A/E SELECTION PROCEDURE

## SCOPE

A.  The policies and procedures set forth herein [shall be
    followed]{.underline} in the evaluation and selection of firms to
    provide architect-engineer (A-E) services under subcontract to
    Fermilab. These policies and procedures may be used in selecting a
    firm to provide A/E services necessary for a specified project or
    activity, or in selecting one or more firms for the award of a
    subcontract in the nature of a master subcontract arrangement with
    subsequent Task Order releases for the provision of A/E services to
    Fermilab as needs for them arise over the term of the subcontract.

B.  "Architect‑Engineer Services" are defined as professional services
    associated with the design or construction of real property that, to
    ensure the quality or reliability of the services, require
    performance by registered architects or engineers or their
    employees. Services may also include studies, design reviews,
    surveying, soils engineering, cost estimating, scheduling,
    inspection of construction, and construction management.

C.  Procurement by Fermilab of A/E services is not subject to the
    requirements of FAR Part 36 or Department of Energy Acquisition
    Regulation (DEAR) Part 936. The policies and procedures set forth
    herein are intended to:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  Assure the selection of the most qualified firm(s) to provide the
    needed A/E services in an efficient and cost‑effective manner;

2.  Establish fair and uniform guidelines and procedures for the A/E
    selection process; and

3.  Promote competition in the selection process to the greatest extent
    practicable.

# **A/E PROCUREMENTS ESTIMATED NOT TO EXCEED \$100,000**

For procurement of A/E services [estimated not to exceed
\$100,000]{.underline} in value, the following procedures will be
followed:

A.  [If appropriate master subcontracts for A/E services of the nature
    required are in effect]{.underline}. The Procurement Administrator
    (PA) shall [(a) ascertain whether A/E firms already under a master
    subcontract is qualified and otherwise suitable to perform the
    required work and, if so, (b) select the appropriate firm already
    under subcontract with which to place the order for A/E
    services]{.underline}. The Procurement Administrator shall consult
    with the requisitioner and an appropriate representative of the
    Facilities Engineering Services Section (FESS) before making the
    determinations in (a) and (b).

B.  [If no appropriate master subcontract for A/E services of the nature
    required is in effect]{.underline}. The Procurement Administrator
    shall [hold discussions with at least two or more firms]{.underline}
    determined to be highly qualified for the required work. Firms to be
    considered shall be chosen from those which have [previously
    submitted an SF‑254 or a letter expressing]{.underline} interest in
    doing work of the nature required as well as [those firms which have
    performed satisfactorily on previous Fermilab subcontracts for A/E
    services of a similar type]{.underline}. The Procurement
    Administrator may also consider firms [whose listings in telephone
    directories]{.underline}, [advertisements]{.underline}, or
    [professional periodicals]{.underline} indicate that they are highly
    qualified to perform the work in question. The Procurement
    Administrator shall consult with the requisitioner and an
    appropriate representative of FESS before making the final selection
    of the firm to be awarded a master subcontract for the required
    work. While all discussions with firms under consideration shall be
    conducted only by the Procurement Administrator, the requisitioner
    and the FESS representative may participate in them at the
    discretion of the Procurement Administrator.

C.  Each selection under A. and B. [shall be supported by documentation
    preferably prepared by FESS which describes the nature of A/E
    services required]{.underline}, the [estimated cost]{.underline},
    and the [schedule for performance of the work]{.underline}. For each
    selection under B. above, the documentation shall [also include the
    critical selection criteria utilized]{.underline}, [an explanation
    why no existing blanket order subcontract could be
    used]{.underline}, and the [Procurement Administrator's
    summary]{.underline} of the procedures followed in the selection
    process including [the findings and rationale leading]{.underline}
    to the final selection.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
III. **A/E PROCUREMENTS ESTIMATED TO BE BETWEEN \$100,000 AND
     \$500,000**

