B.04.Consolidation DF Dredge MATOC FY26.pdf

CUI

ATTENTION

ATTENTION

CUI//SP-PROCURE//FED ONLY

Controlled by: USACE

CUI Category: General Procurement and Acquisition Distribution

Limited Dissemination Control: FEDCON

POC: Andrew McCaskill, 601-631-5284

All individuals handling this information are required to protect it from unauthorized disclosure. Handling, storage, reproduction, and disposition of the attached document(s) must be in accordance with 32 CFR Part 2002 and applicable agency policy. Access to and dissemination of Controlled Unclassified Information shall be allowed as necessary and permissible to any individual(s), organization(s), or grouping(s) of users, provided such access or dissemination is consistent with or in furtherance of a Lawful Government Purpose and in a manner consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Government-wide policies.

Standard Form 901 (11-18) Prescribed by GSA/ISOO | 32 CFR 2002

Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg District

Determination and Findings for Consolidation

Multiple Award Task Order Contract for the Lease of Cutterhead, Hydraulic Pipeline Dredges (not Less Than 24-Inch Diameter), Fully Operated with Attendant Plant and

Personnel, with a Draft not to Exceed 9 Feet, for Construction and Maintenance Dredging within the Vicksburg District

Federal Acquisition Regulation (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 in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 657q and FAR 7.107-2 that consolidation of this requirement into a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) is both necessary and justified. This approval is made in accordance with the approval thresholds set forth in Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFARS) 5107.170-3, “Consolidation of Contract Requirements.” My review resulted in the following findings:

RATIONALE

1. Consolidation may provide substantial benefits to the Government. However, because of the potential impact on small business participation, 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 have been identified; and

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

2. Introduction: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Vicksburg District (MVK), proposes to solicit offers and award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) MATOCs with an ordering period of five years with a total shared capacity of $99.5M to all qualifying offerors.

The purpose of this acquisition is to secure, for the Government, the lease and operation of a cutterhead hydraulic pipeline dredge, including all attendant plant and personnel, for dredging at ports, harbors, locks and dams, and other areas requiring shallow draft dredging. The MATOC will be solicited on an unrestricted basis allowing for both small and large businesses to submit offers. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 237990, Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction. Performance locations are within the geographic boundaries of MVK. MVK has conducted analysis and market research that demonstrates consolidation of requirements in this procurement is both necessary and justified.

This procurement constitutes consolidation of requirements per 15 U.S.C. § 657q(a)(2)(B) in that it involves construction at two or more discrete sites.

3. Description of Procurement Action:

a. Project Description: MVK is tasked with maintaining harbors, rivers, waterways and shallow draft navigation channels within its area of responsibility. Among these are requirements for dredging of federal navigation channels. The purpose of this acquisition is to secure a rapid response contracting tool to perform maintenance dredging at multiple sites along the Mississippi River and its tributaries within the bounds of MVK. MVK is responsible for maintaining Mississippi River Harbors, consisting of Rosedale Harbor, Yellow Bend Port, Greenville Harbor, Lake Providence Port, Madison Parish Port, Vicksburg Harbor and the Claiborne County Harbor, as well as sites on the J Bennett Johnson Waterway (JBJ), and Ouachita-Black Rivers in Louisiana. These dredging locations will be identified based on channel conditions and the need to restore specific reaches to their project depth and width.

b. Acquisition Strategy/Procurement Summary: To rapidly respond to requirements for maintenance dredging, MVK intends to consolidate the anticipated needs into a single solicitation and make multiple awards in accordance with FAR Part 16.503(b)(1). MVK intends to solicit and award MATOCs to all qualifying offerors for the dredging services described above. Firm fixed-price task orders will be solicited from the pool of MATOC holders as competitive Requests for Proposals (RFPs), with award being made based on price and dredge availability.

c. Procurement Taxonomy and Small Business Impact: This procurement falls under NAICS Code 237990 – Other Civil and Heavy Engineering Construction; Dredging and Surface Cleanup Activities, with a size standard of $37M. The Product Service Code (PSC) for this acquisition is Z1KF – Maintenance of Dredging Facilities. The impact of consolidating these requirements on small business is expected to be minimal. From past acquisition history to include FY25, dredging contractors qualified to satisfy these requirements are other than small businesses who self-perform dredging work. Limited opportunities exist for small business subcontracting in dredging; subcontracts for supplies such as fuel and services such as towing and welding are restricted by geographical proximity to the location of work.

