Attachment 1 - White Paper Template (Step 1).docx

ATTACHMENT 1

STEP 1: Request for White Paper (RFWP) for Other Transaction (OT) Progressive Design-Build (PDB) via Other Transaction (OT)

SECTION 1: OVERVIEW

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is seeking qualified Design-Build Team(s) to participate in a PDB project for the Little Mountain Testing Facility (LMTF). This RFWP invites interested Design-Build Teams to submit a qualifications package as the first step in a competitive, two-step selection process.

This acquisition emphasizes:

· Qualifications-Based Selection: Design-Build Team(s) will be selected based on experience and capability, not a price proposal.

· Collaborative Project Development: The selected Design-Build Team will work directly with USACE and Air Force partners to develop the project design and price.

· Speed and Flexibility: The project will be executed under an OT, which is not subject to most FAR-based procurement procedures.

SECTION 2: STEP 1 – WHITE PAPER SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Design-Build Team(s) shall follow the structure below. Submissions that do not adhere to these instructions may be deemed non-conforming. Design-Build Team(s) who submit compelling White Papers may be invited to Step 2 (Pitch Meetings).

Preparation of the White Paper (Qualifications Package). Design Build Team(s) shall follow the structure below to enable efficiency. Government evaluation criteria are in equal order of importance.

Design Build Team(s) who prepare and submit White Papers that demonstrate merit may be invited to provide project pitches to the Government.

a. GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS Format Requirements (MANDATORY):

· Font: Minimum 10 pt (Arial, Times New Roman, or Calibri)

· Spacing: Single-spaced

· Page Size: 8.5” x 11” (11” x 17” allowed ONLY for charts/graphics)

· Margins: Minimum 1 inch

· Page Limit: 10 pages maximum

· File Format: PDF Instruction:

Do not exceed page limits. Do not change formatting. Do not omit sections.

b. OT FRAMEWORK Friendly Reminder:

· Is not subject to FAR-based procurement procedures

· Enables flexible, collaborative acquisition utilizing PDB process

· Emphasizes speed, innovation, and mission outcomes

· Allows tailored agreement terms for risk, schedule, and complexity

· Federal fiscal law and construction laws still apply

c. WHITE PAPER CONTENT (REQUIRED SECTIONS)

1. TECHNICAL APPROACH (HIGH-LEVEL)

Instruction:

This is not a design submittal. Keep submission at a high level.

Address the following:

1. Understanding of Project Objectives

2. Approach to Progressive Design-Build Collaboration

3. Risk Identification and Mitigation Strategy

4. Innovation Approaches (materials, methods, delivery) Expectation:

Responses must demonstrate feasibility, credibility, and understanding of MILCON complexity, and Progressive-Design-Build collaboration.

2. CAPABILITY AND PAST RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

Instruction:

Provide up to three (3) projects demonstrating relevant experience as it relates to LMTF Project. Summarize performance clearly and factually. Relevant Past Experience projects must be 100% complete or substantially complete with only punch-list items remaining.

Expectation:

Provide evidence of consistent, successful project delivery.

Projects must reflect:

· Design-Build or Progressive Design-Build

· Projects relevant to the Project Goals described in Program Solicitation.

· Federal/DoD experience (preferred, but not required)

· Quality of Work

· Schedule Adherence

· References Required Format (USE FOR EACH PROJECT):

· Project Name & Location:

· Client:

· Final Contract Value:

· Delivery Method:

· Key Features & Relevance:

(DB/PDB delivery, successful collaboration, integration)

· Outcomes:

(Cost, schedule, performance)

· Reference Information:

(Company, POC, email, phone) Instruction:

Be specific.

3. MANAGEMENT APPROACH & KEY PERSONNEL

TEAM COMPOSITION & ORGANIZATION

Instruction:

Clearly identify the full team structure. Avoid marketing language—focus on roles and relationships.

Provide:

· Prime Entity (legal name)

· Designer of Record

· Key Sub-awardees/Partners (If applicable, discipline or name) Include Organizational Chart:

Must clearly show:

· Program Manager at top

· Reporting structure

· Relationship between:

· Prime Design-Builder

· A/E Partner

· Key Sub-awardees Expectation:

The chart should demonstrate an integrated Design-Build team.

