The General Services Administration announced Wednesday it has selected the Phoenix office of construction firm Ryan Companies to build the $62 million facility. The building will be owned by Ryan and leased to GSA for use by the FBI under a 20-year lease.

Many companies apparently competed for the build-to-suit lease project, indicating the high level of interest in government projects in a time of economic uncertainty in the construction industry.

John Strittmatter, president of Ryan’s southwest division, told the Phoenix Business Journal that the effort was well worth it.

It was a national competition that lasted well over a year. It was a long and expensive process, but we’re very excited.

The building currently is being designed; construction will begin this fall and take 18 months to complete.

The General Services Administration announced Wednesday that it’s awarded a build-to-suit lease for 575,000 square feet of office space for the agency, whose employees now are scattered among five buildings.

The JBG Companies of Washington will develop two facilities, connected by a central atrium, at the Shady Grove Life Sciences Center in Montgomery County, Md., for the agency. JBG is leasing land for the project from Johns Hopkins University.

The facilities will be built to achieve the second-highest rating from the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program, GSA said.

The architectural firm HOK will design the facility, and James G. Davis Construction will be the general contractor.

 The job listing has now been posted to USAJobs, and it offers some key details that were left out of the earlier post. For instance, the job will be a career position at the GS-15 level, which has a starting salary of nearly $124,000 in Washington. As a senior adviser to the head of  GSA’s Public Buildings Service, the chief greening officer will develop and implement green building programs and strategies across GSA’s inventory of 1,500 owned facilities.

Applications will be accepted until March 3.

In addition, earlier reports that the CIA also leased space in the facility were incorrect, according to a federal official. The General Services Administration leases more than 44,000 square feet of space in the building for the IRS. 

Original post: A small plane crashed into an office building in Austin, Texas, this morning that houses field offices for the FBI and CIA, according to various news reports.

Nearly 200 IRS employees work in the building, which is part of the Echelon office complex, and the building also houses CIA employees, according to local NBC affiliate KXAN. Employees were being accounted for. 

Austin newspaper The Statesman quotes IRS agent William Winnie, who said he was in a training session on the third floor of the seven-story building when he saw a light-colored, single engine plane coming at the building. The plane crashed into the lower floors.

It looked like it was coming right in my window. I didn’t lose my footing, but it was enough to knock people who were sitting to the floor.

The sessions, held the first Thursday of each month, will discuss requirements to report greenhouse gas emissions, install advanced electrical meters on facilities, cut water consumption and make existing buildings more energy efficient, among others.

The 90-minute sessions will be offered live via satellite or through streaming video at your desktop. Registrations are now being accepted online.

The first session was an overview of the executive order President Obama issued in October on greening the government’s operations. It’s already occured, but an archive of the webcast is available here.

The building is the Smithsonian’s main off-site storage warehouse for museum artifacts. It’s unknown what, if any, artifacts may have been damaged by the roof collapse, according to the report. Firefighters responded to the scene before 7 a.m. and shut off electricity and natural gas to the warehouse.

Officials have been warning about the dangers of roofs collapsing from the weight of all the snow the area has received. According to Michael McGill, spokesman for the General Services Administration’s National Capital Region, damage to buildings maintained by GSA has been minimal so far.  A sprinkler burst in one of the buildings at the Food and Drug Administration’s headquarters campus in White Oak, Md. GSA also had to shore up the roof of its 1 million square foot warehouse in Franconia, Va., which was weakened by damage from December’s storm.

The ambitious federal target is the aggregate of percentage reduction targets reported by 35 federal agencies earlier this month. President Obama ordered agencies in an October executive order to begin measuring and reducing their carbon footprints, the first such comprehensive effort by the federal government.

I’ll be sitting in on a conference call at 11 a.m. with administration officials to discuss the initiative. Check back at www.federaltimes.com for a full report.

Here is what Obama said in tonight’s State of the Union address regarding the hold up of several of his nominees:

The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.

And here are two links to our past posts about the hold Bond has on Johnson’s full Senate confirmation. Both note the hold is directly related to Bond’s desire to move a federal complex owned by GSA to downtown Kansas City, Mo.

So what do you think? Did Obama just give Johnson a shout-out of support? Discuss it in the comments section below.

Is it time for the FBI headquarters building to go missing?

The folks over at WeLoveDC.com asked readers today to name a building they’d like to see erased from the DC skyline, and the results could spark a federal investigation.