d. Applicability of Consolidation: Sec 1671 of the FY13 NDAA amended the definition of consolidation as set forth in Sec 44 of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 657q. As implemented in FAR 2.101, “consolidation of contract requirements,” with respect to contract requirements of a Federal agency, means the use of a solicitation to obtain offers for a single contract or a multiple award contract to satisfy – (A) two or more requirements of the Federal agency for goods and services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under two or more separate contracts lower in const than the total cost of the contract for which the offers are being solicited; or (B) requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at 2 or more discrete sites. This requirement meets the definition of consolidation as the proposed MATOC includes construction work that will be performed at two or more discrete sites in Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas; and the total estimated value exceeds the $2M threshold.

e. Requirements Being Consolidated: Requirements for maintenance dredging of shallow draft navigation projects at multiple locations within MVK’s, area of responsibility. MVK has a need for dredging at various Mississippi River ports and harbors from Rosedale Harbor, MS to Claiborne County Port, MS and at various lock and dams and revetments along the Red River and Ouachita/Black Rivers.

f. Procurement History: Prior to 2019, MVK utilized sealed bidding to award stand-alone construction contracts for shallow draft maintenance dredging (Table 1). In 2019, MVK issued a solicitation that resulted in awarding a MATOC to one small business and three large businesses.

Contracts W912EE19D0004, W912EE19D0005, W912EE19D0006, and W912EE19D0007 had an ordering period of three years and a combined capacity of $45M (Table 2). These contracts expired in 2022 (Table 3).

That same year MVK issued another consolidated procurement, resulting in a follow-on MATOC to four large businesses. Contracts W912EE22D0003, W912EE22D0004, W912EE22D0005, and W912EE22D0006 had an ordering period of five years and a combined capacity of $49.5M (Table 4). A historic low water event in 2023 resulted in the award of three task orders against this MATOC, using over $24M of the MATOC’s combined capacity of $49.5M. Two more dredging task orders were awarded against the MATOC in 2024, using nearly $17M of the remaining combined capacity (Table 5). At the end of 2024, approximately $8.5M combined capacity remained.

With the average cost of recent dredging task orders exceeding $8M, it was decided that there was not sufficient combined capacity remaining on the existing MATOC to cover the award of any future task orders, that the MATOC would be closed out, and that consolidated construction contracts using sealed bidding procedures would be used for dredging requirements until a new MATOC could be established. In 2025, two firm fixed-price construction contracts were awarded to meet MVK’s dredging requirements for the year (Table 6). The current award amount of these two contracts is $16.8M, and work is expected to be completed one year from the date of award.

Each contract and task order listed in the tables below include some degree of consolidation.

Awards for Mississippi River Harbors typically include work at seven discrete work sites. Awards for Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers include work at two discrete sites, at a minimum. In some years, only one award was made, and these awards included the discrete work sites on the Mississippi River and on the Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers (2019 and 2021).

Table 1. MVK Historical Construction Contract Awards

Year Contract Number/Contractor Award

Amount Small

Business?

W912EE-12-C-0002

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC/Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 2,936,140.00 No

W912EE-12-C-0004

Pine Bluff Sand & Gravel Company/Mississippi River Harbors

$ 3,983,002.00 No

W912EE-12-C-0007

Inland Dredging Company, LLC/Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 3,221,000.00

No

W912EE-12-C-0020

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC./Mississippi River Harbors

$ 6,148,691.00 No

W912EE-14-C-0003

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC. /Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 2,512,063.00

2014 W912EE-14-C-0009

Weeks Marine, Inc./Mississippi River Harbors

$ 4,390,701.00

W912EE-14-C-0011

$ 2,547,001.00

Yes

W912EE-16-C-0001

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC. /Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 1,599,580.00

W912EE-16-C-0005

Pine Bluff Sand & Gravel Company /Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 4,132,371.00

W912EE-16-C-0007

Pine Bluff Sand & Gravel Company/Mississippi River Harbors

$ 3,418,401.00

W912EE-17-C-0001

$ 3,216,000.00

2017 W912EE-17-C-0009

4H Construction Corp./Mississippi River Harbors

$ 4,701,100.00

W912EE18C0008

Crosby Dredging, LLC//Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 4,502,517.00 Yes

