B.04.21 - Consolidation Determ (final) 2025.04.24 - W912HP25RA005 - DBDBB East MATOC_Redacted.pdf

CUI//SP-SSEL

CUI//SP-SSEL

CONSOLIDATION OF CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION

FOR

W912HP25RA0005

FY25 Design Build/Design Bid Build (DB/DBB) General Construction East

Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) (As prescribed by FAR 7.107-2 and AFARS 5107.107-2)

RATIONALE

1. Consolidation may provide substantial benefits to the Government. However, because of the potential impact on competition, before conducting an acquisition that is a consolidation of requirements with an estimated total dollar value exceeding $2 million, a written determination shall be made that the consolidation is necessary and justified in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 657q, after ensuring that--

(a) Market research has been conducted;

(b) Any alternative contracting approaches that would involve a lesser degree of consolidation have been identified;

(c) The determination is coordinated with the agency's Office of Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization or the Office of Small Business Programs;

(d) Any negative impact by the acquisition strategy on contracting with small business concerns has been identified; and

(e) Steps are taken to include small business concerns in the acquisition strategy.

2. Introduction: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Charleston District (SAC) plans to solicit offers under one solicitation for a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) to meet the needs of construction workload that will performed at two or more discrete sites (per 15 U.S.C. § 657q(a)(2)(B)) under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220, Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The solicitation will be 100% small business set aside and the MATOC subsequently awarded will cover the United States East of the Mississippi, with a target of seven awards. SAC has conducted analysis and market research that demonstrates consolidation of requirements in this procurement is both necessary and justified.

The MATOC will have a total combined capacity of $ .

3. Description of the Procurement Action:

a. Project Description:

CUI//SP-SSEL

The overall objective is to provide a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) for Design-Build (DB) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB) requirements for most SAC Programs to cover the region east of the Mississippi River. The majority of work issued under this MATOC will be Design-Build. Under this acquisition plan, SAC intends to issue one solicitation for a pool of contractors on a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs). This is demonstrated in Figure 1 below.

This MATOC will provide a total MATOC pool capacity of $ , and a performance period of a three-year base plus one two-year option period (total five years). The estimated task order range will be from the simplified acquisition threshold to $10,000,000, and possibly up to $25,000,000. The geographic area covered by the MATOC includes all states east of the Mississippi River including Puerto Rico (for 81st RD). The East MATOC includes but is not limited to task orders primarily for the following stakeholders: DLA, MFR, 81st RD, Joint Base Charleston (JBC), and Fort Jackson. The scope for the East MATOC is limited to assigned SAC stakeholders within this region but may also be used for other stakeholders within the SAD boundaries for task orders within the general scope if capacity is available. Work includes DBDBB construction for new facilities and real property repair and maintenance. The work may include general building repair or renovation, vertical construction, anti-terrorism force protection of new and existing facilities, horizontal construction, and incidental work.

The proposed contract vehicle will allow SAC to ensure the capacity and

Figure 1: Geographical Coverage by Stakeholder

The award will include a target of seven (7) contractors but may include more or fewer. This acquisition will consist of two phases, with a single solicitation issued for Phase One. In Phase One, proposals will be evaluated based on Past Performance (Factor 1) and Management Approach (Factor 2). Phase Two will assess the Technical Approach (Factor 3) using a seed or sample project, with price also considered (Factor 4). If a seed project is unavailable, a sample project will be used.

The purpose of this acquisition is to provide readily available contract tools that will enable SAC to proactively and quickly execute the design-build and design-bid-build new construction and renovation and repair requirements identified by all SAC Customers. The scope of work for this MATOC will be design-build and design-bid-build general construction projects and may include both renovation and new construction. This contracting effort ensures that SAC will be able to support the construction needs of all current stakeholders and other potential partners over the next five (5) years.

b. Acquisition Strategy/Procurement Summary: To meet the new construction, renovation, and repair requirements identified by SAC Customers at their various facilities over the next five (5) years, SAC intends to award a MATOC with $ in total capacity. This MATOC will support execution of firm-fixed-price (FFP)

CUI//SP-SSEL

task orders for the missions entrusted to SAC. The scope and complexity will vary considerably between assigned projects. The period of performance will be a base period of three (3) years and a single option period for two (2) years.

