Attachment 3 - SOW-AE-Design-Osceola Ranger District Office.pdf

Statement of Work Project Name: Osceola Ranger District Administrative Site

Replacement Project Number: 0805-FY23-8CL

Project Control Number 6288230010602

Project Fund Code Q0N8CL23

Expected Completion Date TBD

Order Type: Firm, Fixed price based on a defined scope and schedule

Request For Qualifications Issued

TBD

Questions for RFQ Due 7 calendar days after issuance of RFQ

Question Reponses posted 2 calendar days after Questions Due

Qualifications Due 15 calendar days after issuance of RFQ

Proposal Due: 15 calendar days after issue at 1500 Eastern Line Officer & Forest Project Manager/POC:

Thomas Scott thomas.scott@usda.gov

(386) 752-2577 x4527

Regional Project Manager/POC: James Thompson james.h.thompson@usda.gov

(540) 553-6359

Contracting Officer: James Hunt James.Hunt2@usda.gov 404-347-1761

Contracting Officers Representative:

Sean G. Baldwin sean.baldwin@usda.gov

(423) 244-4889

1.0 GENERAL

1.1 Project Background

The existing Osceola Ranger District office is on the site of the previous Southern Research Station Naval Stores Laboratory, near Lake City, FL in Baker County. The district staff moved there in the 1980s. This administrative site includes both the ranger district office and the work center. Many building elements of the ranger district office are deemed substandard in today’s market and the building was not designed for the current use. As a result, the Osceola Ranger District needs new facilities to house the administrative staff.

The Forest leadership has indicated its interest in utilizing the location of the former Osceola Work Center site for the proposed new administrative site. A Preliminary Project Analysis (PPA), dated August 2021, documents the analysis and recommendation to replace the current Osceola Ranger District Office. The Forest recommended constructing a new Osceola Ranger District Administrative Site at the former Osceola work center on Gum Swamp Road as its preferred recommendation, as per the above noted PPA.

Additional work to review the suitability of the proposed site (former work center) is needed.

mailto:thomas.scott@usda.gov mailto:james.h.thompson@usda.gov mailto:sean.baldwin@usda.gov Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I updated this to use the Q-code since we have to capitalize this work.

SOW: Osceola Ranger District Administrative Site Replacement Design

1.2 Description of the Work

This project will involve design of a new administrative office at the old Osceola Work Center site on Gum Swamp Road. This project will provide a Ranger Station / Work Center design which meets the current needs of the District, reduce operating and maintenance costs, eliminate deferred maintenance, and improve resiliency to climate change and extreme weather events.

Total project scope includes technical requirements development, design and construction of a new administrative complex, move of goods and personnel to new office complex, disposal of existing office buildings and land, and NEPA analysis supporting these actions.

The scope of this Architect/Engineer contract is limited to the technical requirements development, design, and construction support of the new administrative complex..

The project will be designed to meet the requirements of the International Green Construction Code and Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings. Third party green building certification will not be pursued. Enhanced Commissioning will be pursued, with the awarded A/E firm providing the CxA.

1.3 Timeline

All work at the Osceola Administrative Site is fully funded through the Great American Outdoor Act (GAOA) funds.

The Forest Service expects to move to construction procurement directly after completion of construction documents.

Preferred Performance Period is based on the milestones as listed in the Programming Documents.

2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION

2.1 Administrative Information

FS Unit Information:

1. Forest: National Forests in Florida

2. District: Osceola Ranger District

3. Unit ID Code: 080504

Project Location:

Proposed New Osceola Ranger District Office / Work Center 2340 NE Gum Swamp Rd Lake City, FL 32055 County: Columbia

2.2 Project Delivery Method

This project will use a traditional Design-Bid-Build delivery method. The Forest Service expects to conduct a negotiated procurement for construction instead of sealed bid.

Evaluation factors will include constructor’s phasing plan and overall schedule.

2.3 Government’s Estimated Cost of Construction at Award/Available Funding The Government’s Estimated Cost of Construction is $11,000,000.

2.4 Design Standards

January 2023 Design and Construction Standards for Southern Region Facilities

I am still uncertain if this is actually a piece of the scope that is appropriate to include in this contract. This needs a bit more conversation and clarification around how we create the work breakdown structure and combine or separate services.