W912EE18C0009

Inland Dredging Company, LLC//Red, Ouachita, and Black Rivers

$ 3,247,000.00

Total $50,555,567.00

Table 2. MVK Historical FY 19 MATOC Awards

Year Contract Number/Contractor Award Amount Small Business

2019 W912EE19D0004

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

$45 Million Combined

Yes*

2019 W912EE19D0005

Crosby Dredging, LLC

$45 Million Combined

No

2019 W912EE19D0006

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC

$45 Million Combined

No

2019 W912EE19D0007

Weeks Marine

$45 Million Combined

No

*Based on gross receipts, Inland Dredging was a small business concern under NAICS code 237990 at the time of award.

Table 3. MVK Historical Dredge Task Orders Awarded Against FY 19 MATOC Year Task Order/Contractor Current Award

Amount Small

Business?

2019 W912EE19F0069

Inland Dredging Company, LLC Mississippi River Harbors

$3,954,652.23 Yes*

2020 W912EE20F0048

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC

Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$6,428,200.00 No

2020 W912EE20F0091

Crosby Dredging, LLC

Mississippi River Harbors

$12,992,085.50 No

2021 W912EE21F0053

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

Mississippi River Harbors

$5,374,390.00 Yes*

2022 W912EE22F0033

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

Mississippi River Harbors

$5,583,451.07 No

2022 W912EE22F0035

Crosby Dredging, LLC

Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$5,138,817.47 No

Total $39,471,596.27 *Based on gross receipts, Inland Dredging was a small business concern under NAICS code 237990 at the time of award.

Table 4. MVK FY22 MATOC Awards

Year Contract Number/Contractor Award Amount Small Business

2022 W912EE22D0003

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

$49.5 Million Combined

No

2022 W912EE22D0004

Crosby Dredging, LLC

$49.5 Million Combined

No

2022 W912EE22D0005

Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC

$49.5 Million Combined

No

2022 W912EE22D0006

Weeks Marine

$49.5 Million Combined

Table 5. MVK Task Orders Awarded Against FY22 MATOC

Year Task Order/Contractor Current Award Amount

Small Business?

2023 W912EE23F0025

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

Mississippi River Harbors

$6,999,842.39 No

2023 W912EE23F0026

Crosby Dredging, LLC

Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$9,509,488.12 No

2023 W912EE23F0093

Crosby Dredging, LLC

Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$7,542,730.25 No

2024 W912EE24F0059

Inland Dredging Company, LLC Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$8,269,171.13 No

W912EE24F0060

Inland Dredging Company, LLC.

Mississippi River Harbors

$8,652,367.48 No

Total $40,973,599.37

Table 6. MVK Current Dredge Contracts

Year Task Order/Contractor Current Award Amount

Small Business?

2025 W912EE25CA003

Inland Dredging Company, LLC Red and Ouachita/Black Rivers

$9,798,900.00 No

2025 W912EE25CA004

Inland Dredging Company, LLC

Mississippi River Harbors

$7,059,000.00 No

Total $16,857,900.00

f. Other Considerations:

Based on dredging costs from 2023 to 2025, MVK anticipates a funding need of approximately $20M per fiscal year and will require a $99.5M ordering capacity to cover its dredging requirements and any potential emergency dredging needs that may arise for the next five-year ordering period.

g. Rationale for Consolidation:

(1) In order to be determined necessary and justified, the benefits of the consolidated acquisition must substantially exceed the benefits that would be derived from alternative contracting approaches that involve less consolidation. Such benefits may include qualitative or 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 or improve or enhance performance or efficiency, reduction in 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 requested capacity for this MATOC is $99.5M, and all task orders issued from this MATOC are expected to contain some degree of consolidation. Pursuant to FAR 7.107-2(d)(1)(ii), for acquisitions in which the value exceeds $94 million, the quantitative benefits must be equivalent to five percent of the estimated contract or order value (including options) or $9.4 million, whichever is greater. Five percent of $99.5M is $4.975M, therefore, the quantitative financial benefits from consolidation must exceed $9.4M. If the quantifiable benefits do not meet these thresholds, the approving authority may determine that consolidation is necessary and justified if critical to the agency’s mission success and procurement strategy provides for maximum practicable participation by small business. For this procurement, the quantifiable benefits of consolidation exceed the standard set forth in FAR 7.107-2(d). While there are substantial cost benefits associated with this consolidation, these benefits also significantly increase the likelihood of mission success, reduce acquisition cycle times, provide improved quality that will enhance performance or efficiency, as outlined in FAR 7.107-2(c), and are substantial. The dredging program is critical to the mission of USACE in that it provides navigable Federal waterways which are vital to many aspects of Arkansas’s, Louisiana’s, and Mississippi’s economies. MVK’s decision to consolidate the requirements under the proposed solicitation is also based on the anticipated cost savings of mobilization and demobilization (mob/demob) costs.

