MACH1_AOI FA890326OT001__METC_OA_AMEND 2_24 Aug 26.pdf

MACH1 AREA OF INTEREST (AOI):

Owner’s Advisor for Medical Enlisted Training Campus (METC) Recapitalization

AOI Notice ID: FA8903-26-OT001_Amend 2

MACH1 Umbrella Program Notice ID: FA8903-OT-MACH1 Issuing Activity: 772nd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (772 ESS) Requiring Activity: Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC) Location: Joint Base San Antonio – Fort Sam Houston, Texas

This Area of Interest (AOI) is published under the Modernized Agile Construction Horizons (MACH1) Umbrella Program Notice. All submissions must adhere to the procedures and guidelines outlined in the parent MACH1 framework document unless otherwise tailored herein. Any resulting agreement will be an Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) executed under the statutory authority of 10 U.S.C. § 2808a.

1. Summary of Overall Objective The 772nd Enterprise Sourcing Squadron (772 ESS), in coordination with the Air Force Civil Engineer Center (AFCEC), seeks an innovative, highly capable, and deeply experienced partner to serve as the Owner’s Advisor (OA) for programmatic management during the planning, design, and construction of the Medical Enlisted Training Campus (METC) Campus Recapitalization project at JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

The overall METC recapitalization project consists of:

Five (5) Barracks Ships and Dorms (BSDs): Large, multistory dormitories designed to house 1,200 personnel per building (approximately 440,000 square feet per facility). The programmatic split consists of one (1) Air Force Dorm, two (2) Army Barracks, and two

(2) Navy Ships. All buildings must meet Type IIA construction, high-performance building requirements, robust life safety and fire protection standards, and cybersecurity protocols for Facility-Related Control Systems (FRCS).

Central Utility Plant (CUP): Recapitalization will include replacement of CUP (construction firm may replace with one or more based upon their proposed solution).

Campus-Wide Civil Infrastructure: Ring road construction, dedicated interior troop movement pavements, campus landscaping, and advanced storm water management improvements.

Industrialized Construction Delivery: An aggressive target to reduce traditional Military Construction (MILCON) timelines by 30% and construction costs by 20% through extensive utilization of industrialized construction (e.g., off-site prefabrication, modular assembly).

AFCEC is accelerating this schedule to meet critical student demand. The first stage of METC construction design is anticipated for award in early August 2026, with construction starting in late December 2026, targeting substantial completion of all five BSDs within two years (by January 2029).

The selected OA partner will help AFCEC co-create a repeatable, scalable model for Collaborative Delivery Design-Build management across the Department of the Air Force (DAF). This initiative serves as an operational testbed to compress traditional 10-year MILCON timelines into an approximate 3-year requirements-to-construction-completion process (a 70% overall schedule reduction).

2. Background & Problem Statement The Government owner team is intentionally lean, optimized for agile oversight and rapid decision-making. Traditional, slow-moving construction oversight and traditional design-bid-build paradigms are insufficient to support the collaborative, highly accelerated, and iterative nature of the progressive/collaborative Design-Build model.

The Government requires an OA operating at or in the immediate vicinity of San Antonio, Texas, to provide the technical depth, programmatic rigor, and strategic insight required to deliver a massive, modern medical training campus on an active military installation.

The challenge is to define and execute an OA function that is:

1. Purpose-built for collaborative delivery methodologies (Design-Build Institute of America [DBIA] Design-Build Done Right framework).

2. Robust enough to manage a MEGA-scale project ($500M+ value) with highly complex utility, dormitory, and industrialized construction requirements.

3. Flexible and structured to serve as a repeatable, scalable model and to draft the DAF Owner's Advisor Playbook for future installations.

