SDtB_Industry Day_16OCT_v2.pdf

CUI

CUI

SDTB VIRTUAL

INDUSTRY DAY

PRESTENTORS:

Dylan Davis DEEP Team Lead

Rosalind Shoemaker Contracting Officer

16 OCT 2026

• Background and SDtB Concept

• SDtB in SWG

• Unrestricted / Set Aside

• Scope / Overview

• Mod / Options

• Project Schedule: Period of performance and environmental windows

• Phase 1 and 2 Evaluation Criteria

– Dashboard, pending SWG

• Data and Tools

• Corps Shoaling Analysis Tool (CSAT)

• SDtB Battle Rhythm

Disclaimer: The contents of this presentation are deliberative and subject to change.

WELCOME & AGENDA

The Enterprise Dredging Delivery Center (EDDC) Headquarters (HQUSACE) directed center, executed by the South Atlantic Division (SAD), created to implement a coordinated, enterprise-wide approach to dredging. Its mission is to bring together dredging, engineering, cost, construction, and contracting expertise from across USACE to improve competition, predictability, and efficiency.

BACKGROUND

SDtB is a contracting approach where a dredging contract is awarded for a fixed price, and the contractor removes as much shoaling as possible within that budget, rather than bidding on a specified quantity.

This innovative approach is being piloted to provide greater cost certainty and flexibility. For example, the FY27 pilot combines 10 SWG projects into two contract groups, allowing for more efficient mobilization and execution across the region.

SCOPE DREDGE TO BUDGET CONCEPT

ENTERPRISE DREDGING DELIVERY CENTER

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) Full and open competition for major deep-draft navigation channels and ports along the Texas Coast.

Workplan Option: Flexibility to exercise Houston option (~$15M) subject to work plan budget.

Period of Performance: 1 May 2027 to 30 May 2028

Small Business set aside for intracoastal waterways and secondary commercial channels along the Texas Coast.

Options: No options

Period of Performance: 1 May 2027 to 30 APR 2028

SDtB Set-Aside (1.1)

SDTB OVERVIEW

$134.7M Budget $26.2M Budget

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) SDtB Set-Aside (1.1)

SDTB SCOPE

PROJECT DEPTH

(Priority 1) BUDGET

GULF INTRACOASTAL

WATERWAY, TX Up to a depth of

-17 ft MLLW $ 13.9M

CHANNEL TO HARLINGEN, TX Up to a depth of -17 ft MLLW $ 9.6M

GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA,

TX

Up to a depth of -16 ft MLLW $ 2.6M

Total: $26.2M

PROJECT DEPTH

(Priority 1) BUDGET

GALVESTON HARBOR AND

CHANNEL, TX

Up to a depth of -48 ft MLLW $28.5M

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX Up to a depth of -54.5 ft MLLW $54.6M

TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX Up to a depth of -48 ft MLLW $9.9M

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX Up to a depth of -60 ft MLLW $10.9M

MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX Up to a depth of -40 ft MLLW $2.1M

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL,

TX

Up to a depth of -56 ft MLLW $22.9M

BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX Up to a depth of -58 ft MLLW $5.8M

Total: $134.7M

Modifications:

• Written allow for bilateral mods

• Differing site conditions (i.e. sediment characterization)

• Variations

• Weather

Rates Established in Proposal

• Standby

• Trawling

• Inter-project transit miles

Options:

Workplan Option: Flexibility to exercise Houston option (~$15M) subject to work plan budget.

Modifications:

• Written allow for bilateral mods

• Differing site conditions (i.e. sediment characterization)

• Variations

• Weather

Rates Established in Proposal:

• Standby

No options

SDtB Set-Aside (1.1)

SDTB MODS AND OPTIONS

Period of Performance: 1 May 2027 to 30 May 2028 Period of Performance: 1 May 2027 to 30 APR 2028

The order of work is primarily driven by environmental restrictions as described below.