(2) Consolidation of projects gives contractors an opportunity to execute projects more efficiently, which in turn boosts MVK’s ability to complete its dredging mission successfully.

When two or more projects are combined, the solicitation usually allows a longer performance period to give the contractor the option of performing the discrete sites in series or concurrently.

This longer period gives the contractor flexibility in determining how the work is sequenced, and it also gives them the opportunity to take on additional work if they are performed concurrently.

This flexibility also reduces the contractor’s risk of performance, which results in lower costs to the contractor and could consequently result in savings to the Government.

(3) Having the flexibility to consolidate individual projects enhances the Government’s ability to meet customer needs efficiently, timely and at a lower overall cost without having any adverse impacts on the quality of the work. When scheduling windows present a challenge to the completion of multiple projects in proximity by multiple contractors, consolidating the requirements enables one contractor to perform and schedule the work to meet the deadline. This method will substantially increase the probability that projects will be completed, in a timely manner and per contract specifications.

3. Applicable Statutes/Regulations: 15 U.S.C. § 657q, DFARS 207.170, and AFARS 5107.170.

4. Results of Market Research: Market research was conducted to determine those sources that could fulfill the Government’s requirement IAW FAR 10.002(b)(2). To ensure that small business concerns are given appropriate opportunities to participate as prime contractors and subcontractors in federal procurements, MVK conducted market research that supplemented MVK’s knowledge of capabilities based on prior similar acquisitions. Sources Sought Notices W912EE25S0007 and W912EE25S0008, were posted on www.sam.gov (SAM) on 23 April 2025 requesting interested contractors to submit a statement of their capabilities, information regarding their business size and category, and their experience with maintenance dredging of inland river, and their interest in submitting a proposal for evaluation in consideration for award of a MATOC. The requirement was posted with a NAICS code of 237990 and size standard $37 million. The objective of these sources sought notices was to gage industry interest and determine if any small business contractors could meet this requirement for the purposes of considering a set-aside. Notice W912EE25S0007 requested information from vendors who could provide 20-inch diameter cutterhead dredges or larger, with the intention of determining if allowing smaller dredge size would interest small business contractors. Notice W912EE25S0008 requested information from contractors who could supply 24-inch diameter cutterhead dredges or larger. Both notices requested basic contractor information, as well as prior experience in dredging and a list of current or previous dredging contracts. One response was received for each sources sought notice from Crosby Dredging, LLC., a large business concern. Inland Dredging Company, LLC., did not respond to the sources sought notice directly, but has expressed interest in submitting bids or proposals for MVK’s future dredging projects. MVK annually bids one to two cutterhead dredge contracts per year against the existing MATOC. Solicitations for these dredge projects have typically yielded two to three proposals from the existing MATOC holders.

Currently, the pool of contractors capable of meeting the equipment requirements is limited. The following contractors were FY22 Dredge MATOC holders: Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Co.

(Large Business), Weeks Marine (Large Business), Inland Dredging Company, LLC (Large Business), and Crosby Dredging, LLC (Large Business). Based upon procurement history, the targeted pool of contractors is fully capable of performing the consolidated requirement and their ability to compete will not be negatively impacted by this approach. Based on the above market research, and extensive historical experience and knowledge of the contractors within this industry, MVK is confident that all these businesses can perform the requirement whether it is consolidated into a MATOC or awarded under individual stand-alone consolidated contracts.

5. Alternate Contracting Approaches Considered and Rationale for Rejection: MVK considered the potential impact of multiple unconsolidated awards. The primary disadvantage in not consolidating multiple shallow draft dredging sites into a single award is the cost of paying for multiple mobilizations and demobilizations (mob/demob). Other disadvantages of not consolidating this requirement are the increased administrative costs associated with awarding separate contracts for each work site and scheduling problems with dredging contractors. Further rationale for the rejection of alternate contracting approaches with a lesser degree of consolidation or no consolidation are detailed in the section below, which compares the benefits of consolidation with the costs of not consolidating these requirements.