For A/E services procurements estimated not to exceed \$500,000 in
value. The Head of the Business Services Section (BSS) shall [direct the
Procurement Administrator to proceed with a streamlined selection
process]{.underline}. [The Procurement Administrator shall]{.underline},
coordinating as necessary with the requisitioning office:
[1)]{.underline} develop a scope of work for the procurement;
[2)]{.underline} establish appropriate evaluation criteria and then
relative weights (Section V.A.3. may be used as a guide); and
[3)]{.underline} review available sources of information on the
qualifications and capabilities of potential offerors and identify a
sufficient number of firms ([preferably no less than three]{.underline})
to ensure adequate competition. Those firms are then contacted and
invited to provide further information as to their qualifications and
proposed manner to perform the particular work involved. The additional
information may be in the form of a brief narrative geared to that work.
[The Procurement Administrator]{.underline}, preferably with the
assistance of Fermilab staff with A/E experience, [shall evaluate all
pertinent information, and using the evaluation criteria established for
the procurement, select the most qualified of the responding firms for
negotiation and award of a master subcontract]{.underline}. In order to
avoid situations which might give rise to conflicts of interest, the
Procurement Administrator should apprise any others who would
participate in the evaluation process of the policies set forth in the
*Fermilab Procurement Policy and Procedures Manual* which pertain to
personal relationships with firms under consideration that might
adversely affect the ability to perform an impartial and objective
evaluation. The Procurement Administrator shall [document all steps of
the selection process, particularly the results of evaluations of all
responding firms and the reasons why the selectee was the most
qualified]{.underline}.

IV. **A/E PROCUREMENT ESTIMATE TO EXCEED \$500,000**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
A.  For A/E services procurements estimated to exceed \$500,000 in
    value, the Head of the Business Services [Section shall appoint and
    A/E Evaluation Board (or Board) to evaluate the qualifications of
    A/E firms for selection for award]{.underline}, and [shall serve as
    the Source Selection Official]{.underline} (SSO) who provides
    instructions and guidance to the Board, [reviews the Board's
    findings and recommendations, and makes the final selection of the
    firm or firms]{.underline} with whom negotiations of a subcontract
    are to proceed. The Head of the Business Services Section may, on a
    case-by-case basis, delegate the authority to appoint a Board and to
    serve as the SSO to a Deputy or Assistant Head of the Business
    Services Section or the Head of the Fermilab Procurement Department
    or, after coordination with the Fermilab Directorate, to another
    Fermilab official or employee having appropriate experience or
    qualifications in A/E, project, or source selection matters.

B.  A Board collectively should have experience in the A/E disciplines
    needed for the project or in the type of construction involved, and
    in Fermilab procurement policies and procedures. A Board shall be
    comprised of at least three (3) and normally not more than seven (7)
    voting members. All voting members must be full-time Fermilab
    employees. The SSO will designate one of the voting members as the
    Chairperson. Among the voting members of a Board, one member must be
    from the Fermilab Procurement Department and one member from the
    cognizant program organization. Additional technical, legal, and
    other advisors may also be appointed to the Board as non‑voting
    members. These advisors need not be Fermilab employees.

C.  As early as practicable, and preferably prior to formally appointing
    individuals to the Board, the SSO shall ascertain whether the
    service of any prospective Board member (both voting and non‑voting)
    would give rise to a conflict of interest that warrants
    disqualification of that individual from membership on that Board.
    The SSO shall ensure that each Board member duly executes a
    Confidentiality Certificate (Exhibit I) and a Conflict of Interest
    Certificate (Exhibit II). The originals of all Certificates shall be
    retained as part of the official Board file.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
V.  **A/E BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES AND PROCEDURES**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
A.  [Preparation of Letters of Interest]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  The Board shall review specifications and/or statement of work
    prepared by the requisitioner, and ensure that they are adequate and
    not unduly restrictive of competition before they are incorporated
    into a solicitation.

2.  The Board shall review the project requirements including:

-   Type of project and statement of work

-   Type of subcontract proposed

-   Estimated cost of services and cost of construction

-   Schedule objectives

-   Specific evaluation criteria

3.  Evaluation Criteria are mandatory and must be incorporated into
    every source selection. The criteria shall include the general
    qualifications of the firm, the personnel and organization, and any
    specialized criteria developed for the specific project. Evaluation
    criteria are used to determine the offeror's understanding of the
    requirements, potential for successfully accomplishing the work, and
    comparative competitive status. The evaluation of A/E firm's
    responses to the RFP and the relative importance, or weight,
    assigned to each category becomes the basis the selection of the
    successful offeror. The Board shall develop a plan for scoring and
    ranking the A/E firms in a fair, impartial, and consistent manner.
    The criteria used shall be set forth in the invitation documents and
    should include the following except as otherwise determined by the
    Board and approved by the Head of the Business Services Section.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(a) General Qualifications:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1)  Reputation and standing of the firm and its principal members;