SDtB Set-Aside (1.1)

PROJECT SCHEDULE

Description Window Details Channe / Reach Affected

Whooping Cranes 1 NOV – 30 APR No dredging

GIWW,

CHANNEL TO

VICTORIA, TX

Seagrass 1 MAR – 31 OCT No dredging GIWW

Wintering Piping Plover 1 AUG – 1 MAY Monitors required

CHANNEL TO

HARLINGEN,

TX

Nesting Birds 1 MAR – 31

AUG

No work within 1,000 ft of active nests

CHANNEL TO

HARLINGEN,

TX

PROJECT Details Required

GALVESTON HARBOR

AND CHANNEL, TX

Galveston Harbor Start NLT 1 MAY 2027 Required

HOUSTON SHIP

CHANNEL, TX

5-Mile Rule Required

Bayport Ship Channel Start NLT 1 MAY 2027 Required

TEXAS CITY SHIP

CHANNEL, TX None

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX None

MATAGORDA SHIP

CHANNEL, TX None

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP

CHANNEL, TX None

BRAZOS ISLAND

HARBOR, TX

Summer Dredging (Turtles) Preferred

FACTOR Description 4 Project Priorities Delivered 5 Management Plan/Approach 6 Project Schedule & Equipment Plan 7 Small Business Participation* 8 Cost SECTION Betterments**

EVALUATION CRITERIA SUMMARY

FACTOR Description 1 Bonding Plan 2 Past Performance, Subcontractors past performance, Highlight past experience w/ Texas stakeholder coordination

3 Equipment Plan

3.a Partnering Plan include letter of commitments with potential subs

Phase 1

Phase 2

PHASE 1 – EVALUATION CRITERIA

BONDING PLAN

Document plan for adequate bonding capacity.

FACTOR 1

PAST PERFORMANCE

Evaluated for prime and potential subcontractors, focusing on commercial navigation and Texas coastal stakeholder coordination.

FACTOR 2

EQUIPMENT PLAN

A tentative identification of proposed dredging plants including a break down of production rate ranges.

FACTOR 3

PARTNERING PLAN

Letters of commitment for potential subcontractors and joint venture entities.

FACTOR 3.a

Standard Evaluation: Phase 1 evaluation criteria are identical for both Unrestricted and SB Set-Aside solicitations.

PHASE 2 – EVALUATION CRITERIA

Required Work and Additional Work

Must plan to accomplish all Priority 1 reaches before additional maintenance (Priority 2 & 3).

FACTOR 4

Management Plan / Approach

• Decision Authority

• Fleet Logistics

• Safety & Risk

• Emergency shoal Response Plan

FACTOR 5

Project Schedule & Equipment Plan

• Cost Loaded Schedule

• Equipment Plan (2.0)

• Partnering Agreements

FACTOR 6

Small Business Participation

Offerors will be evaluated based on level and degree of SB utilization/partici pation.

FACTOR 7

Standard Evaluation: Phase 2 evaluation criteria are similar for both Unrestricted and SB Set-Aside solicitations.

Factor 4 Small Business Participation is only required for the Unrestricted solicitation.

Cost

Price proposal evaluation for all program requirements, including reasonableness and completeness.

FACTOR 8

Betterments

Proposal of any element, component, or system, which exceeds the minimum performance requirements.

SECTION

TECHNICAL RATING SCALE: Blue: Outstanding Purple: Good Green: Acceptable Yellow: Marginal Red: Unacceptable

The Government will rate proposal based on proposed work to be accomplished from unacceptable to outstanding.

Priority 1 Work is considered required to receive an acceptable rating.

Priority 2 and 3 work will be considered either good or outstanding. A matrix will be provided to assist in prioritization of priority work.

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) & Set-Aside (1.1) FACTOR 4: Required and Additional Work

Outstanding Priority 3, plans to accomplish X% of priority 2* and X% priority 3

Good Priority 2, plans to accomplish X% of priority 2 work*

Acceptable Acceptable; meet minimum requirement of all priority 1 work.