6. Consolidation Benefit Analysis:

Table 7. Analysis Summary Unconsolidated

Construction Contract Consolidated

MATOC

Acquisition Cycle* 140 days 60 days or less

Terms and Conditions No Difference No Difference Administrative Costs Average Lower than Average

*Project Identification to Award.

(1) Cost Saving. Per 15 U.S.C. § 657q(c)(2)(B), “savings in administrative or personnel costs alone do not constitute a sufficient justification for a consolidation of contract requirements” unless the total amount of the cost savings is expected to be substantial in relation to the total cost of the procurement.

Administrative and labor cost savings for MVK. The consolidated MATOC approach maximizes the opportunity to procure high quality construction and maintenance dredging at fair and reasonable prices from technically acceptable offerors. Tables 8, 9, and 10 below reflect the estimated total of pre-award/award overall costs required for consolidated MATOC task orders in comparison to stand-alone not consolidated construction contracts. These costs are based on standard labor costs developed by contracting for procurements, along with historical average procurement support costs for Cost Engineering Division, Programs and Project Management Division (PPMD), and Operations Division for acquisition coordination, document review, Source Selection Evaluation Board labor, and source-selection related preparation, travel, and administration.

The average procurement costs provided by the respective branches for in-house labor required for the review of an IFB by project management, Cost Engineering Division, and contracting is approximately $40,000. This in-house labor cost was derived using the labor rates and costs for the different disciplines mentioned above from current acquisitions for this type of work and includes the combined total costs associated for each activity required from project design completion to award. Issuing multiple stand-alone contracts for each project location would increase the overall design and procurement costs significantly and decrease the funding available for actual construction of the projects. The required time from project start to contract award averages approximately 140 days, based off historical data. This time includes conducting required internal reviews as well as procurement related activities such as sources sought announcement, conducting market research, coordinating with the SBA, creating the required solicitation in the Army Contract Writing System (ACWS), performing internal technical and legal reviews, providing technical and cost analyses related to the source selection process, and soliciting and awarding the contract. Oftentimes, the same personnel are working on multiple projects which would increase the time required from project start to contract award for the individual projects. Therefore, it is more time efficient to have a MATOC as opposed to having multiple smaller stand-alone construction contracts for each project location.

Historical labor rates show that there are minimal additional labor costs for engineering efforts for award of each task order. For these requirements engineering and design work is done upfront for basic IDIQ contracts and stand-alone construction contracts. Therefore, the largest cost driver for task orders is the labor from MVK Contracting. Historically, the MVK Contracting office charges approximately $30,000 per task order in labor. As there have been at least 2 stand-alone construction contracts awarded per year, the following chart shows the costs savings of awarding 2 task orders versus 2 stand-alone construction contracts.

Table 8. In-House Labor to Award Task Orders versus C-type contracts

Contract Type Number and Cost Total Cost Consolidated MATOC Task Orders (years 1-5); 10 total

10 x $30,000 $300,000

Unconsolidated Stand-Alone Contracts (years 1-5); 10 Total

10 x $40,000 $400,000

Current labor costs for awarding a MATOC are $50,000. In Table 10 above, the labor cost of issuing ten task orders is $300,000 compared to $400,000 for ten stand-alone contracts. The labor costs of awarding a MATOC and issuing ten task orders against that MATOC are $350,000. In sum, MVK estimates that continuing to use a MATOC would generate $50,000 in labor savings over a five-year period.

