Attachment B - Industry Questionnaire.pdf
PDF 63 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Industry Feedback Requested for Progressive Design-Build with Other Transaction Authority Process
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
About this file
This is an industry questionnaire designed to solicit feedback from design-build firms on the proposed terms and conditions of an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) for progressive design-build construction projects.
The questionnaire addresses six primary topic areas: (1) Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) and cost flexibility, examining whether Articles 1.15 and 2.3(c) establish firm financial ceilings while permitting operational flexibility, design maturity thresholds for GMP establishment, and fund reallocation discretion; (2) Payment, Allowances, and Shared Savings, requesting recommendations on structuring payment applications, Schedule of Values methodology, and alignment with commercial billing practices; (3) Bonding and Financial Security, evaluating whether Phase 1 bonding exemptions align with surety underwriting guidelines and improve firm competitiveness; (4) Small Business Teaming and Subcontracting, assessing whether collaborative development of small business goals during Phase 1 provides adequate flexibility to secure qualified local partners; (5) Phase 1 Off-Ramps and Design Intellectual Property/Liability, determining commercially reasonable mechanisms for Government acquisition of CAD/BIM files and associated intellectual property if the Government exercises its off-ramp option at Phase 1 conclusion; and (6) Broad Industry Best Practices Alignment, requesting identification of articles misaligned with current industry standards and articles that would negatively impact firm participation decisions. The questionnaire seeks detailed responses regarding implementation feasibility, administrative considerations, and recommended contractual revisions to ensure the OTA structure is operationally viable and competitive within the design-build construction industry.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment A - OTA_Progressive_Design-Build_Construction_Articles.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Attachment B: PDB with OTA Industry Questionnaire
1) Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) & Cost Flexibility
a) (Reference: Article 1.15 & Article 2.3(c)) Does the definition of the Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) in Article 1.15 and the process described in Article 2.3(c) clearly establish a firm financial ceiling while maintaining the commercial operational flexibility required for progressive execution?
b) In light of the definition in Article 1.15, how would your firm typically define and structure a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) for a project of this nature?
c) Does the language in Article 2.3(c)(ii), which grants the Design-Builder discretion to apply savings between line items, provide sufficient flexibility to reallocate funds without a formal modification, provided the overall GMP is not exceeded? If not, what adjustments are recommended?
d) Regarding the establishment of the GMP during Phase 1, what level of design maturity (e.g., 60% Design Development, 90% Construction Documents) do you consider optimal to establish a reliable and fair GMP that minimizes the need for excessive contractor contingency?
2) Payment, Allowances, & Shared Savings
a) How would you recommend structuring the payment application process under Article 10? Should it be based primarily on a Schedule of Values (SOV) or be similar to a Federal Progress Payment Clause?
b) Is tying progress payments in Phase 2 to a cost- and resource-loaded SOV, as stated in Article 10.2(b), aligned with your standard commercial billing practices? What administrative hurdles, if any, do you foresee with this invoicing model?
c) How would you structure the details within Article 10 regarding Payment to ensure clarity and efficiency for both parties?
3) Bonding and Financial Security
a) Article 12.1 exempts Phase 1 from bonding requirements, mandating them only for the Phase 2 GMP. Does this phasing align with your surety's typical underwriting guidelines?
b) Does the exemption of Phase 1 bonding, as described in Article 12, significantly improve your firm's capacity or willingness to compete for these projects?
4) Small Business Teaming & Subcontracting Article 8 establishes that small business subcontracting goals will be collaboratively developed during Phase 1 and incorporated into the Phase 2 GMP. Does this approach provide the necessary flexibility to secure highly qualified local small business partners as the design matures?
5) Phase 1 Off-Ramps & Design Intellectual Property / Liability If the Government exercises its "Off-Ramp" at the end of Phase 1, Article 27.5 grants the Government rights to the design to continue the project. What do you consider a commercially reasonable mechanism for the Government to acquire the CAD/BIM files and associated intellectual property in such a scenario?
6) Broad Industry Best Practices Alignment
a) Are there any articles in the provided "OTA Progressive Design-Build Construction Articles" that you believe are out of alignment with current industry best practices? If so, which articles and what revisions would you recommend?
b) Are there any specific articles that cause your firm concern or would negatively impact your decision to compete for a project under this OTA? If so, what are your specific concerns?
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .