10 U.S.C. § 4022 — FY2026 Complete Guide

10 U.S.C. § 4022 — FY2026 Complete Guide

Other Transaction
Authority for
Military Construction

Other Transaction
Authority for
Military Construction

The definitive guide for Contracting Officers and Agreements Officers. Learn how OTA now applies to construction and facility projects — and why FY2026 is the critical window to use it.

The definitive guide for Contracting Officers and Agreements Officers. Learn how OTA now applies to construction and facility projects — and why FY2026 is the critical window to use it.

FY2026 Deadline: September 30, 2026 — Last viable OTA start date: August 15, 2026

FY2026 Deadline: September 30, 2026 — Last viable OTA start date: August 15, 2026

$40m

First USACE Construction OTA Award

Fort Campbell, FY2024

38

Days From Initiation to Award

vs. 120–270 days under FAR

§ 4022

Statutory Authority

No FAR · No J&A Required

SEPT 30

FY2026 Hard Deadline

Last start date: Aug 15, 2026

Section 01

What Is Other Transaction Authority?

Other Transaction Authority (OTA) is a procurement mechanism that allows the Department of Defense to enter into agreements for prototype projects without being bound by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS), or the cost accounting standards that govern traditional government contracts. It is not a contract — it is a transaction, negotiated directly between a DoD component and a qualifying contractor.

The authority was originally established to give DoD the flexibility to work with non-traditional defense contractors — companies that would not engage with the government under FAR's prescriptive requirements. Congress has since expanded both the scope of what qualifies as a prototype project and the types of contractors who can participate. The most significant expansion for construction professionals came with the FY2023 NDAA, which clarified that construction and facility renovation projects incorporating emerging technology or innovative approaches qualify as prototype projects under the statute.

Key Distinction

Key Distinction

OTA is not a loophole or a workaround. It is a Congressionally authorized acquisition mechanism codified at 10 U.S.C. § 4022. Its use is subject to written determinations by a warranted Agreements Officer and oversight by the cognizant DoD component. Used correctly, it is the most powerful legal tool available for obligating construction funds against time-sensitive requirements.

Section 02

The Statute: 10 U.S.C. § 4022

The governing statute is 10 United States Code, Section 4022, titled "Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects." The statute authorizes the Secretary of Defense, and the secretaries of the military departments, to enter into transactions (other than contracts, cooperative agreements, and grants) for prototype projects that are directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, components, or materials proposed to be acquired or developed by the Department of Defense. Three elements are critical for construction practitioners. First, "prototype project" is not limited to technology — it encompasses any project that demonstrates or tests a solution relevant to military mission effectiveness. Second, "directly relevant to enhancing mission effectiveness" covers barracks, facilities, and infrastructure that enable operations. Third, the authority applies to all DoD components, including USACE.

Statutory Text — 10 U.S.C. § 4022(a)

"The Secretary of Defense, in accordance with this section, may enter into transactions (other than contracts, cooperative agreements, and grants) under this chapter for prototype projects that are directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, components, or materials proposed to be acquired or developed by the Department of Defense..."

The statute further specifies that at least one of three conditions must be met: (1) there is at least one non-traditional defense contractor participating to a significant extent; (2) all significant participants other than the Federal Government are small businesses or NDCs; or (3) the senior procurement executive determines in writing that exceptional circumstances justify the use of a transaction that provides for innovative business arrangements not feasible under a contract.

Section 03

The Three OTA Methods — and Why Only One Works for FY2026

DoD practice has evolved three distinct execution paths for OTA agreements. Understanding which method applies — and which is viable within FY2026's remaining timeline — is the most critical decision a Contracting Officer will make in this process.

Method A FY2026 Viable

Direct Award to NDC

30–45 Days

Direct negotiation and award to a qualified Non–Traditional Defense Contractor. No competitive solicitation required. Fastest path to obligation. Requires written NDC certification and AO determination.

Method B Too Slow

Consortium Award

60–90 Days

Award through a pre-established OTA consortium. Requires consortium membership and consortium–level review. Timeline typically 60–90 days minimum.

Method C Too Slow

Competitive OTA

120–180 Days

Competitive solicitation under OTA authority. Still faster than FAR full–and–open, but too slow for FY2026 one–year funds with the September 30 deadline.

Method A FY2026 Viable

Direct Award to NDC

30–45 Days

Direct negotiation and award to a qualified Non–Traditional Defense Contractor. No competitive solicitation required. Fastest path to obligation. Requires written NDC certification and AO determination.

Method B Too Slow

Consortium Award

60–90 Days

Award through a pre-established OTA consortium. Requires consortium membership and consortium–level review. Timeline typically 60–90 days minimum.