Mobilization and Demobilization Cost Savings for MVK. The benefit of the proposed strategy also provides the Government with significant savings in mob/demob costs. MVK considered alternative contracting approaches however they were rejected due to the mob/demob and scheduling impacts identified below (Table 19). Consolidating the procurement of these projects will increase efficiency in meeting MVK’s mission to restore channel depths after shoaling is identified. A substantial cost in a federal navigation channel maintenance dredging project is the mob/demob of dredge equipment. Through consolidation, the Government will obtain substantial cost savings by eliminating several mobilizations/demobilizations of contractor dredge equipment already in the project areas. When the mob/demob costs are reduced through consolidation, funding can be better utilized to maximize the actual dredging effort to optimize navigational access to these channels thus decreasing vessel delays, transport costs, and unnecessary ship traffic delays. The average bid price for mobilization/demobilization for a leased cutterhead dredge is $1,650,000.00. On a typical year under this contract, two dredges can work at the following projects depending on the shoaling and available funds: Rosedale Harbor, Yellow Bend Port, Greenville Harbor, Lake Providence Port, Madison Parish Port, Vicksburg Harbor, Claiborne County Harbor, JBJ Waterway, and the Ouachita-Black Rivers. With these nine locations consolidated into two task orders, mobilization/demobilization costs run $3,300,000 annually. If separate mobilization costs were applied to the nine locations listed above, MVK could expect to pay roughly $14,850,000 in mobilization costs. It is assumed that MVK will issue two task orders under this MATOC, one for the MS harbors, and one for the JBJ/Ouachita-Black. The contract also includes towing the entire dredge and plant from project to project at a per mile rental rate. The average cost of moving a cutterhead dredge from project to project is $630 per mile. The total range between MS River projects above is 192 miles, a total moving cost of $120,960.00. The total range of river miles on the JBJ/Ouachita-Black is 532 miles, a total moving cost of $335,160. Therefore, the total mobilization/demobilization per year cost of the consolidated contract as proposed would be:

Table 9. Mobilization Costs

Alternatives Mobilization Costs Total Costs MATOC Consolidated Recommended

(2) x $1.65M $3,300,000

9 Unconsolidated Stand-Alone Construction Contracts

(9) x $1.65M $14,850,000

Therefore, on a typical year of dredging using the consolidated contract, the Government would save over $11,550,000 on mobilization costs.

Table 10. Movement Costs Alternatives Moving Costs Total Costs MATOC Consolidated Recommended

724 miles x $630

$456,120

9 Unconsolidated Stand-Alone Construction Contracts

0 $0

Therefore, on a typical year of dredging using the consolidated contract, the Government would spend an additional $456,120 on movement costs.

The net result is that the Government would save $11,093,880 in mobilization and movement costs using a consolidated contract. Over a five-year period, using a consolidated contract would save the Government $55,469,400 in mobilization and movement costs.

(2) Time Benefits: The period required to award a stand-alone construction contract, consolidated or unconsolidated, is typically about 140 days based on past procurements. A contractor may require approximately 21 days to mobilize to the project site after the issuance of Notice to Proceed. As a result, roughly 161 days may be expended for the acquisition of a stand-alone construction contract. The period required to award a task order under a MATOC typically is less than 60 days, plus 21 days for mobilization after issuance of Notice to Proceed (Table 7, Table 11). With the award of a task order, the contractor can be actively dredging in 81 days or less. This approach greatly benefits the Government as river levels fluctuate at an extremely fast rate. The 80 or more extra days in takes for a stand-alone construction contract vs. a task order could lead to loss in navigation.

Table 11. Time Benefits Alternatives Unconsolidated

Construction Contract Consolidated MATOC

Time to Award 140 Days 60 Days NTP to Mobilization 21 Days 21 Days

Total 161 Days 81 Days

(3) Quality and Scheduling Benefits: Utilizing a consolidated MATOC offers MVK the advantage of being able to use technical factors such as performance, scheduling, and dredge availability as evaluation criteria when awarding a task order. Based on prior experience within MVK, scheduling and dredge availability are usually the most important factors other than price, and because MVK River Ops typically has an idea on when dredging should commence based on forecasts of river conditions, proposals that do not meet schedule requirements can be rejected quickly without materially contributing to award time. These benefits are not necessarily restricted to a consolidated requirement. An unconsolidated Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procurement would allow MVK to consider non-cost factors like performance, capability, and scheduling when making an award. However, a Stand-Alone construction contract would be solicited as an Invitation for Bids (IFB) and award would follow sealed bidding procedures with the award going to the apparent low bidder if the apparent low bidder is determined to be responsible and prices are determined to be fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 14.408-2(a). Utilizing acquisition procedures that do not allow for the evaluation of technical factors run a greater risk of awarding to a poor performer than using contracting methods that allow for technical evaluation as part of selection criteria.