Shope, Christine - FS, GA Suggest decommissioning as a Bid Option. Can it be a separate line item that is funded by other sources if possible?

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA Again, this is related to the previous comment about whether it's appropriate to include this in the work identified for this A/E and as part of the design.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA How does what a firm might do with NEPA analysis differ from what we are expecting our own FS staff to do? We need to clearly identify roles and responsibilities for this project, and that might help establish if this is a true expectation of the design firm.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA This appears to be a reference to a unique situation that may have existed with Croatan, but I do not see how this is applicable to Osceola. I think this statement should be deleted.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I recommend creating a table to show the milestone description and estimated timeframe for this piece.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I do not believe this scenario applies to our project.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I do not think a separate site plan and prep scenario applies to our project and therefore these are not applicable milestones to Osceola. Recommend deleting these statements.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I am getting a little confused of how this step relates to the next one below. Does this process seem clear? I am a bit confused.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA Do we think we can start sooner? Or is this built around expecting the site feasibility study first and giving until end of calendar year to get that done?

Where do we have a copy of this document? Is it fully revised now? Check in with David Culp on this.

2.5 Special Design Requirements

None

2.6 Government Furnished Information

Program Document for administrative direction, “Osceola RDO Program.docx” A Site Feasibility Analysis of the proposed site, “Osceola Site Feasibility Analysis” – Delivered at conclusion of analysis March 2024.

Design and Construction Standards, “Design and Construction Standards for Southern Region Facilities_10Dec21.docx” Design reference for sustainability certification, “08.Guiding Principles Scorecard-Osceola

RDO”

Design reference for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations, “Design Recommendations for Accessible Electric Vehicle Charging Stations - Last Updated: 7/17/2023.”

Sign guidance, “EM 7100-15 FOREST SERVICE SIGN STANDARDS” Topographic Site Survey (centered on 25+ acres surrounding old work center site), CAD files.

2.7 Travel Requirements

Travel by contractor personnel is required as part of this task order. Travel requirements are detailed in each task description.

2.8 Period of Performance

Submit proposed period of performance in the Proposal. Refer to project milestones.

2.9 Submittal General Requirements

Include task order number in all communications.

Submittals are listed in each task description.

All work products will be delivered in both PDF and authoring files supported by FS corporate software. Corporate software includes:

1. Autodesk AutoCAD 2020

2. Autodesk Civil3D 2020

3. Autodesk Revit 2020

4. Bluebeam Revu CAD 2019

5. ESRI ArcGIS Pro

6. Microsoft Office 365

7. Adobe Creative Cloud (Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign): Allowable for use, but requires FS approval before authoring deliverables in these formats.

Formats:

1. Program, analytical reports, notes, specifications, and cost estimate: letter size, with 11x17 pages as needed.

2. Drawings: Architectural D-size.

Maybe what we need to state is that an analysis will be forthcoming from a separate a/e firm? Rather than simply reference our SOW.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I don't think this applies to our project and should be deleted.

We need Chris Shope or David Culp to clarify whether this document is appropriate as a supplemental document for the Osceola project.

3.0 SERVICES REQUIRED

3.1 Existing Conditions, Program Verification, and Owner’s Project Requirements

Two (2) days, on site:

1. Examine existing conditions and FS-provided concept.

2. Discuss site constraints.

3. Verify functional, space, and performance needs.

4. Establish project goals for developing the Owner’s Project Requirements for the commissioning.

Skills needed:

1. Architecture.

2. Landscape Architecture and site planning.

3. Civil Engineering

4. Commissioning Agent

Submittals

1. Charrette and Site Investigation Report

2. Revised Program

3. Site Development Plan

4. Preliminary Cost Model

3.2 Design of the Osceola Ranger District Office / Work Center Schematic Design Verification

1. Government Review: Allow 15 calendar days.

2. Submittals:

a. Drawings

b. Draft Owner’s project requirements

Design Development

1. Government Review: Allow 21 calendar days.

2. Submittals:

a. Drawings

b. Specifications

c. Design Analysis including Design Calculations and Design Narrative

d. Cut sheets for major systems and products.

e. Detailed Cost Estimate with life cycle costs

f. Energy and water models with costs

g. Revised Owner’s Project Requirements

h. CxA review report

Ask Chris Shope, is one day enough? Do we need to consider two? Should this be combined with the design firm providing a design charette for the FS?