2)  Experience and technical competence of the firm in comparable work;

3)  Past record in performing work for DOE, other government agencies,
    and in private industry including projects or contracts implemented
    with no overruns; performance from the standpoint of cost including
    cost overruns (last five years); the nature, extent, and
    effectiveness of contractor's cost reduction program; quality of
    work; and ability to meet schedules including schedule overruns
    (last five years), where applicable;

4)  The volume of past and present workloads;

5)  Interest of company management in the project and expected
    participation and contribution of top officials;

6)  Adequacy of central or branch office facilities for the proposed
    work including facilities for any special services that may be
    required;

7)  Geographic location of the home office and familiarity with the
    locality in which the project is located.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(b) Personnel and Organization

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1)  Specific experience and qualifications of personnel proposed for
    assignment to the project including, as required, for various phases
    of the work:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
i.  technical skills and abilities in planning, organizing, executing,
    and controlling;

ii. abilities in overall project coordination and management; and

iii. experience in working together as a team.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2)  Proposed project organization, delegations of responsibility, and
    assignments of authority;

3)  Availability of additional competent, regular employees for support
    of the project and the depth and size of the organization so that
    any necessary expansion or acceleration could be handled adequately;

4)  Experience and qualifications of proposed consultants and
    subcontractors; and

5)  Ability to assign adequate personnel from the proposed organization
    (firm's own organization, joint‑venture organizations, consulting
    firms, etc.) including key personnel and a competent supervising
    representative.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(c) Additional (or special) criteria developed for the specific project
    shall be considered and evaluated as may be appropriate.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  Cost or Price Considerations

> Unless instructed otherwise by the SSO, cost or price considerations
> are not used as evaluation criteria by the Board, and cost proposals
> are not requested as part of the Board evaluation process.

B.  [Approval of Board Actions by SSO]{.underline}

> The Board shall develop and submit to the SSO, for approval prior to
> issuance or public advertisement, the proposal letter of invitation
> and/or advertisement which will be sent to prospective A/E's. The
> invitation should incorporate the following: Statement of work, type
> of subcontract, appropriate value of engineering and construction
> phases, schedule for services, and evaluation criteria.

C.  [Collection of Data on Architect-Engineer Firms]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  In order to obtain adequate and effective competition in the
    acquisition of A/E services, the Board shall endeavor to solicit
    interest through means such as:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(a) Advertisement in the Commerce Business Daily.

(b) Advertisement in appropriate professional journals or periodicals.

(c) Mailing notices of intention to subcontract for A/E services to
    firms likely to have the expertise and facilities to rank well
    against the evaluation criteria.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  After the notices of intention to subcontract for A/E services have
    been advertised and/or issued and the date for submission of
    responses has lapsed, the Board shall review and evaluate all
    responses. The Board will examine each firm's response and evaluate
    it against the established evaluation criteria. The voting members
    will then rank the firms against the weighted evaluation criteria.
    The total score for each firm shall determine its ranking (highest
    to the lowest). Based on this evaluation, no less than three firms
    should be selected for "Discussions". These firms can be identified
    by reviewing previously submitted SF‑254's and other expressions of
    interest. Every opportunity shall be given to Small Business and
    economically disadvantaged firms.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
D.  [Approval of Selected Firms for Discussions]{.underline}

> After three or more firms have been selected in accordance with the
> above procedures, approval shall be obtained from the SSO to enter
> into "Discussions" with those firms for further and in‑depth
> evaluation and also for approval to delete the balance of the firms no
> longer considered competitive. The report submitted for SSO approval
> shall include the consensus of Board evaluation findings for all firms
> that responded to the invitation.

E.  [Discussion Phase]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  After the firms have been selected in accordance with the above,
    discussions shall be held with those firms. These discussions may be
    used to obtain additional qualifications performance and management
    data, and other information needed to properly apply the evaluation
    criteria and evaluate the firms under consideration. Discussions may
    include telephone conversations, exchange of correspondence, or
    interviews.