7. Bundling Analysis:

a. Definition of Bundling. FAR 2.101 defines bundling as consolidating two or more requirements for supplies or services, previously provided or performed under separate smaller contracts, into a solicitation for a single contract 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 (i) through (iii) of this definition.

b. Applicability of CICA Bundling Principle: This acquisition does not meet the definition of bundling, as it does not attempt to consolidate “two or more requirements for supplies or services, previously provided or performed under separate smaller contracts that are likely to be unsuitable for award to a small business concern”. The requirements being consolidated have all been previously advertised as an Unrestricted IFB.

This procurement is intended to be a full and open, unrestricted MATOC. Bundled procurements combine separate requirements into one contract; thus, they have the potential to restrict competition in violation of CICA by excluding firms that can provide only a portion of the bundled requirement. However, substantial cost savings achieved through the reduction of duplicative efforts and operational efficiency can be a reasonable basis for restricting competition where requirements are bundled. As demonstrated above, substantial cost savings will be accomplished through consolidation of these requirements. These projects have been consolidated in the past into a MATOC procurement vehicle. Competition to small businesses is restricted by the limited number of contractors with the ability and equipment to perform this work. Market research conducted by MVK, which included publishing two sources sought notices to www.sam.gov, a Small Business Administration (SBA) Quick Market Search (QMS), a SBA Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS), and a review of prior acquisition history did not identify any small businesses capable of meeting this requirement. The Government does not reasonably expect to receive offers from two or more small business concerns. Additionally, the Government has no information or received any comments from the dredging community to suggest that placing each navigation project under separate contracts, or regrouping them in some other manner, would create interest and allow other contractors to perform this work.

8. Considerations, facts, and reasoning supporting the determination: All facts, considerations and rationale have been covered previously in the findings. Consolidation will allow MVK to efficiently coordinate and execute these crucial dredging projects at a reduced acquisition time frame time, will produce increased quality and performance due to the selection of qualified and experienced contractors.

Most importantly, consolidation of this requirement will allow the dredging program to successfully execute the mission of providing navigable Federal waterways which are vital to many aspects of Arkansas’s, Louisiana’s, and Mississippi’s economies. In all practically any lesser degree of consolidation is not even a possibility given the availability of qualified dredge contractors.

9. Summary: Although this MATOC constitutes consolidation in that it combines construction at two or more discrete sites into one contract, this approach provides the best combination of competitive procedures, timely acquisition, cost efficiency, quality and capable prime contractors to execute maintenance dredging on MVK deep draft navigation channels requirements. Stand-alone construction contracts were considered; however, they would result in significantly higher costs and increased acquisition cycle time. The quantifiable benefits of consolidation, $55,519,400 or approximately 56% of the estimated contract value, exceed the standard in FAR 7.107-2(d)(1)(i) and are further supplemented by the qualitative benefits. Additionally, it is significantly less burdensome for the District’s Contracting and Operations Divisions to administer one MATOC than numerous Stand-Alone construction contracts. The findings of the market research and the documentation provided herein support the conclusion that consolidation of requirements is both necessary and justified, based on sound business judgment in view of the size, complexity, and potential number of efforts to be executed in support of the District’s Civil Works program, and the consolidated approach provide advantages that substantially exceed the benefits of an approach that provides less consolidation.

Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Multiple Award Task Order Contract for the Lease of Cutterhead, Hydraulic Pipeline Dredges (not Less Than 24-Inch Diameter), Fully Operated with Attendant Plant and

Personnel, with a Draft not to Exceed 9 Feet, for Construction and Maintenance Dredging within the Vicksburg District

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

Deputy District Counsel

Demetric Erwin Deputy for Small Business Programs

R. Ellis Screws Contracting Officer, Construction and A-E Branch

Davita S. Baloue Chief, Vicksburg District Contracting Office

Multiple Award Task Order Contract for the Lease of Cutterhead, Hydraulic Pipeline Dredges (not Less Than 24-Inch Diameter), Fully Operated with Attendant Plant and

Personnel, with a Draft not to Exceed 9 Feet, for Construction and Maintenance Dredging within the Vicksburg District

Based on the foregoing rationale, I hereby determine, pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 7.107-2 and Army Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 5107.107, that the consolidation of the requirements for construction and maintenance dredging is both necessary and justified and will serve the best interests of the Government.

Davita S. Baloue Chief, Vicksburg District Contracting Office

Cons Signatures