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA Do we need cost estimating skills since this phase includes an expectation of a preliminary cost model?

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I think this would be important to have the a/e firm validate in their own report that their site visit corroborated all the info provided, including the site feasibility analysis that we would give them. So I think this is needed.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA We need to fix the formatting of the headings - we are missing 4.2.1, etc

We are missing the Value Analysis process with this Design Development phase. I have pulled wording from the Buckhall project SOW and inserted in the section below this one. Review for appropriateness.

Draft Construction Documents

3. Government Review: Allow 21 calendar days.

4. Submittals

a. Drawings

b. Specifications

c. Design Analysis including Design Calculations and Design Narrative

d. Cut sheets for major systems and products

e. Detailed Cost Estimate with life cycle costs

f. Review Comments

Final Construction Documents After corrections to the Draft Construction Documents and acceptance by the Forest Service, submit a complete set sealed by the appropriate professionals for signature by the Regional Engineering Director. The Director serves as the Forest Service’s Authority Having Jurisdiction.

3.4 Value Analysis

Contractor to provide a SAVE International Certified Value Specialist (CVS) to serve as a Value Analysis Team Leader to facilitate a Forest Service team. The CVS cannot be a member of the contractor’s design team but can be a contractor employee. (The Forest Service will conduct a formal one-week Value Analysis at the Design Development stage of the design, with the CVS specialist facilitating.)

The Value Analysis (VA) will occur concurrently with the formal Design Development review and will be scheduled for 1-2 weeks after scheduled receipt of a complete Design Development submittal. The complete Design Development submittal will be provided to the VA team at least one week in advance of the VA session.

The VA team lead will prepare the formal report after the VA session.

The Forest Service will discuss the recommendations and suggestions of the VA team with the design team before formally accepting them for incorporation into the design.

3.5 Regulatory Permitting

From the design documents, create documents required by local Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs) for acquiring permits.

Coordinate with local AHJs on permit requirements and acquire permits on behalf of the Forest Service. Permits required to be acquired by the designer of record.

3.6 Commissioning Services

Provide enhanced commissioning as defined in the LEED NC v4 Enhanced Commissioning credit. The Commissioning Agent may be an employee of the Contractor or prime subcontractor who is not otherwise directly involved in the design of this project.

Provide commissioning services for:

1. Building Enclosure

2. HVAC

3. Electrical power distribution

4. Lighting

5. Communications

Fix formatting of this inserted text for Value Analysis, to use numbering system (4.3) and match text size/font/format.

6. Fire detection and alarm

7. Fire suppression

8. Power generation

9. Access Control, Intrusion Detection, and CCTV

3.7 Procurement Planning and Support

<<NOTE: Work is likely to be of a technical nature only and will not include assistance to the Source Selection Evaluation Board>> Attend site visit conducted by the construction CO. (Estimate 6 Hours of time) Provide answers to questions submitted by offerors to the CO.

3.8 Construction Administration Support

This work will be priced as part of the overall proposal, but not awarded until construction starts to allow for pricing revision from scope clarification.

Site Visits:

1. Preconstruction kickoff: one day on site.

2. Construction-phase observation visits: four visits, one day each, on site. Timing to be determined by project schedule.

3. Final Inspection at Substantial Completion to advise the COR/PM on issuing a new

Certificate of Occupancy

4. This task order will be modified to add additional site visits if needed.

5. Provide a written field report with photos for all site visits.

Progress Meetings: Attend progress meetings to advise the Forest Service. Meetings that do not coincide with a site visit will be conducted virtually.

Submittals: Review all submittals for review and information Requests for Information: Prepare response for Constructor RFIs for issuance by Forest Service Supplemental Instructions: Prepare for Constructor RFIs for issuance by Forest Service Change Requests by Constructor: Assist Forest Service in evaluating.

Change Requests by Forest Service: Assist Forest Service in preparing.

Information Management: The Constructor will be providing an electronic construction management service for all project information. This system will be used by the Constructor, Forest Service, and A/E for all information interchange and tracking from construction award through closeout.

We should vet this statement with David Culp/Chris Shope for suitability to our project.

Parrish, Angela - FS, VA I think this statement is confusing to anyone reading it. It provides no clarity to an a/e firm as to what services we are requesting of them.

Fix numbering. We need this whole section. Just fix and strange formatting.