What this opportunity is
The Department of Defense is seeking Architect-Engineering (A-E) services through an unrestricted Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC). This opportunity is suitable for businesses in the 541330 NAICS category, which includes firms specializing in engineering services. As this is a combined synopsis/solicitation notice, interested contractors should track the opportunity closely for further details rather than submitting immediate bids.
Analysis by Mindy, grounded in the SAM.gov notice.
Description
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
441 G STREET, NW
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20314-1000
CECT-ZA (415-17b-1) 14 April 2021
MEMORANDUM FOR Acquisition Community
SUBJECT: Updated Procedures for the Selection of Task Orders on Architect-Engineer
Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDCs)
1. References:
a. 40 United States Code, Chapter 11, Selection of Architects and Engineers
(Brooks Act). (https://uscode.house.gov/browse.xhtml)
b. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 16.5, Indefinite-Delivery Contracts.
(https://www.acquisition.gov/)
c. FAR Subpart 36.6, Architect-Engineer Services. (https://www.acquisition.gov/)
d. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 715-1-7, Architect-Engineer Contracting in USACE, 29
February 2012. (https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/)
2. Purpose:
a. The Directors’ Policy Memorandum 2020-02 published 3 March 2020, subject:
Procedures for the Selection of Task Orders on Architect-Engineer Indefinite Delivery
Contracts (IDC), is rescinded and replaced with the issuance of this memorandum.
b. The purpose of this memorandum is to reinforce requirements and specify
procedures for the selection of an Architect-Engineer (A-E) contractor under a multiple-
award task order contract (MATOC). This memorandum is being issued to ensure
compliance with the Brooks Act and FAR requirements.
c. This information supplements task order selection processes in the current EP
715-1-7 (2012 edition) (“the EP”) until such time that the EP is updated. To the extent
that any interpretation of this memorandum conflicts with the EP, this memorandum will
take precedence. To the extent that any interpretation of this memorandum conflicts
with the Brooks Act and/or the FAR, the Brooks Act and/or the FAR will take
precedence.
-- 1 of 10 --
CECT-ZA
SUBJECT: Updated Procedures for the Selection of Task Orders on Architect-Engineer
Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDCs)
3. Applicability:
This memorandum is applicable to all Headquarters USACE elements, Divisions,
Districts, Centers, Laboratories and Field Operating Activities for all A-E Brooks Act
selections under IDCs.
4. Definitions:
a. Indefinite Delivery Contract (IDC) (also known as an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite
Quantity Contract) – Provides for an indefinite quantity, with stated limits, of supplies or
services during a fixed period. The government places orders for individual
requirements. See FAR Subpart 16.5.
b. Single Award Task Order Contract (SATOC) – A single base contract with a
specific scope that is awarded to a single A-E firm under which task orders are issued.
c. Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) – A base contract awarded to a
pool of a minimum of three A-E firms issued from a single solicitation. An individual firm
is selected from the pool and awarded a task order for each requirement that arises
within scope of the base contract. Capacity of the contract is shared among the pool of
A-E firms awarded the base contract.
5. Implementation:
Procedures specified herein shall apply to all new multiple-award A-E base contracts
(and task order selections made under those base contracts) awarded after 3 March
2020. Existing IDCs and those IDCs that have already gone through the selection
phase are not affected unless otherwise noted herein. Nevertheless, it is strongly
recommended that procedures that would not require a contractual change to existing
IDCs be implemented immediately.
6. Base Contracts:
a. SATOCs. Districts or Centers may award SATOCs without having to justify why
multiple awards are not appropriate (FAR 16.500(d)). As a result, when an A-E SATOC
has been properly awarded and no other SATOC awarded by the District or Center
includes the same or similar (i.e., overlapping) scope of work, Districts and Centers
need not comply with the procedures required for Multiple Award IDCs as outlined
below. The selection and award of SATOCs are qualifications-based per the Brooks
Act (EP 715-1-7, para 2-8.e).
b. MATOCs. The selection and award of task orders under A-E MATOCs must be
executed as qualifications-based contract actions, per the Brooks Act (EP 715-1-7, para
2-8.e), following the requirements of FAR 16.500(d) and Subpart 36.6.
-- 2 of 10 --
CECT-ZA
SUBJECT: Updated Procedures for the Selection of Task Orders on Architect-Engineer
Indefinite Delivery Contracts (IDCs)
c. Districts or Centers shall not award multiple A-E SATOCs that have the same or
overlapping scopes of work from either a single or multiple synopses. This means that
the breadth of each SATOC synopsis scope should be narrowed, both substantively
and geographically, to ensure that only one contractor is evaluated as the most highly
qualified firm to perform the entire scope of services under the awarded SATOC.
d. Selection of at Least Three Firms. When awarding MATOCs, it is necessary to
select and award to at least three firms to comply with FAR 16.500(d) and Subpart 36.6.
However, going forward, in applying this guidance, in the event that three firms are not
part of the MATOC ordering pool, making it non-compliant with the Brooks Act and the
procedure in FAR Subpart 36.6, the MATOC (base contract) will require justification and
approval in accordance with FAR Subpart 6.3.
e. Avoiding Overly Broad Scopes. It is important that the scopes of work for an A-E
IDC not be overly broad (e.g., all manner of A-E work that could potentially be
performed within a District, or work that extends beyond a Division boundary not
specific to a defined program). The use of such broad scopes makes it extremely
difficult to comply with the Brooks Act and implementing regulations.
f. Annual Updates for SF 330s. As most A-E IDCs have extended performance
periods of five (5) years or longer, the information contained in the SF 330 on file used
for selection can become outdated over the term of the IDC. Per the Brooks Act, firms
are encouraged to update their qualifications information on an annual basis. A-E firms
will be encouraged to amend th…
Source: SAM.gov, as posted. Verify the current solicitation before responding.