B.04.21 - DF for Consolidation - W912HP23R4000 - NASA Stennis Roof Replacement_Redacted.pdf

Source Selection Information, See FAR 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON DISTRICT

DETERMINATION AND FINDINGS REQUEST FOR CONSOLIDATION

W912HP23R4000, FIRM FIXED PRICE TYPE

CONTRACT

STAND-ALONE, TWO-PHASE DB AWARD

NASA, BUCKET 4, SSC

REPAIR 24 MISCELLANOUES ROOFS

FAR 2.101 defines consolidation or consolidated requirement as a solicitation for a single contract, a multiple-award contract, a task order, or a delivery order to satisfy-

(i) Two or more requirements of the Federal agency for supplies or services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under two or more separate contracts, each of which was lower in cost than the total cost of the contract for which offers are solicited; or (ii) Requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at two or more discrete sites. FAR 7.107-2 requires that consolidation of requirements with an estimated total dollar value exceeding $2 million shall be supported by a written determination that consolidation is necessary and justified in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 657q.

I have reviewed this requirement and associated market research and determined that consolidation, in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 657q, Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (FAR) 7.107-2, is both necessary and justified. This approval is made in accordance with the approval thresholds set forth in Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5107.107-2, "Consolidation."

My review resulted in the following:

FINDINGS

1. Introduction: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Charleston District (SAC), proposes to award a stand-alone (“C” type) two-phase design-build contract in the estimated amount of $ . This contract will be awarded to one (1) contractor. This award will be utilized to repair storm damage roofs that were damaged due to Hurricanes Zeta and Ida. This contract meets the requirements for General Construction project under North American industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 - Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. This Determination and Findings (D&F) is submitted to justify the consolidation of requirements for general construction work for repair of storm damage roofs at Stennis Space Center (SSC) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration

(NASA).

2. Description of Procurement:

A. Project Description: The project consists of repairing damage to twenty-four (24) buildings near each other at Stennis Space Center (SSC).

The work is to repair damaged roofs observed immediately after Hurricanes Zeta and Ida. Work shall include roof replacements of 24 miscellaneous roofs including demolition and installation of new roofs as well, roof deck repairs/replacements and demolition of installation of lightening protection systems.

B. Acquisition Summary/Procurement Summary: The proposed contract will be awarded through a fully competitive, stand-alone (“C” type) two-phase design-build contract procurement.

C. Applicability of Consolidation: This requirement meets the definition of consolidation because it will result in the solicitation of a contract to satisfy requirements of renovation work to be performed at two (2) or more discrete sites (or locations) and the estimated total value of the contract exceeds $2M.

D. Requirements Being Consolidation: This contract will support the Stennis Space Center (SSC) mission. Table 1 below lists the 24 Buildings at SSC to be consolidated under this contract including costs from the most recent cost estimate which is based on one stand-alone contract.

TABLE 1

# Projects to be Consolidated Estimate$

1 B4210 (BTTC) (15ksf)

2 B9101 (GPO) (100Ksf)

3 B9101 (Aerojet WH) (193Ksf)

4 B1100 SW (35Ksf)

5 B1100 CW (6.25Ksf)

6 B3202, NDBC (52Ksf)

7 B3203, NDBC (56Ksf)

8 B1020, S. Miss (24Ksf)

9 B1100 NW (22ksf)

10 B1103, MSET Admin. (41Ksf)

11 B8110, AST Lab (22ksf)

12 B2119 Wellness Center (8Ksf)

B4400 Water Plant (35Ksf)

B1100 CW (37Ksf)

B2425 R. House (6.6Ksf)

B8101, X-Ray (4.5Ksf)

B3225, Prop Test (26Ksf)

B3226, Prop Test (26Ksf)

B2124, G. Station (4.5Ksf)

B8100, Multi-Facility (73Ksf)

B8304, Prop Test Elect. (10Ksf)

B7001, N. Gate (4Ksf)

B7001, NRL (10.9Ksf)

B9121, S3 Shop (11.8Ksf)

Total

E. Procurement History: This is a new requirement to repair significant roof damage to several buildings on SSC caused by Hurricanes Zeta and Ida.

F. Rationale for Consolidation:

(1) The primary justification for consolidation is that the benefits of a consolidated acquisition substantially exceed the benefits that would be derived from alternative contracting approaches that involve less consolidation. Such benefits may include quantifiable cost savings or price reductions, as well as other benefits, regardless of whether quantifiable in dollar amounts, to include quality improvements that will save time and/or enhance performance or efficiency; reduce acquisition cycle time; better terms or conditions; or any other supportable benefit.