Individual task orders will be competitively solicited to the MATOC and negotiated to award to a single MATOC contractor. The availability of the MATOC will efficiently and effectively meet many of construction requirements and will also better position SAC to successfully meet short-fused, fiscal year-end acquisition requirements. Use of the MATOC is in the best interest of the Government with respect to timeliness, oversight, and administrative costs.

c. Applicability of Consolidation: As stated above, in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § contract or a multiple award contract - (A) to satisfy two (2) or more requirements of the Federal agency for goods or services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under two (2) or more separate contracts lower in cost than the total cost of the contract for which the offers are solicited; or (B) to satisfy requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at two (2) or more discrete sites. The definition applies to this procurement because this proposed MATOC will be used to perform multiple construction projects awarded on individual task orders at two (2) or more discrete sites.

Requirements Being Consolidated: The planned MATOC will provide Design- Build (DB) and Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Construction at various locations, to include known requirements and requirements specifically developed in coordination with all the customers SAC supports.

a. Procurement History: Historically, SAC has procured this type of work through a combination of various stand-alone C-type contracts or other general construction MATOCs task orders. Existing MATOCs with their corresponding task orders are shown in Tables 1 and 3 below. The projects listed in Table 3 are an accurate representation of the types of projects awarded under these tools and the type of work expected to be awarded under the future MATOCs.

CUI//SP-SSEL

versus relying on multiple individually competed actions with increased lead times. Use of an IDIQ is appropriate in accordance with FAR 16.501-2(a) when exact times and/or exact quantities of future deliveries are not known at the time of award. FAR 16.504(b) indicates that the Contracting Officer may use an indefinite-quantity contract when the Government cannot predetermine, above a specified minimum, the precise quantities of supplies or services that the Government will require during the contract period, and it is inadvisable for the Government to commit itself for more than a minimum quantity. The Contracting Officer should use an indefinite-quantity only when a recurring need is anticipated.

This new MATOC will provide SAC with an acquisition tool and capacity to support awards in a timely and responsive manner, especially during the 3rd and 4th quarter of each fiscal year when much of the work is received and executed.

In accordance with FAR 7.107-2(e)(1), when the benefits of consolidated requirements are not quantifiable as stated at FAR 7.107-2(d)(1), the consolidation must be determined to be necessary and justified based on the and that the procurement strategy provides the maximum practicable participation by small business. The benefits here are not quantifiable, but consolidation is otherwise necessary and justified. The justification for consolidation is discussed in Section Consolidation Benefit Analysis.

4. Results of Market Research:

A Sources Sought Notice was posted on SAM.gov on 21 June 2024 and closed on 8 July 2024. In total, twenty-one (21) businesses responded to the notice expressing interest in the MATOC. The technical team reviewed all the submissions for the following factors, relevant experience and bonding capability. The technical team made the determination that 6 businesses had ratings indicating they could meet the needs of the work to be performed on this MATOC and 7 businesses had ratings indicating they could likely meet the need of the work to be performed on this MATOC. The remaining were given ratings indicating that they likely cannot perform the work. In total, twenty

(20) responses to the sources sought notice were small businesses and one (1) was other than small business. A total of thirteen (13) 8(a) firms submitted; however, only two (2) 8(a) firms were given ratings that indicate capability of performing this work.

Additionally, there were other socio-economic groups represented (HUBzone, SDVOSB, and WOSB) by the responding businesses, but none were highly represented enough to support a MATOC Pool set aside for a particular socioeconomic type.

CUI//SP-SSEL

have a much react to a new requirement. Section 6. Consolidation Benefit Analysis (c) Acquisition Cycle Times SATOCs offer higher performance risk and could be subject to a poor performing contractor that would be difficult and costly to replace, and higher cost risk without competitive pricing and due to the idea many SATOCs will have to be implemented to cover the same Area of Responsibility (AOR) creating much higher administrative costs. The analysis of the alternative approaches is as follows:

As documented in the Acquisition Plan, the PDT analyzed various contract types, including available and anticipated USACE contracts to determine the best contracting vehicle to achieve the successful completion of the construction activities in support of

Two (2) alternatives were identified and analyzed by the PDT.