Marginal Less than 90% minimum required priority 1 work.

Unacceptable Less than 50% minimum required priority 1 work.

SDTB MENU LIST

Priority 1 (Required)

Priority 2

Priority 3

Betterments

Priority 1 (Required)

Priority 2

Priority 3

Betterments

Priority 1 (Required)

Priority 2

Priority 3

Betterments

Priority 1 (Required)

Priority 2

Priority 3

Betterments

HOUSTON SHIP

CHANNEL, TX FREEPORT, TX

$55M $11M $2M $22M

CORPUS TEXAS CITY

$134.7M https://geo-essayons.egis.usace.army.mil/portal/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=1b5c149b77d04afa8aa97160476258d4

SWG DASHBOARD (LINK)

https://geo-essayons.egis.usace.army.mil/portal/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=1b5c149b77d04afa8aa97160476258d4

PHASE 2 – EVALUATION CRITERIA (REVISIT)

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s corporate management structure, project team organization, and risk mitigation protocols to ensure effective execution of an enterprise-level dredging contract. The proposal must provide:

A. Organizational Hierarchy & Decision Authority: An organizational chart depicting key management personnel (Project Manager, Marine Superintendent, Quality Control Manager, and Safety Director) with clear lines of operational authority, ensuring that the Project Manager possesses binding authority to commit contractor resources and make immediate decisions on dredging priorities.

B.Multi-Harbor Fleet Dispatch & Logistics Control: A communications and fleet management protocol detailing how the prime contractor manages crew rotations, fuel bunkering, emergency mechanical repairs, and pipeline relocation across geographically separated sites from Sabine Pass to Brownsville. (Stakeholder coordination – USCG)

C.Safety & Environmental Risk Control Plan: Specific risk mitigation procedures complying with USACE Safety Manual EM 385-1-1, addressing vessel collision avoidance in heavily trafficked industrial waterways (Houston Ship Channel, Texas City), pipeline marking, navigation aids, and immediate response plans for marine spills or dredge pipeline ruptures.

D.Emergency Shoal Response Plan: Specific procedures to address critical shoaling conditions within each respective set of projects.

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) & Set-Aside (1.1)

FACTOR 5: MANAGEMENT PLAN / APPROACH

TECHNICAL RATING SCALE: Blue: Outstanding Purple: Good Green: Acceptable Yellow: Marginal Red: Unacceptable

Project Schedule: Offerors shall submit a cost loaded project schedule on how they propose to meet the project requirements, including equipment type and range of production. Any JV/Partnering Agreements shall be established and provide documentation. The schedule should be well-structured and reflect a clear and realistic plan with logical sequencing for timely project completion. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), critical path logic, and dredging sequence across all X project locations.

A. Cost Loaded Schedule B. Equipment Plan “2.0” C. Partnering Agreements

In accordance with Chapter 3 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures and the Army Source Selection Supplement, the Army methodology for evaluating Technical Approach and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 7 - Technical Ratings for Factor 6 below).

This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) & Set-Aside (1.1)

FACTOR 6: PROJECT SCHEDULE & EQUIPMENT PLAN (2.0)

TECHNICAL RATING SCALE: Blue: Outstanding Purple: Good Green: Acceptable Yellow: Marginal Red: Unacceptable

EVALUATION CRITERIA – PHASE 2

FACTOR 7: SMALL BUSINESS

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) - ONLY

Small Business Participation:

Offerors shall submit a SBPCD and will be reviewed to look at the offeror’s level and degree of commitment to small business utilization/participation in performance of this requirement. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed participation amount, complexity of work assigned to small businesses, and any binding commitments.

In accordance with Chapter 3 of the DoD Source Selection Procedures, the Army methodology for evaluating Technical Approach and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 7 - Technical Ratings for Factor 8 below).