Benefits that are quantifiable are considered substantial if they meet the dollar amounts set forth in FAR 7.107-2(d).

The work being consolidated under this contract is within a 10-mile radius at Stennis Space Center. That said, substantial time and cost savings are expected by consolidation in not having multiple contractors at multiple close-by locations each having to mobilize and demobilize, each having to bring in the same equipment, each requiring lay down yards, etc. Also, with all the work in the same vicinity the contractor and the government's construction management team will benefit from time and cost efficiencies.

(2) A review of existing IDIQ contracts was done prior to deciding to award a new contract. Although SAC has IDIQ contracts that could be used for this work, the capacity of those contracts is either reserved for known work, or there isn't enough capacity to award this new requirement.

Further, no other district within SAD contacted has available capacity to loan for this requirement.

3. Applicable Statutes/Regulations: 15 U.S.C. § 657q, FAR 7.107-2, and

AFARS 5107.107-2.

4. Results of Market Research: A Sources Sought was issued on 2 February 2023 and responses were received. Nine firms expressed interest in the requirement as follows:

SAC conducted an analysis of the contractors that either responded to the sources sought notice or were contacted as part of the over-all market research. All the contractors that responded were small businesses, six of those were 8(a) certified, two were women owned small businesses. Three contractors that responded do not have sufficient bonding and are therefore not capable. Historically, even when SAC receives good initial contractor interest in the project, when it comes time to submit proposals, SAC usually only receive one or two proposals. Accordingly, after receiving responses from 8a certified companies, and to maximize competition, the recommendation is to advertise as an 8a competitive set aside in accordance with FAR 19.805-1.

5. Alternative Contracting Approaches: SAC recognizes the least level of consolidation is to execute awards for individual projects utilizing stand-alone contracts.

A. Alternative 1 - Stand-Alone Contract for each Building: The District makes every effort to conduct stand-alone procurements for MILCON, large IIS, large SRM and other type projects. This alternative includes no consolidation of the requirements. Therefore, twenty-four (24) stand-alone contracts would need to be put into place.

This alternative is expected to be highest cost alternative as it may require up to additional costs.

Also, when considering the Government labor cost charged to the customer. Stand-alone construction contracts result in an estimated labor cost of at least $ each. This cost is based on the typical labor rates for Contracting, Engineering, Construction, and Project Management, and includes the entire competitive source selection process. The estimated total cost of $ per contract action at four (4) contracts is at least $ . This is approximately the cost SAC would charge to execute four (4) stand-alone contracts.

The average Procurement Acquisition Lead Time (PALT) for each of the four (4) stand-alone contracts is approximately 10-12 months-per-contract. However, due lack of available resources to develop four (4) contracts simultaneously, the contract schedules would need to be staggered leading to up to 25% more time to procure the contracts and complete the construction. The impact of such delay in lieu of consolidating requirements puts the readiness and usability of the buildings at SSC in jeopardy. While this option allows for less consolidation, it is still not the most reasonable approach for the work being considered.

C. Alternative 3 - Consolidated Direct 8(a) Small Business Sole Source

Match: Direct 8(a) Small Business Sole Source Match limits competition;

however, all twenty-four (24) buildings are in the same vicinity and are similar in scope and at least three (3) Native American Sole Source firms were interviewed by the government in December 2022. In January 2023, SSC provided SAC a written request to use a competitive approach to maximize the amount of roofing work expected to be performed with the limited available funds available for this requirement. Therefore, at the request of the customer, this alternative was no longer considered.

D. Alternative 4 - IDIQ: Traditionally, repair work of this nature would be awarded as task orders against existing IDIQ contracts. These requirements are due to natural disasters which were not planned. SAC does not have available design-build capacity under an existing IDIQ for this work. Further, no other district within SAD has available DB capacity to loan for this requirement. Therefore, this alternative is not a viable option.

