Control No.: MICC 2026-15

The bridge contract will allow sufficient time for the Army to determine how the Campus Style Dining Venue initiative may affect Dining Facilities in use for Full Food Service and allow the Army to make these adjustments and finalize the requirements for the follow-on Full Food Service contract.

The issuance of a bridge contract to the incumbent, North Carolina Health and

Human Services, is justified under FAR 6.302-1. The current contract was awarded subject to the Randolph-Sheppard Act (R-SA), 20 U.S.C. §107, Operation of Vending Facilities and 34 CFR §395.33, Operation of Cafeterias by Blind Vendors. This action is critical to prevent a lapse in mission-essential Full Food Services (FFS).

In August 2025, the Army initiated steps to implement the CSDV model at Forts

Bragg, Stewart, Carson, Hood, and Drum. This model aligns with the Department of War Acquisition Transformation Strategy, prioritizing a "Commercial-First" approach to leverage private-sector innovation. The CSDV initiative includes the Flexible Eating and Expanded Dining (FEED) initiative, meal prep programs, kiosks, and food trucks.

As CSDV is initially rolled out, it will not immediately replace FFS but will coexist with FFS as an alternative option for Soldiers.

While Fort Bragg was originally slated for a standard 5-year FFS contract, the

Army has recently accelerated the CSDV rollout across the Western Hemisphere Command footprint. A bridge with the incumbent is required to maintain service continuity until the phase one CSDV framework is implemented at Fort Bragg and subsequently the Army can redefine the requirements for the follow-on FFS contract.

Awarding a bridge to the incumbent is the only method to avoid an unacceptable break in service and incurrence of duplication of costs if a new vendor was introduced to perform a short-term bridge contract. Per FAR 6.302-1(a)(2)(ii), the incumbent is the only source capable of providing these services without the Government incurring substantial duplication of costs that are not expected to be recovered through competition.

Procurement Lead Time: A full FFS procurement typically requires a Procurement Administrative Lead Time (PALT) of at least 235 days.

Duplication of Transition Costs: A new vendor would require a 30-day "Phase- In" period. If a non-incumbent were awarded the bridge, the Government would pay for two separate transitions: one for the bridge vendor and a second for the eventual FFS provider. By retaining the incumbent, the Government avoids the initial transition cost, estimated at , and ensures that taxpayer resources are reserved for the final strategic transition to the follow-on FFS vendor.

Operational Risk: The scope of FFS requirements at Fort Bragg is highly complex. Introducing a new vendor for a period of 12 months creates unnecessary instability in soldier subsistence during a period of significant institutional change.

b. Alternatives: Suspending operations or transitioning to a new source at this time is not a viable alternative, as failure to continue full food service support would result in mission failure. The requiring activity does not have the necessary military personnel (e.g., 92G – Food Service Specialist) to assume the workload, nor is there sufficient time to execute a new competitive procurement. The most feasible course of action is to utilize a bridge IDIQ contract to prevent a break in service and not risk significant disruption to critical operations.

1) Suspension of Food Program Services: The services procured by this contract are tied directly to the mission success of the Department of War and cannot cease without a negative impact on the mission of the Army and Fort Bragg. As a result, the suspension of FFS is not a viable option.

2) Use of In-House Resources: Installations are authorized to use appropriated subsistence funds to contract with Army Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) facilities to provide food service support to enlisted personnel when no other appropriated fund food service support is available. Authorization must be obtained from their respective Installation Management Command. Fort Bragg MWR facilities do not have the capability of providing food service to thousands of soldiers attending basic training, advanced individual training, and institutional training.

3) Use of Catered Meals to Feed Soldiers: AR 30-22 paragraph 3-44 authorizes commercially prepared catered meals only when food service personnel or equipment are not authorized or available, and support cannot be obtained from another Reserve Component or Active Army unit with food service capability. Request to purchase catered meals must be approved by the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-4 for the Department of the Army. The Army G-4 is highly unlikely to approve catered meals, as using catered meals would not be a good steward of government.

c. Impact if Justification is not Approved: If the justification is not approved and the bridge action is not executed, the Government will be unable to issue funded task orders to continue full food services at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. As a result, the 406th Army Field Support Brigade’s ability to support six dining facilities operating 24 hours a day will be severely impacted. There are no viable alternatives available and the timeline to procure a new contract competitively exceeds the time remaining before service interruption would occur. A lapse in service would directly result in the inability to feed Soldiers, which would compromise mission readiness and daily operations. The risk to personnel support and operational continuity is unacceptable, and therefore urgent action for this IDIQ bridge is required to mitigate the risk while the long-term solution is competed.

7. Efforts to Obtain Competition: The Contracting Officer shall publish the notices required by FAR 5.201 and any bids or proposals received shall be considered.

a. Effective Competition: Because this is a sole source action, effective competition is not applicable. In accordance with FAR 6.302-1, the Government is not pursuing competition for this interim bridge action. Competing a requirement of this magnitude for a short-term duration would not be cost-effective for the Government or the industrial base, as the "return on investment" for a new contractor would be negated by the mobilization costs and the potential imminent transition to a new FFS vendor.

b. Subcontracting Competition: Subcontracting competition shall be achieved by submission of a subcontracting plan by the incumbent awardee, which shall be incorporated into the new bridge contract. The Government will request a subcontracting plan for this contract action and will coordinate review of the plan with the Small Business Specialist (SBS) and Small Business Administration (SBA) Procurement Center Representative (PCR) as required by FAR 19.705-4(d)(7).

Additionally, the approved plan will be incorporated and made a material part of the contract as required by FAR 19.705-5(a)(5). Finally, a copy of the award document will be provided to the Area Director for the SBA Area Office where the contract will be performed as required by FAR 19.705-6(a) and a copy of the final negotiated subcontracting plan will be provided to the SBA PCR as required by FAR 19.705-6(c).

8. Actions to Increase Competition: As the Army is modernizing its food service acquisition, it remains committed to maximizing competition for its remaining legacy full food service requirements. Once the requirements are finalized for Fort Bragg’s legacy full food service requirements, the MICC-IRC will begin a competitive procurement for the legacy full food service requirements.

9. Market Research: Market research confirmed that this requirement must be executed as a sole source, IDIQ bridge, until the competitive follow-on acquisition is finalized.

The incumbent contractor is the only source capable of providing uninterrupted service without a lapse in coverage.

Competing the bridge requirement is not in the Government’s best interest due to the risk of service disruption, increased transition costs, and schedule delays to the requiring activity’s mission.

Price reasonableness will be determined using prior contract pricing, IGE, and any available historical data.

This bridge action is intended to maintain mission continuity while allowing time to complete the competitive acquisition process for the long-term solution.

Based on these results and industry analysis, it is concluded that awarding a sole source IDIQ bridge to the incumbent contractor is the only viable solution to ensure uninterrupted mission support. No additional qualified sources were identified that can meet the Government’s immediate needs and competing this requirement would create unacceptable risk of service disruption. This bridge action will provide the necessary continuity of Full Food Service for Fort Bragg, NC.