Method C Too Slow

Competitive OTA

120–180 Days

Competitive solicitation under OTA authority. Still faster than FAR full–and–open, but too slow for FY2026 one–year funds with the September 30 deadline.

Section 04

The NDC Requirement: Definition, Verification, and Common Misconceptions

The Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) requirement is the single most misunderstood element of OTA execution. Most Contracting Officers either overestimate its complexity — assuming NDC verification requires extensive legal review — or underestimate its importance, treating it as a checkbox rather than the foundational legal requirement that makes direct award possible.

Statutory Definition — 10 U.S.C. § 3014

"The term 'non-traditional defense contractor' means an entity that is not currently performing and has not performed, for a period of at least one year prior to the date of the relevant transaction, any contract or subcontract for the Department of Defense that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting standards prescribed pursuant to section 1502 of title 41 and the regulations implementing such section."

In practical terms, a contractor qualifies as an NDC if they have not held a DoD contract subject to full Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) coverage for at least one year prior to the OTA award date. CAS full coverage applies to contracts exceeding $2 million that are not otherwise exempt. Most small and mid-size construction companies — particularly those whose work has been primarily commercial, residential, or in the civilian federal space — have never been subject to CAS full coverage and qualify as NDCs.

The Three-Step NDC Verification Process

01

SAM.gov Registration

Confirm active SAM.gov registration with current representations and certifications. NDC status is not a formal SAM.gov designation — it is determined by contract history.

02

FPDS Contract History

Search the Federal Procurement Data System for the contractor's DoD contract history. Identify any contracts over $2M that may have been subject to CAS full coverage in the prior 12 months.

03

Written NDC Certification

Obtain a written NDC certification from the contractor, signed by an authorized representative, stating that they meet the statutory definition. This document goes in the agreement file.

01

SAM.gov Registration

Confirm active SAM.gov registration with current representations and certifications. NDC status is not a formal SAM.gov designation — it is determined by contract history.

02

FPDS Contract History

Search the Federal Procurement Data System for the contractor's DoD contract history. Identify any contracts over $2M that may have been subject to CAS full coverage in the prior 12 months.

03

Written NDC Certification

Obtain a written NDC certification from the contractor, signed by an authorized representative, stating that they meet the statutory definition. This document goes in the agreement file.

Section 05

Case Study: The $40M Fort Campbell Construction OTA

In September 2024, USACE Louisville District executed what Army.mil described as the first construction agreement award in USACE history using Other Transaction Authority. The project — a renovation of Building 4067, a 44,106 square foot VOLAR barracks at Fort Campbell, Kentucky — was awarded September 25, 2024, five days ahead of the fiscal year deadline. The USACE team received the Excellence in Contracting Award — Innovative Team of the Year for this work.

ProjectBuilding 4067 VOLAR Barracks Renovation
InstallationFort Campbell, Kentucky
Size44,106 SF (Built 1978)
Value$40 Million
Award DateSeptember 25, 2024
Days Early5 days ahead of FY deadline
Authority10 U.S.C. § 4022 — OTA
Executing AgentDefense Innovation Unit (DIU)

The project was selected in late 2023 as a Congressional pilot program for OTA use in military construction. The facility had persistent mold growth, failed building systems, and spaces that no longer met current Army Barracks Standards. The 101st Airborne Division's soldiers were living in it. The OTA was used specifically because the mold remediation and facility reconfiguration required emerging technology solutions that FAR's prescriptive specifications would have constrained.

The Agreements Officer on the project, April Judd, became the first AO in the USACE Great Lakes and Ohio River Division to receive an unlimited AO warrant. In USACE's own reporting, she noted that the Non-Traditional Defense Contractor selected was a company that "would have never engaged with that project had it been procured using FAR-based methodology."

Section 06

The FY2026 Urgency Window

Federal fiscal year 2026 ends at midnight on September 30, 2026. Any unobligated one-year funds — including Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (SRM) funds, Military Construction (MILCON) funds, and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) funds — that are not awarded by that deadline expire. They do not roll over. They do not get extended. They are gone, and the mission need they were appropriated to address goes unmet for another budget cycle.

FY2026 OTA Execution Timeline — Method A

Aug 15
Initiation
+5 days
NDC Verify
+15 days
Negotiation
+25 days
AO Determination
Sept 30
Award
August 15, 2026 is the last viable initiation date for Method A OTA to obligate FY2026 funds by September 30.

FY2026 OTA Execution Timeline — Method A

Aug 15
Initiation
+5 days
NDC Verify
+15 days
Negotiation
+25 days
AO Determination
Sept 30
Award
August 15, 2026 is the last viable initiation date for Method A OTA to obligate FY2026 funds by September 30.