2.  Supplemental information may be required prior to and as a prelude
    to the discussion phase of the A/E Selection Process. Such is
    appropriate for the larger or more complex projects where
    information beyond that already furnished is needed to apply the
    evaluation criteria and evaluate and rank the firms.

3.  Requests for supplemental information will be limited to information
    that will enable selection of the best-qualified contractor.

4.  Requests for supplemental information should state the purpose for
    such information similar to the following: "As a result of our
    initial evaluation of material on file with this office and the
    SF‑254's and/or SF‑255 submitted in response to our invitation, we
    have selected your firm for further consideration for selection to
    perform the architect‑engineer services. The principal purposes of
    this request is to obtain additional specific qualification and
    performance data concerning your firm."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
F.  [Selection of Firm or Firms for Negotiation]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  After discussions and further evaluation of the firms, the Board
    shall recommend to the SSO---in order of preference---no less than
    three firms deemed to be the most highly qualified to provide the
    A/E services. The SSO shall select the firm determined to be most
    highly qualified for subcontract negotiations. Should the SSO select
    a firm other than that ranked most favorable by the Board, the SSO
    shall provide complete documentation justifying his selection.

2.  To assist the SSO in his determination and selection, the Board
    shall submit a written report of its actions, findings, and
    evaluations of the most highly qualified firms. The report shall
    present the consensus of the relative strengths and weaknesses of
    the finalists and why they ranked as they did. Cost considerations
    may be addressed at this time by the Board but not as an evaluation
    criteria in ranking.

3.  Upon acceptance of the Board recommendations by the SSO, the Board
    Chairperson shall:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(a) Advise the selected firm of its status in writing.

(b) Advise the unsuccessful offerors of the selection in writing.

(c) Prepare a Final Report for the SSO of all the Board's actions and
    determinations from establishment to acceptance of its
    recommendations. The report will thus contain the accumulated papers
    and backup material developed by the Board. This report will become
    part of the procurement file and will remain confidential.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  The preparation and transmittal of sample subcontracts for
    solicitation of price proposals will be by the Procurement
    Administrator after the Board's work is approved by the SSO. Any
    subcontract negotiations will be by the Procurement Administrator.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
G.  [Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors]{.underline}

> After the selection is announced, unsuccessful offerors may submit
> written requests for debriefings. Such requests should be received
> within two weeks after the selection announcement. Debriefings shall
> not be conducted without the participation of the Board Chairperson
> and the Procurement Department member of the Board. The rules for all
> debriefings are described below:

1.  Debriefings shall be confined to discussions of how the unsuccessful
    offeror could have improved its proposal. The specifics of the
    scoring will not be discussed.

2.  The Board's selection scores will be discussed in general, but no
    discussion will be allowed of the other proposals.

3.  No selection documents will be released.

4.  The Board Chairperson shall develop an official record of the
    debriefing.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
VI. **SOLE SOURCE A/E PROCUREMENT AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
A.  While it is the policy of Fermilab to acquire A/E services by means
    of competition utilizing the procedures set forth above, nothing
    herein shall preclude the acquisition of A/E services on a sole
    source basis where the exigencies of a particular procurement so
    dictate. In such cases, the sole source procurement procedures set
    forth in the *Fermilab Procurement Policy and Procedures Manual*
    shall be followed to the greatest extent practicable, and a
    Justification for Noncompetitive Procurement, as described in the
    Manual, shall be prepared.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  For A/E services procurements estimated not to exceed \$50,000 in
    value, the Justification must be reviewed and approved by the
    Procurement Manager.

2.  For A/E services procurements estimated to exceed \$50,000 in value,
    the Justification must be reviewed and approved by the Head of the
    Business Services Section.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
B.  Nothing herein shall preclude any limitation being placed on the
    size or types of firms which may be eligible for award in any given
    procurement in furtherance of Fermilab subcontracting policies and
    plans that have been established pursuant to the Prime Contract with
    DOE.

EXHIBITS:

Exhibit I - Confidentiality Certificate

Exhibit II - Conflicts of Interest Certificate