Alternative 1: No Consolidation Alternative 2: Lower Degree of Consolidation

a. Alternative 1: No Consolidation - Multiple individual contracts, covering each construction need. SAC would primarily utilize competitive Firm Fixed Price -contract awards to cover each construction need.

Cost Risk: The cost risk in utilizing this procurement type is Low because each requirement is competed separately. This approach brings the lowest risk to pricing.

Performance Risk Performance risk is medium. While there is some assurance of successful performance through competing each requirement, this benefit may be offset if SAC must frequently award contracts to new contractors and cannot establish long-term relationships with contractors performing construction under USACE managed projects.

Schedule Risk: Schedule risk is high. The time required to award a standalone contract versus individual task orders against a MATOC is significantly higher, less efficient, and would potentially not allow SAC to meet all milestones and/or mission requirements. A standalone construction contract will take between 120 days and 220 days depending on the estimated value of the requirement. Assuming 4 actions a year, two between $250k and $10M and two between $10M and $100M, our annual lead time will be an estimated 680 days each year.

Other considerations and limitations: While this acquisition strategy has been used by SAC to award general construction and renovation, the increased cycle time decreases the quality of service to SAC leadership has identified that, due to SAC award individual contracts for each construction need is not sustainable due to

, the time required to award a standalone contract versus individual task orders against a MATOC is

CUI//SP-SSEL

significantly higher, less efficient, and endangers milestone and/or mission requirements for many projects.

Furthermore, repeated use of this strategy constrains limited SAC resources due to increased effort in preparation and review of full contract plans and specifications, contract document preparation, coordination with the Small Business Administration, and post-award plan review/acceptance.

b. Alternative 2: Lesser Degree of Consolidation Awarding multiple Single Award

Task Order Contracts (SATOCs) based on geographical area that cover the entirety of the scope of the contract.

Cost Risk: The cost risk in utilizing this procurement type is Medium. This strategy would require more effort to award all the required SATOCs to cover the required area.

Further, there is a significant difference in administrative costs associated with executing and administering a MATOC compared to multiple SATOCs that cover the same scope. Multiple SATOCs are not advantageous to the Government due to the costs of procurement, implementation, administration, and oversight associated with each.

Performance Risk: Performance risk is High. SATOCs have inherent performance risk.

A contractor may demonstrate poor performance in the execution of its SATOC projects. If that risk were realized, there is very little remedy available for the Government to respond timely to other requirements. SATOCs provide limited parameters across the board and would require multiple SATOCs in order to meet the successfully complete complex projects.

Schedule Risk: The Schedule risk is Low. The schedule risk is much lower than Alternative 1. Awarding as multiple SATOCs would require the pre-award activities be completed only once for each IDIQ to cover the five (5) year performance period, rather than each time for a multiple number of individual standalone contracts. This decreases acquisition efforts.

SAC considered the award of multiple SATOCs with respective regions to cover the entire Eastern United States. As previously noted, establishing a MATOC pool of experienced contractors to service their respective regions provides the highest degree contractors will be selected based on their past experience performing design build construction services. The contractors will gain further experience through the iterative process of responding to RFPs and executing projects. It has been SAC that MATOC pool contractors develop into a cadre of more highly qualified and competitive offerors than is available in the general contractor community. Contractors awarded individual SATOCs would be selected on similar past performance and experience factors as MATOC contractors and could increase their experience through the iterative task order process of negotiations and performance. The SATOC

CUI//SP-SSEL

acquisition efforts and costs. This would also have a significant negative impact on end of year execution due to the time frame in which significant expiring funds are received by the District and resources are strained.

Using the acquisition cycle times (see Alternative 1) and estimating an average of four

(4) actions per year under this proposed MATOC, SAC would save an estimated 2,000 days (assuming 3 design build, and 1 design-bid-build procurements per year) of total acquisition cycle time over the course of the five-year MATOC period of performance.