Most readers called for the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building to be torn down. The headquarters building, built between 1967 and 1974, is made of poured concrete in the Brutalist architectural style that was popular at the time but has since gone out of fashion.

Other readers suggested that what the building really needs is an overhaul, not a demolition, pointing out that restoring outdated buildings is not only environmentally preferable but a big source of revenue to the district.

So what do you think? Are there worse offenders out there than the FBI building, and is the best solution to tear down or fix up these outdated structures?

Brita is the staff director for the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management. The subcommittee has oversight of GSA’s Public Building Service and federal real property management.

She replaces Barney Brasseux, a GSA career veteran, who recently retired.

This announcement fills one gap in the agency’s leadership team which has seen an unusual amount of turnover in recent weeks.

Just before Christmas, Stephen Leeds took over the role of acting administrator from Paul Prouty, who decided to return home to Colorado and to his career post as GSA’s Region 8 Public Building Service commissioner.

Earlier this month, Danielle Germain, the agency’s chief of staff, resigned to head up the Collaboration Project at the National Academy of Public Administration. In making the move, Germain said the hold Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., has maintained on Martha Johnson’s confirmation to lead GSA was a factor in her decision. Bond’s hold on the final approval of Johnson’s nomination means the agency has been without a permanent administrator since 2008.

Plum Island Animal Disease Center

A partially decomposed body of a 6-foot tall white man was found on Plum Island, N.Y., home of the the government’s Animal Disease Center, according to a New York Daily News report.

A facility guard found the body, which reportedly had no signs of trauma, on a beach that was part of a secure area of the island.

The mysterious "Montauk Monster" was said to be a Plum Island creation.

This is the latest mystery on an island shrouded in mystery. Some of the world’s most lethal livestock diseases are researched here. During the Cold War, it was home to the government’s bilogical weapons program.

Plum Island’s history as a super-secure animal research facility led many in the New York area to speculate that the so-called “Montauk Monster,” an apparently mutated animal carcass that washed up on Long Island in 2008, came from the facility.

The medical center joins another 15 VA facilities that have been certified through the Green Globes system, which recognizes achievements in energy efficiency and environmental management  practices.

In the U.S., Green Globes has trailed behind the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) as the preferred tool for measuring and certifying green buildings. But like the little engine that could, Green Globes is steadily making inroads in the marketplace.

The Green Building Initiative has marketed Green Globes as an easier and less-costly alternative to LEED, and GBI President Ward Hubbell trumpeted that theme in a press release announcing the 100th certified building.

Reaching the 100 building mark is a significant milestone for the GBI as we continue our work to make green rating tools practical and affordable. Projects like this that obtain a Green Globes rating demonstrate to the building community that it is possible to benchmark and improve the environmental performance of an existing building, even with a limited budget and resources.

The New York Democrat unsuccessfully introduced a bill during the last Congress to ban smoking within 25 feet of any federal building’s entrances, exits, windows that can be opened and ventilation intakes. Engel reintroduced the bill Nov. 18 to correspond with the American Cancer Society’s Great American Smoke Out smoking-cessation campaign.

The Surgeon General reported in 2006 that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. One step we can take in limiting such exposure is to free the entrances of buildings of the clouds of smoke often found when smokers gather outside of entrances and exits. The problem with this is simple – how else are people going to avoid secondhand smoke when the only ways in and out of a building is blocked by smoke?”

The bill would clarify various levels of guidance involving smoking near federal buildings. The General Services Agency banned smoking in courtyards and within 25 feet of doorways at GSA-controlled buildings, effective June 19, 2009.

A 1997 executive order banned smoking in all Executive Branch buildings, as well as all inside space owned, rented or leased by the Executive Branch.

What say you, feds? Is smoking an annoyance at your workplace? Or are you a smoker that would be annoyed by any new regulations?

Confused?

It turns out that while federal agencies are hiring more workers, they’re also getting rid of thousands of buildings they no longer need. The number of buildings in the federal inventory declined nearly 9 percent in 2008, or roughly 70 million square feet, according to a report posted today by the General Services Administration.

GSA attributes the decrease to a reduction of 36,000 military housing units and 4,000 warehouses by the Air Force and Navy.

While I expected to discover quite a bit about the conditions my ancestors endured when they passed through there in the early 1900s, I did not expect to discover a government contracting story that seems to prove the adage “the more things change, the more they stay the same.”

