(1)the term “Chief Acquisition Officer” means the employee of a Federal agency designated as the Chief Acquisition Officer for the Federal agency under section
1702(a) of title
(2)the term “consolidation of contract requirements”, with respect to contract requirements of a Federal agency, means a use of a solicitation to obtain offers for a single contract or a multiple award contract—
(A)to satisfy 2 or more requirements of the Federal agency for goods or services that have been provided to or performed for the Federal agency under 2 or more separate contracts lower in cost than the total cost of the contract for which the offers are solicited; or
(B)to satisfy requirements of the Federal agency for construction projects to be performed at 2 or more discrete sites; and
(3)the term “senior procurement executive” means an official designated under section
1702(c) of title
41 as the senior procurement executive for a Federal agency.
The head of each Federal agency shall ensure that the decisions made by the Federal agency regarding consolidation of contract requirements of the Federal agency are made with a view to providing small business concerns with appropriate opportunities to participate as prime contractors and subcontractors in the procurements of the Federal agency.
(c) Limitation on use of acquisition strategies involving consolidation
(1) In general
Subject to paragraph (4), the head of a Federal agency may not carry out an acquisition strategy that includes a consolidation of contract requirements of the Federal agency with a total value of more than $2,000,000, unless the senior procurement executive or Chief Acquisition Officer for the Federal agency, before carrying out the acquisition strategy—
(A)conducts market research;
(B)identifies any alternative contracting approaches that would involve a lesser degree of consolidation of contract requirements;
(C)makes a written determination that the consolidation of contract requirements is necessary and justified;
(D)identifies any negative impact by the acquisition strategy on contracting with small business concerns; and
(E)ensures that steps will be taken to include small business concerns in the acquisition strategy.
(2) Determination that consolidation is necessary and justified
(A) In general
A senior procurement executive or Chief Acquisition Officer may determine that an acquisition strategy involving a consolidation of contract requirements is necessary and justified for the purposes of paragraph (1)(C) if the benefits of the acquisition strategy substantially exceed the benefits of each of the possible alternative contracting approaches identified under paragraph (1)(B).
(B) Savings in administrative or personnel costs
For purposes of subparagraph (A), savings in administrative or personnel costs alone do not constitute a sufficient justification for a consolidation of contract requirements in a procurement unless the expected total amount of the cost savings, as determined by the senior procurement executive or Chief Acquisition Officer, is expected to be substantial in relation to the total cost of the procurement.
(3) Benefits to be considered
The benefits considered for the purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2) may include cost and, regardless of whether quantifiable in dollar amounts—
In subsec. (a)(1), “section
1702(a) of title
41” substituted for “section 16(a) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(a))” on authority of Pub. L. 111–350, § 6(c),Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3854, which Act enacted Title 41, Public Contracts.
In subsec. (a)(3), “section
1702(c) of title
41” substituted for “section 16(c) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(c))” on authority of Pub. L. 111–350, § 6(c),Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3854, which Act enacted Title 41, Public Contracts.
The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Tuesday, August 13, 2013
An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.