PUBLIC BUILDINGS - SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 27, 2008
• Sequence Number: 92
• Publication Date: July 26, 1972
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
PUBLIC BUILDINGS
P.L. 92-582
PUBLIC BUILDINGS-SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS
AND ENGINEERS
House Report (Government Operations Committee) No. 92-1188,
June 28, 1972 [To accompany H.R. 128071
Senate Report (Government Operations Committee) No. 92-4219,
Sept. 25, 1972 [To accompany H.R. 128071
Cong. Record Vol. 118 (1972)
DATES OF CONSIDERATION AND PASSAGE
House July 26, 1972
Senate October 14, 1972
The Senate Report is set out.
SENATE REPORT NO. 92-1219
~! I I' Corrunittev on Government Operations, to whi,:?h was referred
the bill (H.R. 12807) to amend the Federal Property and Adurinis-
trativeServices Act of I9 t9, in order to establish Federal policy con-
cerningthe selection of fi rms and individuals to perform architeetnral,
engineering. and related services for the Federal Government, havilig
crnrsidered the same, reports favorably thereon without. amendment
and recornmends that the bill do pass.
PURPoss
The 1)irrpose of ILR. 12807 is to cast in statutory form the tradi.
tional system Government agencies have used for more than 30 years
in the procurement of architect-engineer services. Tie hill would
amend the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949
to estzi)lish a Federal policy for the selection of quaiitied architects
and engineers to design an.cl provide consultant services in rr r} in,
out. Federal construction and related programs. The bill expressly
declares it to be the policy of the Federal Government to negotiate
contracts for such professional services on the basis of demonstrated
competence and qualifications for the type of professional service re-
(juired at fair and reasonable prices.
BACKGROUNI)
On .April 20. 1967. the Comptroller General of the United States
requested Congress to clarify by legislation the procedure used in se-
lecting r relritect and engineerin se vices under Federal procurement
statues. The Comptroller General subsequently reconiendnrp'd that the
:sr l "ctir)n process for these services follow a competitive pricin,' proce-
dure under which the amount. of the fee to be paid would be cons idern~d
a factor in the selection process. The Comptroller General has re(,corrr-
4767
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
P.L. 92-582
u ei led ghat the 6-percent limitation on architect-engineer fees slhinild
he rely irled.
Legislat iorr similar to 11.It. 12807 was passed by tine IIouse during
the 91st Congress and reported by this cornrnittee. Ilowever, Congress
adjourned before the Senate could act on the inearure.
A bill, S. 3156, was introduced in the 92d Congress by Senator :1bc-
Clellan and Senator Percy which is substantially similar to 11.R.
12S07.
'T'here, a ro several differences between I1.R. 12807 and tiv, measure re-
ported by the committee in the 91st Congress. First, language was
added to require public announcement of all requests for -l/E services.
Tliis will assure that all interested A/E's have the opportun itv to loll-11
about the Government's requirements for design services. Such maeda-
tory public announcement is designed to enh once further
n eonrpetitem
anxrg L/L's for Government contracts.
II.It. 12807 also was modified to reflect the suggestion that discrts-
sions of anticipated concepts and the relative utilitl of alternative
methods for furnishing rertuired. services should be taken into account
in evaluating the relative competence and qualifications of 1/E's and
not wait until negotiations are already underway with the selected
Finally, at the suggestion of the Generai SkXvices Adruinisi rat ion.
larrghrir e was added to imprc,ye the Solect1011 h1,0 1'chrre, should ionic
of thr+ originally selected firers agree to a satisfactory coirtr:act.
EXPLANATION (IF THE BILL
11, R. 12807 responds to the Comptroller General's rertaest that Con-
gress cla iify the procedure for selecting architectsand errginoei . The
hill retains the, present practice of selecting; the best qualified design
professional, subject to the negotiation of compensation that is fair
agog r:asonable to the Government.
The hill does not affect existing statutes which limit- architect-engi-
ne'r foes to 6 percent of the estimated coa.structiorr cost:. The. r;-J 'I c ant,
linrilAlion, when applied to the preparation of ric i,s, pl:(ns,'liea'-
ir s, nod specifications as Congress intended. is a ye l able s,ieguard
to ths public. While the limitation may pose some ~lifliculty in 110gn-
ti:rung fair compensation for small projects, renovation work and
projects requiring exceptional design cil'ort;., lla. 6-percent fee h.rnit.a-
tr ':n is deemed to be an equitable ceiling.