According to an exhibit at the history of the immigration station, after the original complex of wooden buildings burned to the ground in 1897, the Treasury Department ran a competition for a “fireproof” (masonry) building. With the contract awarded to the firm Boring and Tilton, Ellis Island became the first federal facility to be designed under the competitive procedures prescribed by the Tarnsey Act. The act allowed private contractors to design federally owned structures.

The exhibit also highlighted a couple of contracting problems that persist in government contracting to this day. Specifically, Ellis Island came in behind schedule and didn’t meet the needs of the workers there.

Construction began in September 1898 and was supposed to take 12 months, but, according to the exhibit:

Strikes, contract disputes, and a lack of skilled workmen delayed the opening of Ellis Island’s new buildings until December 17, 1900.”

In addition:

Officials working on Ellis Island complained about the building’s design and construction…Designed to meet the needs of 500,000 immigrants each year, Ellis Island actually had to accommodate hundreds of thousands more. Over the next quarter century, the island’s facilities, despite periodic additions, were sorely taxed by the growing surge of immigration.”

Options being considered include thin solar films that are imbedded into roofs, additional insulation to repel heat, and vegetative roofs such as a 5,000-square-foot garden patch atop the seven-story Interior Department headquarters building in Washington.

Other agencies have outfitted their roofs with vegetation, recognizing both the environmental and economic benefits. Our videographer, Colin Kelly, recently toured two examples outside the nation’s capital in Suitland, Md. Follow the links for video of green roofs at the Census Bureau headquarters and at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration facility.

The White House Council on Environmental Quality is working with several agencies to draft the new presidential directive, council chairwoman Nancy Sutley said during an Earth Day event at the State Department. Sutley did not say when the order will be issued.

Existing laws and executive orders already require agencies to cut their energy and water consumption, increase their use of renewable energy, purchase environmentally preferable products and buy alternative fuel vehicles. Sutley said the new order will go even further.

The order will closely integrate federal greening actions and set new goals for energy efficiency, the use of renewable energy, the purchase of fuel-efficient cars, water conservation and encourage overall sustainability.

For those of you who read your Federal Times closely each week, Sutley’s comments should come as no surprise. We reported this week that the administration was reviewing all existing goals to determine which ones should be updated, modified or otherwise revised to meet the Obama administration’s green government commitments.

Original post: The General Services Administration just announced that it’s decided how it will spend the $5.5 billion in stimulus funds it received.

Congress directed that $4.5 billion go toward converting federal buidlings to high-performance green facilities. Another $750 million is available for building and renovating federal buildings and courthouses, and $300 million must be directed to renovating and constructing land ports of entry.

GSA said it’s selected projects based on the speed at which jobs can be created and hwo much added energy efficiency can be gained. GSA intends to award $1 billion in projects within 120 days and the rest of the work in the next two years, according to a press release issued this afternoon.

Money will be spread out across the country, and every state should see at least one GSA-funded stimulus project, the agency said.

GSA said a detailed plan has been submitted to Congress, several days ahead of the April 2 deadline required by law. We’ll have more details in coming days.

After all, federal agencies are rating scores of products — everything from awards and bed linens to vending machines and water coolers — for recycled and biobased content, energy and water savings and absence of environmentally harmful chemicals or gases.

Agencies are required to buy environmentally preferable products, but finding out whether green alternatives exist for products being purchased is often a time- consuming and frustrating exercise.

Now there is a tool to make it a little easier. An intern at the White House Office of the Federal Environmental Executive has compiled environmental ratings from nine federal programs on products cutting across 18 broad categories into an Excel spreadsheet.

It’s the first time all of the designated products have been compiled into an easy to use tool for facility and fleet managers, information technology personnel, contracting officials and those who are certifying the products and services, said Dana Arnold, the acting federal environmental executive.

Arnold said the tool will be posted to both www.ofee.gov and www.fedcenter.gov and updated as new products are designated.

In an executive order issued this afternoon, Obama said the White House would encourage agencies to require so-called project labor agreements for facility, highway or other construction projects totaling at least $25 million. The union contracts would establish work rights and labor dispute procedures for all employees working for a contractor or subcontractor on a specific construction project.

Obama said such work rules would ensure big construction projects don’t get bogged down by disputes among various companies working on a single project.

Obama’s order re-establishes procedures that were in place under President Clinton that were overturned by President George W. Bush.