The Fort Campbell VOLAR Barracks project was driven by exactly this dynamic. The FY2024 SRM funds were one-year money. The requirement was real and urgent. FAR's minimum 120-day timeline for a $40 million construction procurement made it mathematically impossible to award before expiration. OTA — specifically Method A direct award — was the only legal path to obligation. The agreement was signed September 25, 2024. Five days to spare.

Section 07

Does Your Project Qualify? The Three-Question Test

Not every construction requirement qualifies for OTA. The authority is designed for prototype projects that demonstrate or test solutions relevant to military mission effectiveness, not for routine maintenance or standard construction. The following three questions provide a practical framework for evaluating whether a given requirement has a viable OTA path.

Q1
Does the project incorporate emerging technology, innovative construction methods, or a performance-based approach that FAR's prescriptive requirements would constrain?
✓ Likely Qualifies
Barracks renovations using mold remediation technology, energy efficiency systems, or innovative facility configurations. Design–Build projects testing faster delivery methodologies.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
Standard painting, routine HVAC replacement, or maintenance work that follows existing specifications without innovation.
Q2
Is there a qualified Non–Traditional Defense Contractor available who would not otherwise engage with this requirement under FAR?
✓ Likely Qualifies
A construction company with no CAS-covered DoD contracts in the prior 12 months. A design-build firm with primarily commercial or civilian federal experience.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
A large defense contractor that already holds multiple CAS-covered DoD contracts. A company that has been performing FAR-based DoD construction for years without interruption.
Q3
Can your Agreements Officer execute a written determination supporting direct award within the available timeline?
✓ Likely Qualifies
An AO with an active unlimited warrant, familiarity with OTA authority, and legal counsel support. A USACE district that has executed OTA agreements previously.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
An office that has never executed an OTA and would require extensive training and legal review before proceeding.
Q1
Does the project incorporate emerging technology, innovative construction methods, or a performance-based approach that FAR's prescriptive requirements would constrain?
✓ Likely Qualifies
Barracks renovations using mold remediation technology, energy efficiency systems, or innovative facility configurations. Design–Build projects testing faster delivery methodologies.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
Standard painting, routine HVAC replacement, or maintenance work that follows existing specifications without innovation.
Q2
Is there a qualified Non–Traditional Defense Contractor available who would not otherwise engage with this requirement under FAR?
✓ Likely Qualifies
A construction company with no CAS-covered DoD contracts in the prior 12 months. A design-build firm with primarily commercial or civilian federal experience.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
A large defense contractor that already holds multiple CAS-covered DoD contracts. A company that has been performing FAR-based DoD construction for years without interruption.
Q3
Can your Agreements Officer execute a written determination supporting direct award within the available timeline?
✓ Likely Qualifies
An AO with an active unlimited warrant, familiarity with OTA authority, and legal counsel support. A USACE district that has executed OTA agreements previously.
✗ Likely Does Not Qualify
An office that has never executed an OTA and would require extensive training and legal review before proceeding.

📋 OTA vs. FAR — Side-by-Side Comparison

Element
FAR-Based Contract
OTA (Method A)
Award Timeline
120–270 days
30–45 days
FAR Applicability
Full FAR/DFARS
Not applicable
J&A Required
Yes (non–competitive)
No
CAS Applicability
Full coverage >$2M
Not required
Contractor Pool
Traditional defense base
NDC — non-traditional
Negotiation
Structured by FAR
Direct, flexible
Protest Risk
GAO/COFC jurisdiction
Limited protest rights

📋 OTA vs. FAR — Side-by-Side Comparison

Element
FAR-Based Contract
OTA (Method A)
Award Timeline
120–270 days
30–45 days
FAR Applicability
Full FAR/DFARS
Not applicable
J&A Required
Yes (non–competitive)
No
CAS Applicability
Full coverage >$2M
Not required
Contractor Pool
Traditional defense base
NDC — non-traditional
Negotiation
Structured by FAR
Direct, flexible
Protest Risk
GAO/COFC jurisdiction
Limited protest rights

Request a Capability Briefing

Request a Capability Briefing

A direct, one-on-one technical session with Ralphael Locklear. We review your specific FY2026 requirement, funding type, and project scope. You get a clear OTA viability determination — yes or no — within the first 15 minutes.

A direct, one-on-one technical session with Ralphael Locklear. We review your specific FY2026 requirement, funding type, and project scope. You get a clear OTA viability determination — yes or no — within the first 15 minutes.

  • OTA viability determination for your specific project
  • NDC eligibility verification
  • Execution timeline and path if OTA is viable
  • Answers to your AO's legal and procedural questions
  • No obligation — you keep everything discussed

Does your project qualify?

Get a direct OTA viability determination from Ralphael — no charge, no obligation.