3. Desired Outcomes & Lines of Effort (LOEs) Respondents must propose a highly structured, creative, and technically rigorous approach to executing the OA role across three (3) distinct Lines of Effort:

LOE 1 - Program Management & Advisory Services

• Provide technical, schedule, financial, and risk-management oversight during the design and pre-construction phases. Responsibilities include:

• Translating validated mission requirements into detailed Owner’s Project

Requirements (OPR) and performance-based specifications

• Establishing a project governance and decision-making framework that enables rapid, real-time Government approvals.

• Creating and maintaining an open-book risk register, risk allocation strategies, and contingency modeling.

• Performing continuous cost-estimating, independent cost analysis, and open-book cost reviews to establish a defensible, fair, and reasonable Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP).

• Managing collaborative design progression to balance strict budgets, tight schedules, and operational training requirements.

LOE 2 - Construction Management Services Provide on-site quality assurance, compliance monitoring, and technical validation throughout the construction phase. Responsibilities include:

• Tracking daily construction activities against approved designs, schedules, and quality standards.

• Verifying high-performance building metrics, cyber-safe FRCS integrations, and life-safety systems.

• Managing scope and contract modification controls while preserving the cooperative "One Team" culture.

• Coordinating construction sequencing, campus utility tie-ins, and civil site work to prevent disruptions to active base operations.

• Overseeing site safety, environmental compliance, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) compliance, and complex supply chain logistics.

LOE 3 - Advanced Delivery Integration & Lifecycle Advisory Provide specialized advisory support for emerging and long-term project delivery methods. Responsibilities include:

• Advising the Government on the integration, logistics, and quality assurance of off-site manufactured and industrialized construction components.

• Conducting a feasibility study and structuring the technical, operational, and contract frameworks to transition the METC campus into a possible long-term Design-Build-Operate (DBO) model, where the contractor may assume lifecycle maintenance responsibility for the facilities.

4. Eligibility & Submission Guidelines

• Eligibility: Open to U.S.-based industry, academic, and non-profit organizations with demonstrated success as an OA on complex projects utilizing collaborative Design-Build methodologies at or exceeding a $500M construction value.

• Base Access: Respondent personnel must possess the ability to obtain and maintain unescorted installation access to JBSA Fort Sam Houston, Texas.

• Submission Portal: All respondents must register and submit their Phase 1 materials through the designated portal at 772ESS.PKA.MACH1@us.af.mil and include the AOI Notice ID # in the subject line.

Tailored Submission Guidelines (Phase 1):

Pursuant to Section 3 of the MACH1 parent notice, the Agreements Officer (AO) has tailored the Phase 1 page limits to accommodate the scale and complexity of this requirement:

Submission Type: White Paper (Solution Brief).

Page Limit: Maximum ten (10) pages (excluding the Cover Sheet). Supporting documentation, including organizational charts and key personnel resumes/profiles, may be submitted as an Appendix and will NOT count towards the 10-page maximum.

However, individual resumes in the Appendix must be limited to a maximum of one (1) page per person.

Required Content:

1. Cover Sheet: Company Name, Date, Point of Contact (POC), Email, Phone, SAM Unique Entity ID (UEI), and mailing address.

2. Technical Concept & Implementation Approach: A detailed plan for executing LOEs 1, 2, and 3, incorporating industrialized construction expertise and DBIA-aligned collaborative delivery methodologies.

mailto:772ESS.PKA.MACH1@us.af.mil

3. Qualifications & Reference Mega-Projects: Direct past performance references demonstrating OA success on projects valued at $500M or more. Include contact info for a primary customer POC for each reference project.

4. Key Personnel & Reach-back Capability: Resumes or profiles of the key leadership team and an overview of corporate reach-back capability.

5. Organizational Chart: Depicting the OA team's structure and its integration with the AFCEC PMO.

6. Proposed Schedule & Payment Structure: High-level milestones and suggested payment/incentive mechanisms (e.g., milestone-based, performance incentives).

5. Timeline & Milestones

• Phase 1 Solution Briefs Due: 1 September 2026/3:00 PM CST

• Rapid Down-Select to Phase 2 (Pitches): Anticipated within 30 days of posting.