This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

TECHNICAL RATING SCALE: Blue: Outstanding Purple: Good Green: Acceptable Yellow: Marginal Red: Unacceptable

EVALUATION CRITERIA – PHASE 2

Price proposal must support the technical approach and will be evaluated for:

1. Reasonableness to the scope-dredge to budget limitation, and

2. All program requirements for the project have been included the price (e.g. completeness).

Note, the design and construction cost limitation is $134.7M and $26.2M, respectively.

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) & Set-Aside (1.1)

FACTOR 8: COST

TECHNICAL RATING SCALE: Pass Fail

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) SDtB Set-Aside (1.1)$134.7M Budget $26.2M Budget

Betterments: The Offeror shall include a section entitled “Betterment” in their proposal. For purposes of this evaluation factor a “Betterment” is defined as any element, component, or system, which exceeds the minimum performance requirements set forth in the RFP and/or includes the addition of features or amenities that exceed the minimum Program of Requirements. Any Betterment not specifically identified by the Offeror in this section will not be evaluated. If the Offeror is not providing any Betterment, the Offeror must indicate “none” in this section of its submission. If Betterments are offered, they must:

1. Meet or exceed the requirements specified in the RFP.

2. Enhance the overall quality and performance of the project.

3. Be clearly identified as Betterments in the proposal.

4. Be identified by document and page reference to the minimum requirements to be exceeded.

5. Identify any potential conflicts between the Betterment and the minimum requirements.

6. State the anticipated benefit of any such Betterment (e.g. improved functionality.)

SDtB Unrestricted (1.0) & Set-Aside (1.1)

SECTION: BETTERMENTS

What does CSAT do?

• Estimates shoaling rates using hydrographic survey data within the boundaries of the National Channel Framework.

• Uses the historical shoaling rates to forecast future dredging volumes at various channel depth intervals.

• Produces GIS-compatible outputs that can be used to identify shoaling ‘hot spots’ within the navigation channel.

• Allows users to answer questions about how shoaling has changed in response to meteorological events (extratropical storm, rainfall, or drought periods), dredge schedule changes, or dredge type changes.

CORPS SHOALING ANALYSIS TOOL (CSAT)

National Channel Framework

Hydrographic Survey

National Channel Framework, hydrographic survey map sheet from eHydro, and the shoaling rate prediction for Columbia

River mouth, Oregon.

Shoaling Analysis Higher shoaling – red Low shoaling - green

After the districts upload hydrographic surveys to eHydro, the CSAT team post-processes the bathymetry into a suitable format for shoaling analysis.

10 ft x 10 ft gridded bathymetry

WHERE DOES CSAT GET THIS

INFORMATION?

Download eHydro data as irregular survey points

Create TIN

Resample bathymetry onto a regular 10 ft x

10 ft grid

“Behind the scenes” workflow:

21EXAMPLES OF DISTRICT-LEVEL CSAT

APPLICATIONS

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FLORIDA

UPPER REACH – 40’ MAINTAINED DEPTH

Average shoaling rate and cross-section profile for an upper reach of Jacksonville Harbor. Note the shoal encroaching from the outer boundary of the channel (B).

A B

A B

Bathymetric survey and cross-section profile for an upper reach of Jacksonville Harbor.

Depth (ft)

A B

A B Shoaling Rate (ft/yr)

Mapping the average annual shoaling rate helps the district to identify shoaling hotspots.

• Warm colors – higher shoaling rates

• Cool colors – lower shoaling rates

GALVESTON ENTRANCE CHANNEL,

TEXAS

EXAMPLES OF DISTRICT-LEVEL CSAT APPLICATIONS

SDTB PROCUREMENT BATTLE RHYTHM

Virtual Industry Day

16 OCT 2026

Draft RFP Posted to Sam.gov

19 OCT 2026

Industry Face to Face

3-4 NOV 2026

Revised Final RFP Posted

18 NOV 2026

Phase 1 Evaluations

30 NOV 2026

Phase 2 Evaluations

DEC to MAR

Award

APR 2027

Commence Dredging

MAY 2027

QUESTIONS?