1t1.I{. 12807 restates the selection procedure generally applied in the
procurement of architectural and engineering services--a procedure
which Federal, State, and local governments have been using for more
than 30 years, and which is also followed to a large degree by the pri-
vate sector. Under this selection procedure, architects anal engineers
compete on the basis of their respective capabilities, aqualilioatious, and
experience its they relate to a proposed project. A /E's are ranked by
the procuring agency on the basis of their ability to perform thw proj-
ect. Negotiations are then conducted with the top ranking firm to arrive
at the compensation for the project. Under H.R. 12807, the compen-
sation paid must be "fair and reasonable to the Government." Further-
more, the architect-engineer fee for the preparation of desig*ns, plans,
drawings, and specifications can be no more than 6 percent of the esti
mated construction cost of the project. The 6-percent limitation has
been in existence sinee 1930 and is not changed by 11. H. 12;07.
4768
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
PUBLIC BUILDINGS
P.L. 92-582
As provided ill the bill, architectural and euigineering firms engaged
it, the lawful practice of their profession, are encouraged to submit an-
nt,illy a statcment of qualifications and performance data, to the a~ev
Bits eOnccrned with the procurement of stuoh professional services. The
agency head, for each proposed project after public announcement,
must evalnatc current statements of qualifications and (erforniauicc.
data on file ;vith the agency, together with those that may be sttb-uifted
by other firms and then select in order of preference, no less than threo
of the firms deemed to be the most highly c ualified to provide the
services required, based upon criteria which be has established and
published.
The agency head then enters into negotiations with the firm deemed
most qualified, and a contract, is let if a fee (comprising the architect's
or eugut(er's cast, of performing the services, plus his anticipated
profit) that is fair and reasonable to the Government can be agreed
upon. In making his determination, the agency head must take into
account the estimated value of the services to be rendered and their
sci eject.
This section does not require the submission of pre.linnnar~ designs,
plans, drawings, specifications, or other material relrtuig to the pro
posed project. In unique situations involving "prestige '" prole( t : such
is the design of memorials and structures of unusual national sigariti--
e ance. when the additional cost justifies the approach. and Winch rime
,flows, the agency head can rely upon design competition undcr? tl
recognized procedures that have been traditionally applir,l to this
type of procurement. Generally, however, it is expected that the ,el;one v
head, through discussions with an appropriate number of the firms iii-
terested in the project, will obtain sufficient knowledge as to tit=' ai.y-
ing architectural and engineering techniques that, together vsitI the
information on file with the agency, will make it possible for hint to
make a meaningful ranking. Under no circumstances should the cri-
teria developed by an agency head relating to the ranking of architects
and engineers on the basis of their professional qualifications include,
or relate to the fee to be paid to the firm, either directly or indirectly.
seetwn 90I
Section 90-1(a) sots out the primary negotiation stage once the se-
lection process has been completed. This section requires that the ccior-
mination of the fee be fair and reasonable to the Government. taking
into account the estimated value of the services to be rendered and
the scope, complexity, and professional nature of the perforntnare
required of the architect or the engineer. The phrase "highest qu,eli-
fied" as used in this section relates back to the selection made in section
90x. This phrase is not limited merely to the technical accepta-
bility of the firm, but includes other meaningful, pertinent considera-
tions which have been universally applied in determining relative
qualifications of architects and engineers to perform a specific project,
and which relate to the quality of the work the Government might
reasonably expect from members of these professions.
Section 904(b) states the procedure to be followed should the high-
est ranking firm fail to agree to a fee the agency head determines is
fair and reasonable to the Government. This section states that nego-
tiations with the architects or engineers who are ranked first, sccwutd.
and third, and so on be conducted irrdeependentl', and in a saeries. If
tltr agency head determines that the highest ranking firm will not agree
to a fee that is fair and reasonable to the Government, no further
negotiations shall be conducted with that firm on the basis of that
proposal. The agency head w ill then attempt to negotiate a contract
v itli the next nmost qualified architect or engineer, and so on, until
a ;,csiitract is consummated at a fee that is fair and reasonable to the
Government.
Section 901(c) would allow the agency head to select additional
firms in order of coinpetenee and qualification and continue negotia-
Iion5 in accordance with enrlier provisions of the act until an agree-
nter,t is reached, should he be unable to negotiate a satisfactory con-
tract with the firms originally selected.
4774
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP89-00244R000200260092-6
PUBLIC BUILDINGS
P.L. 92-582
Robi.CAI:I, `(TES ON FINAL PASSAGE
~epteiii/ e,10, ,'i1 F'inal Passage,: Ordered reported:
Fcas
McClellau
I:ibicofF
Alen
1I niiphrey
Mathias
Saxbo
Rot11
(Recorded for)
Jackson
Rrock
.S"PInte/o1o 2 20.,
l'f is .
McClellan
Ja