• Phase 2 (Pitch) Oral Presentations: Mid-September 2026

• Final Selection & Phase 3 Negotiation: Late September 2026.

• Target OTA Award Date: Early October 2026.

Period of Performance Milestones:

The resulting agreement is expected to be executed across the following three segments:

Contract Segment Trigger/Duration Purpose

Milestone 1 (Pre- Construction & Early Design)

20-30 Calendar Days Advise the Government through design-build partner onboarding (OTA 2 development); establish governance and PMO structure; oversee early design.

Milestone 2 (Design & Construction Phase)

~Dec 15, 2026 –July1, 2029 (Triggered by Government acceptance of

GMP)

Provide continuous, uninterrupted on-site construction oversight, quality assurance, and schedule/cost tracking through substantial completion of the five BSDs.

Milestone 3 (Commissioning & Closeout)

~July 2, 2029 – Dec 31, 2029 (Triggered by Substantial Completion)

Oversee campus commissioning, facility transition and turnover, 1-year warranty period, and finalization of DAF DBO framework options.

~ = estimated

6. Evaluation Process & Criteria Submissions will be evaluated in accordance with the multi-phase MACH1 procedure.

Phase 1: Standing Evaluation Criteria (Rapid Down- Select) Phase I Solution Briefs (White Papers) will be evaluated on their own merit to determine if they possess sufficient capability to progress to Phase 2. The DAF will utilize the following three standing criteria:

1. Relevance to AOI: Does the executive summary and technical concept target the exact requirements of the METC OA program.

2. Merit of Constructability Concept: Is the proposed approach to managing progressive design-build and industrialized construction technically reasonable, credible, and accelerated?

3. Company Viability: Does the company demonstrate the financial stability, past performance on MEGA-projects ($500M+), and administrative capacity to scale rapidly after award?

Phase 2 (Pitch) & Phase 3 (Full Proposal) Tailored Evaluation Rubric Offerors down selected to participate in Phase 2 Oral Presentations (Pitches) and subsequent Phase 3 negotiations will be evaluated based on the specific evaluation criteria detailed below:

Category Specific Criteria Criteria Description

Experience & Relevant Expertise

Collaborative Mega-Scale Project Experience

Demonstrated success as an OA on complex projects at or exceeding a $500M construction value, aligning with the DBIA Design-Build Done Right framework. Past performance must include verified examples of industrialized/modular construction management.

Collaborative Culture & Team Philosophy

Proven history of fostering a DBIA-aligned "One Team" environment. Must provide verifiable reference POCs for all cited mega-projects.

Management & Execution Strategy

Innovative & Rigorous Approach

Quality and feasibility of proposed technical solutions for structuring, scaling, and managing the METC PMO advisory role.

Speed to Capability (S2C) Methodology

Feasibility and realism of the plan to support an aggressive construction schedule to complete five BSDs in two years, compressed from traditional timelines.

Demonstrates immediate scalability post-award.

LOE Compliance LOE 1 Compliance

Clear, robust methodology for translating requirements into OPRs, implementing rapid-decision governance, managing risk allocation, performing cost validation, and maintaining open-book GMP transparency.

LOE 2

Compliance

Clear, robust methodology for on-site quality assurance, tracking daily construction activities, managing scope changes, coordinating utility/site civil staging, and enforcing safety and environmental criteria.

LOE 3

Compliance

Feasibility and depth of the methodology to advise the Government on Industrialized Construction integration, QA of off-site components, and structuring the long-term Design-Build-Operate (DBO) facility framework.

Scalability & Knowledge Transfer

Scalability, Repeatability & Playbook Creation

Quality of the proposed plan for capturing lessons learned, processes, and standard templates to deliver a comprehensive, enterprise-ready Owner’s Advisor Playbook.

*Additional information on priorities will be provided in Phase 2.