6. Bundling Analysis:

a. FAR Bundling: Definition of Bundling. FAR 2.101 defines bundling as a subset of consolidation that combines two or more requirements for supplies or services, previously provided or performed under separate smaller contracts, into a solicitation for a single contract, a multiple-award contract, or a task or delivery order that is likely to be unsuitable for award to a small business concern due to:

(i) The diversity, size, or specialized nature of the elements of the performance specified; (ii) The aggregate dollar value of the anticipated award; (iii) The geographical dispersion of the contract performance sites: or

(iv) Any combination of the factors described in paragraphs (1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this definition.

b. Applicability of FAR Bundling Definition. This acquisition does not meet the definition of bundling in that the proposed general construction services contemplated have not previously been performed under separate smaller (i.e., individual) contracts.

c. Definition of the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) Bundling Principle. This principle, as developed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) case law, focuses on whether the combined requirement (new, old, or otherwise) restricts competition, and whether the agency is consolidating or bundling a new requirement unnecessarily. To justify CICA Bundling the agency must show "a reasonable basis for why the bundling is necessary to meet the agency need." (Vantex Serv., Inc., B-29041 5, Aug. 8, 2002, and Outdoor Venture Corp., B-299675; B-299676, Jul. 19, 2007).

d. Applicability of CICA Bundling Principle. The CICA requires solicitations to provide for full and open competition. Therefore, it is the intent of the Charleston District, to procure this work using a single “C-type”, 2-phased stand-alone competitive approach.

7. Considerations, Facts, and Reasoning Supporting the Determination: The chart below summarizes the cost and time between alternatives noted in Paragraph 5, above:

SAC is making every effort to ensure maximum competition, while minimizing procurement and construction costs and time. As such, the use of a single stand-alone, two-phase design-build contract is the most prudent and reasonable approach.

8. Summary: FAR 7.107-2(d)(1)(i) states that “benefits that are quantifiable in dollar amounts are substantial if individually, in combination, or in the aggregate the anticipated financial benefits are equivalent to 10% of the estimated contract or order value (including options) if the value is $94 million or less”. Considering the discussion and table provided above, consolidation is necessary and justified as the benefits of consolidation substantially exceed the benefits of the alternative contracting approaches. Fulfilling this requirement through separate, stand-alone contracts would result in considerable risk of higher procurement costs as well as resources and scheduling constraints to the Government. Even with partial consolidation, the cost and time would exceed the customer’s requested budget and schedule. Multiple contractors have been identified as capable of performing the work. The findings of the market research and the documentation provided herein support the conclusion that

Alternative

Viable Option

(Yes/No)

Approx.

Procure

Time (Calendar

Days)

Approx.

Construction

Time (Calendar

Days) Approx. Pre- Award Cost

Approx.

Construction

Cost Savings Recommend

(Yes/No) Alternative 1 - 24 Stand- Alone Contracts Yes 450 2738 50% No Alternative 2 – Four (4) Stand- Alone Contracts Yes 375 2281 25% No Alternative 3 - Consolidated Direct 8(a) Small Business Sole Source Match

No (Customer does not agree) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No

Alternative 4 -

IDIQ

No (None available for use) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A No

Consolidate 24 Buildings into One Stand-Alone Contract Yes 300 1825 N/A Yes consolidation of requirements is both necessary and justified, based on sound business judgment in view of the number of projects to be executed, and the consolidated approach provides advantages that substantially exceed the benefits of an approach that provides less consolidation. Finally, Stennis Space Center requested a competitive approach to maximize the amount of roofing work expected to be performed with the funding available as this work is critical to their mission.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON DISTRICT

DETERMINATION AND FINDINGS REQUEST FOR CONSOLIDATION

W912HP23R4000, FIRM FIXED PRICE TYPE

CONTRACT

STAND-ALONE TWO-PHASE DB AWARD

NASA, BUCKET 4, SSC

REPAIR 24 MISCELLANOUES ROOFS

The following signatures indicate concurrence within the Charleston District with the contents of this document for the consolidation of 24 Miscellaneous Roof at Stennis Space Center (SSC), MS.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, CHARLESTON DISTRICT

DETERMINATION AND FINDINGS REQUEST FOR CONSOLIDATION

W912HP23R4000, FIRM FIXED PRICE TYPE

CONTRACT

STAND-ALONE TWO-PHASE DB AWARD

NASA, BUCKET 4, SSC

REPAIR 24 MISCELLANOUES ROOFS

Upon the basis of the findings above, I hereby determine, pursuant to the authority of 15 U.S.C. § 657q, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 7.107-2, "Consolidation" and Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5107.107-2 "Consolidation", that the proposed consolidation of two or more discrete construction projects for the Department of Defense and other Federal Agencies at Stennis Space Center (SSC), is both necessary and justified.

Charlenne L. Figgins Division Contracting Chief U.S. Army Corps of Engineers