two stages.
Open design competitions are simply competitions that are open to all design
professionals - most frequently registered architects. Invited competitions are
design competitions where a select group of design professionals – typically
highly regarded or recognized architects are invited to submit a design on a
project.
i. One-stage competitions are competitions where the winner is selected by
the board and awarded the contract to design the project. This is the most
common type of competition used by the private sector and
internationally. The competitor bears all the cost and risk in entering the
design competition. The Vietnam Veteran's Memorial is an example of a
one- stage design competition.
ii. A two-stage design competition is a competition that is usually open to all
design professionals and the highest-ranking competitors are invited to
compete in the second stage. It is common practice for the board to give
the second stage competitors a written critique of their design submission.
c. The competition announcement should feature a short description of the
project and its location. Key dates such as competition registration deadlines
and submission deadlines should be mentioned. The name of the board
members should be stated. Eligibility requirements should be clearly stated.
The competition announcement should be widely disseminated in
professional journals and newsletters to maximize interest in the competition.
i. Competition Registration - Persons or firms interested in competing in
the design competition should be registered and pay a nominal entry fee
to defray the cost of the competition.
ii. Eligibility - Competitions should open to architects and engineers who
are registered in the United States.
iii. Competition Security - To assure fair and impartial evaluations of
competition submittals, names should not be used to identify
competitors. Registrants for the competition should be assigned a number
to assure anonymity. These numbers should be used throughout the
competition process.

d. The design competition document should consist of the competition rules, a
site description, program of requirements, and competition submission
format.
i. Rules. The rules of the competition must be clear and enforceable. Date
and time for the competition submission deadline must be stated in the
document. Failure to meet the deadlines and other violations of
competition rules should be grounds for disqualification.
ii. Site Description. The site description should contain a site analysis with a
detailed site plan showing topography and other physical features. The
site and the areas surrounding it should be illustrated, photographed, and
discussed. The availability of utilities should be illustrated and discussed.
iii. Program of Requirements. The Program of Requirements (POR) is key to
the success of the design competition. The POR should provide the goals
and objectives of the project. It should have space requirements,
functional relationships, and other design requirements. The POR should
clearly state the design problem.
iv. Drawings, Photographs and Maps. The OPDIV should provide drawings,
site plans, maps and photographs necessary for the competitors to
complete their submissions. The OPDIV may require the competitors to
use the drawings and maps as base drawings or backgrounds for the sake
of consistency in the presentation of submissions.
v. Submission Format. The size and number of boards or panels should be
clearly stated. The OPDIV should establish the type of media permitted for
the presentation of the submission. If written documents are required a
format should be established.
e. The Board selects the prize winners. The Board prepares a report to the OPDIV
Selection Authority in accordance with the FAR recommending selection in
order of preference. The results of the competition are made public.

3. Preparation and Publicizing Solicitations
a. Preparation and Publicizing Solicitations: Solicitations must describe the
requirements of the Government clearly, accurately, and completely.
Unnecessarily restrictive specifications or requirements that might unduly
limit the number of bidders or offerors are prohibited. The solicitation should
include all documents (whether attached or incorporated by reference) that
prospective bidders or offerors must submit with their bid or proposal.
i. Solicitations must be publicized pursuant to the requirements of FAR 5.2.
Publication must provide sufficient time to enable prospective bidders or
offerors to prepare and submit bids or proposals. Projects above OPDIV
approval authority may not be advertised without an approved Facility
Project Approval Agreement.
ii. In addition, all HHS construction shall be executed in compliance with
applicable Federal Acquisition Regulations plus Executive Orders, laws,
and regulations relating to
1. Labor
2. Energy
3. water conservation
4. sustainability
5. other environmental matters
6. safety
7. building codes
8. fiscal responsibility.

4. General Construction Procurement Guidance
The procurement of construction should be in accordance with the acquisition
plan. There are only two basic types/ major categories of contracts. They are
Fixed Price and Cost-Reimbursement. Generally, firm-fixed priced contracts shall
be used to acquire construction, FAR 36.207. Firm-fixed-price contracts shall be
used when the method of contracting is sealed bidding, FAR 14.104. FAR 16.2
addresses incentives and economic price adjustments in fixed-price contracts.
a. A firm-fixed-price contract provides for a price that is not subject to
adjustment, except for appropriate modifications. This contract type places
upon the contractor maximum risk and full responsibility for all costs and
resulting profit or loss. It provides maximum incentive for the contractor to
control costs and perform effectively, while imposing a minimum
administrative burden upon the contracting parties.
b. Fixed-price contracts with economic price adjustment may be used for
construction in certain circumstances as outlined in FAR 36.207(c) and when
authorized in accordance with FAR 16.203.
c. Justification is required for other than firm-fixed-price contracts for
construction, except on projects contracted with tribes on P.L. 93-638. The
basis for using incentives or economic price adjustments in a fixed-price
construction contract shall be documented in the acquisition plan.
5. Safety
The OPDIVs should assure that the Contractor follows federal and state safety
regulations as they relate to construction. Although job safety is the responsibility
of the contractor, the project manager should look for unsafe or potentially
unsafe conditions. Should the project manager become aware of any such
conditions, the project manager should notify the Contracting Officer and the
contractor. If the unsafe condition is life threatening, the project manager should
direct the contractor to take immediate action to remedy the situation, even to
the point of issuing a "Stop Work Order", if necessary. If a "Stop Work Order" is
issued, the project manager should notify the Contracting Officer of the pertinent
facts as soon as possible.

6. Government Oversight
The OPDIV is responsible for performing oversight of all aspects of the contract to
assure that construction contract requirements are met:
a. Quality Assurance in accordance with FAR Part 46
Government contract quality assurance shall be performed at any stage of
performance and such places as may be necessary to determine that the work
conforms to contract requirements. Quality assurance surveillance plans
should be prepared in conjunction with the preparation of the statement of
work. The plans should specify all work requiring surveillance and the
method(s) of surveillance.
b. Changes
The FPAA is a binding agreement that establishes project scope, budget, and
schedule. Changes at this level of development are costly (construction
phase) and should be avoided. Each OPDIV should have a formal change
control process. Technical changes due to differing site conditions or errors
and omissions by the architect/engineer or the Government should be
approved at the OPDIV level. Programmatic changes should also be approved
at the OPDIV level. The Contracting Officer is the only person with authority to
issue a change or modification to the construction contract. The Contracting
Officer may delegate authority to the project manager for field changes. If the
Program of Requirements (POR) is exceeded or if the cost exceeds the limits of
the FPAA, approval must be obtained through HHS using the FPAA process.
The OPDIVs shall assure that the approved changes are properly implemented
into the project. See also 5 Project Planning </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-
manual/project-planning/index.html> for changes requiring Departmental approval
through the FPAA </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/project-planning/index.html#5-
2>.
<< 7. Excess Real Property Use and Disposal </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-manual/excess-
real-property-use-disposal/index.html>

Top of page
9. Historic and Archeological Preservation >> </about/hhs-manuals/hhs-facilities-
manual/historic-archeological-preservation/index.html>
Content created by Program Support Center (PSC)
Content last reviewed June 6, 2025

Chapter 8. HHS Facility Design and Construction _ HHS.gov.pdf

More Related Content

Similar to Chapter 8. HHS Facility Design and Construction _ HHS.gov.pdf (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter 8. HHS Facility Design and Construction _ HHS.gov.pdf