15 U.S.C. § 657q (COMMERCE AND TRADE)
§ 657q. Consolidation of contract requirements
(a) Definitions
In this section—
(1) the term “Chief Acquisition Officer” means the employee of a Federal agency appointed or designated as the Chief Acquisition Officer for the Federal agency under section section 1702(a) of title 41;
(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.
(b) Policy
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—
(A) quality;
(B) acquisition cycle;
(C) terms and conditions; and
(D) any other benefit.
(Pub. L. 85–536, § 2[44], as added Pub. L. 111–240, title I, § 1313(a)(2), Sept. 27, 2010, 124 Stat. 2538; amended Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XVI, § 1671(a), (b), (c)(2), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2084, 2085; Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title VIII, § 822(b), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3436.)
heading: Prior Provisions
text: A prior section 2[44] of Pub. L. 85–536 was renumbered section 2[47] and is set out as a note under section 631 of this title.
heading: Amendments
text: 2014—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 113–291, § 822(b)(1), inserted “appointed or” before “designated” and substituted “section 1702(a) of title 41” for “section 16(a) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(a))”.
Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 113–291, § 822(b)(2), substituted “section 1702(c) of title 41” for “section 16(c) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 414(c))”.
2013—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 112–239, § 1671(a), substituted “or a multiple award contract—” and subpars. (A) and (B) for “or a multiple award contract 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; and”.
Subsec. (c)(1)(E). Pub. L. 112–239, § 1671(b), substituted “ensures” for “certifies to the head of the Federal agency”.
Subsec. (c)(4). Pub. L. 112–239, § 1671(c)(2), struck out par. (4). Prior to amendment, text read as follows:
“(A) In general.—The Department of Defense and each military department shall comply with this section until after the date described in subparagraph (C).
“(B) Rule.—After the date described in subparagraph (C), contracting by the Department of Defense or a military department shall be conducted in accordance with section 2382 of title 10.
“(C) Date.—The date described in this subparagraph is the date on which the Administrator determines the Department of Defense or a military department is in compliance with the Government-wide contracting goals under section 644 of this title.”