The full text of the order is after the jump.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

USE OF PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS FOR FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and in order to promote the efficient administration and completion of Federal construction projects, it is hereby ordered that:

Section 1. Policy. (a) Large-scale construction projects pose special challenges to efficient and timely procurement by the Federal Government. Construction employers typically do not have a permanent workforce, which makes it difficult for them to predict labor costs when bidding on contracts and to ensure a steady supply of labor on contracts being performed. Challenges also arise due to the fact that construction projects typically involve multiple employers at a single location. A labor dispute involving one employer can delay the entire project. A lack of coordination among various employers, or uncertainty about the terms and conditions of employment of various groups of workers, can create frictions and disputes in the absence of an agreed-upon resolution mechanism. These problems threaten the efficient and timely completion of construction projects undertaken by Federal contractors. On larger projects, which are generally more complex and of longer duration, these problems tend to be more pronounced.

(b) The use of a project labor agreement may prevent these problems from developing by providing structure and stability to large-scale construction projects, thereby promoting the efficient and expeditious completion of Federal construction contracts. Accordingly, it is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement.

Sec. 2. Definitions.

(a) The term “labor organization” as used in this order means a labor organization as defined in 29 U.S.C. 152(5).

(b) The term “construction” as used in this order means construction, rehabilitation, alteration, conversion, extension, repair, or improvement of buildings, highways, or other real property.

(c) The term “large-scale construction project” as used in this order means a construction project where the total cost to the Federal Government is $25 million or more.

(d) The term “executive agency” as used in this order has the same meaning as in 5 U.S.C. 105, but excludes the Government Accountability Office.

(e) The term “project labor agreement” as used in this order means a pre-hire collective bargaining agreement with one or more labor organizations that establishes the terms and conditions of employment for a specific construction project and is an agreement described in 29 U.S.C. 158(f).

Sec. 3. (a) In awarding any contract in connection with a large-scale construction project, or obligating funds pursuant to such a contract, executive agencies may, on a project-by-project basis, require the use of a project labor agreement by a contractor where use of such an agreement will (i) advance the Federal Government’s interest in achieving economy and efficiency in Federal procurement, producing labor-management stability, and ensuring compliance with laws and regulations governing safety and health, equal employment opportunity, labor and employment standards, and other matters, and (ii) be consistent with law.

(b) If an executive agency determines under subsection (a) that the use of a project labor agreement will satisfy the criteria in clauses (i) and (ii) of that subsection, the agency may, if appropriate, require that every contractor or subcontractor on the project agree, for that project, to negotiate or become a party to a project labor agreement with one or more appropriate labor organizations.

Sec. 4. Any project labor agreement reached pursuant to this order shall:

(a) bind all contractors and subcontractors on the construction project through the inclusion of appropriate specifications in all relevant solicitation provisions and contract documents;

(b) allow all contractors and subcontractors to compete for contracts and subcontracts without regard to whether they are otherwise parties to collective bargaining agreements;

(c) contain guarantees against strikes, lockouts, and similar job disruptions;

(d) set forth effective, prompt, and mutually binding procedures for resolving labor disputes arising during the project labor agreement;

(e) provide other mechanisms for labor-management cooperation on matters of mutual interest and concern, including productivity, quality of work, safety, and health;

and

(f) fully conform to all statutes, regulations, and Executive Orders.

Sec. 5. This order does not require an executive agency to use a project labor agreement on any construction project, nor does it preclude the use of a project labor agreement in circumstances not covered by this order, including leasehold arrangements and projects receiving Federal financial assistance. This order also does not require contractors or subcontractors to enter into a project labor agreement with any particular labor organization.

Sec. 6. Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council), to the extent permitted by law, shall take whatever action is required to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation to implement the provisions of this order.

Sec. 7. The Director of OMB, in consultation with the Secretary of Labor and with other officials as appropriate, shall provide the President within 180 days of this order, recommendations about whether broader use of project labor agreements, with respect to both construction projects undertaken under Federal contracts and construction projects receiving Federal financial assistance, would help to promote the economical, efficient, and timely completion of such projects.

Sec. 8. Revocation of Prior Orders, Rules, and Regulations. Executive Order 13202 of February 17, 2001, and Executive Order 13208 of April 6, 2001, are revoked. The heads of executive agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law, revoke expeditiously any orders, rules, or regulations implementing Executive Orders 13202 and 13208.

Sec. 9. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of the provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 10. General. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Sec. 11. Effective Date. This order shall be effective immediately and shall apply to all solicitations for contracts issued on or after the effective date of the action taken by the FAR Council under section 6 of this order.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,

February 6, 2009.