Instruction:

Identify only critical personnel. Do not include unnecessary staff.

Required Roles (at minimum):

· Project/Program Manager

· Design Manager

· Construction Manager

· Key Technical Leads (as applicable) Required Format:

Additional Requirement:

Provide a short narrative describing:

· Team integration

· Prior working relationships (if applicable)

· Ability to execute collaboratively

SECTION 3: EVALUATION CRITERIA (HOW YOU WILL BE SCORED)

The Government will evaluate White Papers for merit using a qualifications-based approach.

· FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH

· 1.1: Understanding of Project requirements: The degree to which the White Paper demonstrates a clear and comprehensive understanding of the project's mission, technical requirements, and constraints, including the affordability limit.

· 1.2: Design Management and ICD/ICS 705 Compliance: The feasibility and quality of the proposed approach for managing the design process and ensuring compliance with all security requirements, especially for ICD/ICS 705 facilities.

· FACTOR 2: CAPABILITY AND PAST RELEVANT EXPERIENCE

· 2.1: Relevant Experience: The depth and relevance of the design-build team’s experience with projects of similar size, scope, and complexity, including radiation facilities, secure federal facilities, and laboratories.

· 2.2: PDB Expertise: The design-build team’s demonstrated expertise and corporate experience with the PDB delivery method and collaborative procurement instruments.

· FACTOR 3: MANAGEMENT APPROACH & KEY PERSONNEL

· 3.1: PDB Management Philosophy: The clarity and effectiveness of the proposed management philosophy for a collaborative PDB project.

· 3.2: Key Personnel: The qualifications and experience of the proposed key personnel for the roles identified.

· 3.3: Organizational Chart: The logic and clarity of the proposed design-build team structure and reporting relationships.

SECTION 4: EVALUATION APPROACH

The Government will:

· Evaluate submissions against the criteria above, and against all other white paper submissions.

· Consider:

· Strengths

· Weaknesses

· Risks Greater consideration may be given to Design Build Partner(s) demonstrating:

· Proven success in PDB or other collaborative delivery models.

· A corporate history of a non-adversarial approach to project execution.

· A deep understanding of the unique challenges of complex, secure MILCON projects.

SECTION 5: COMMUNICATIONS

All communications shall be directed to the Agreements Officer (AO).

Instruction:

Do not contact other Government personnel.

SECTION 6: PROCESS AND SCHEDULE

· Program Solicitation Step 1, Request for White Papers Release Date: 15 July 2026

· Questions Due: TBD via ProjNet

· White Paper Submission Due: TBD

· Invitation to Pitch: TBD The Government may:

· Engage in communications at any time

· Modify the process

· Select none, some, or all Design-Build Team(s) for Step 2

SECTION 7: FINAL COMPLIANCE CHECK (INTERNAL USE)

Before submission, confirm:

· All required sections included

· Page limit not exceeded

· Formatting compliant

· Organizational chart included

· References provided

· Submission instructions followed Compliance: Your white paper must address all requirements outlined in Attachment 1. Incomplete submissions may be deemed non-conforming and disqualified from further consideration

SECTION 8: COMPARATIVE EVALUATION AND DOWN SELECTION

The Government intends to:

· Conduct a comparative evaluation of all submissions (Step 1 Deep Dive)

· Identify qualified Design Build Team(s) based on White Paper submission; identify up to three the best-qualified Design Build Teams who provided White Papers which demonstrated the most merit (most strengths/fewest weaknesses).

· Invite the best-qualified Design Build Team(s) to proceed to Step 2.

· Step 2: Interview 1: The Pitch

· It’s the Governments intent to only select the best-qualified Design Build Team to Interview 2

· Step 2: Interview 2: The Solution The Government may:

· Seek clarifications or engage in communication(s)

· Consider the relative strengths and weaknesses between Design Build Team(s)

· Make selections without further communication(s) Consistent with the OT framework:

· The Government reserves the right to:

· Modify the evaluation approach as necessary

· Consider additional information obtained through this process

· Select none, one, some, or all Design Build Team(s) for Step 2.

· This evaluation is not conducted under FAR Part 15 procedures, and formal source selection processes do not apply.

***End of Attachment 1***