The use of task orders under a MATOC streamlines the procurement process and is significantly more expeditious than a single award required Procurement Acquisition Lead Time (PALT) for a design-bid-using Invitation for Bid (IFB) takes a minimum of 120 days and includes internal reviews (District Quality Control (DQC), Agency Technical Review (ATR), and Biddability, Constructability, Operability, Environmental, and Sustainability (BCOES)), procurement related activities, such as market research, coordination with SBA, creating solicitation, legal review, and administrative activities necessary for soliciting/awarding the contract.

The PALT for a two-phase design-build with similar size and complexity is approximately 220 days. Having multiple projects under development at the same time for similar work would result in overlapping reviews, tie up labor resources, and decrease administrative efficiencies. In addition, the likelihood exists that the same SAC personnel would be working on multiple projects, increasing the time required from project start to contract award for the individual projects. In contrast, task orders under a MATOC do not require significant advance notice, voluminous solicitations and proposal reviews. The historical PALT, i.e., the time it takes from Contracting receiving all the necessary documents until contract award for Design-Build MATOC Task Orders procedures is 60-80 days. This reduced lead time allows SAC to respond faster, increasing the success of the overall mission.

Very often, requests for execution of work are not received by SAC until the third and fourth quarters of the fiscal year. The late project priority determinations by customers and corresponding late delivery of funding necessitates that SAC utilize flexible and efficient procurement strategies. These externally imposed end-of-year procurement requirements are most successfully addressed by the streamlined acquisition procedures provided under FAR Part 16, where there is no requirement to advertise a project for 15 days, or to provide prospective contractors 30 days to submit a proposal.

that are presented in the fourth quarter would be at significant risk, or impossible, to award before funds cease to be available for obligation within the corresponding fiscal year.

Other considerations and limitations: The government also considered the use of 8(a) sole source contracts for actions to fulfill the needs of this program. However, that strategy would only apply to those procurements not using the two-phase design-build procedures at FAR 36.3. It is important to note that many procurements under this

CUI//SP-SSEL

requirements into one contract; thus, they have the potential to restrict competition in violation of CICA by excluding firms that can provide only one portion of the bundled requirement.

d. Applicability of CICA Bundling Principle: Although this action constitutes

CICA bundling by combining like and related construction and MILCON support with design capabilities, it is consistent with industry practice and

SAC to leverage economies of scale, streamline acquisition cycles, and eliminate duplication of efforts by establishing MATOCs with responsive and responsible contractors to perform individual task orders as the need arises. This is critical given the mission to support a variety of different customers (DLA, MFR, Army, and 81st Readiness Division) across United States.

8. Considerations, Facts, Reasoning Supporting the Determination: All facts, considerations and rationale have been covered previously in the findings. The DD 2579 was prepared, reviewed, and signed by the Contracting Officer, Deputy for Small Business, and the Small Business Administration (SBA) Procurement Center Representative (PCR).

9. Summary:

Though this MATOC constitutes consolidation in that it combines construction at two (2) or more discrete sites, this approach provides the best combination of competitive procedures, timely acquisition, cost efficiency, quality, and capable prime contractors to execute the requirements. The quantifiable benefits of consolidation are $672,997.00 or

% of the estimated MATOC value, which does not exceed the minimum standard of 5% applicable to this acquisition (FAR 7.107-2(d)(1)(ii)). However, this savings is significantly supplemented by decreased acquisition cycle times and increased contractor/government relationships that will save time or improve or enhance performance and/or efficiency. Other acquisition alternatives were considered but would result in higher costs and increased acquisition cycle time that would be detrimental to the missions entrusted to SAC.

The consolidated approach provides advantages that substantially exceed the benefits of alternate approaches. Based on sound business judgment in view of the size, complexity, and number of efforts to be executed for SAC customers, the findings of the market research, and the documentation provided herein, consolidation of requirements is both necessary and justified.

CUI//SP-SSEL

CONSOLIDATION OF CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS DETERMINATION

for

W912HP25RA005

FY25 Design Build/Design Bid Build (DB/DBB) General Construction East

Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC)

The following signatures indicate concurrence with the contents of this document:

Program Manager, Charleston District

Assistant District Counsel, Charleston District

Deputy for Small Business Programs, Charleston District

Contracting Officer, Charleston District