DoD's $45.7M construction contract for BSTB awarded to ACC Construction Co., Inc. with 4 bidders

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $45,735,580 ($45.7M)

Contractor: ACC Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-06-26

End Date: 2011-07-12

Contract Duration: 1,111 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BASE - CONSTRUCTION OF BSTB

Place of Performance

Location: FORT CAMPBELL, MONTGOMERY County, TENNESSEE, 42223

State: Tennessee Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $45.7 million to ACC CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: BASE - CONSTRUCTION OF BSTB Key points: 1. The contract value appears reasonable given the scope of construction services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (1111 days) indicates a significant project timeline. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor. 5. The project is located in Tennessee, potentially impacting local construction workforce. 6. The absence of small business set-aside suggests larger firms were primary targets.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $45.7 million for the Base - Construction of BSTB seems within a reasonable range for a large-scale construction project of this nature. Benchmarking against similar Department of Defense construction contracts of comparable size and complexity would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure generally indicates that the government has negotiated a set price, which can be advantageous if costs are well-managed by the contractor. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to industry standards for similar construction projects, a definitive value assessment is challenging.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 4 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant construction project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and potentially better value for the government. The fact that four companies engaged in the bidding process implies that the project was attractive enough to warrant significant interest within the construction industry.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down the final contract price through competitive pressures, ensuring a more cost-effective use of public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense, receiving critical infrastructure for its operations. The project delivers essential construction services for a significant military base. The geographic impact is concentrated in Tennessee, potentially creating local employment opportunities. The construction activities will likely involve a skilled labor force, impacting the local construction sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during the extended construction period.
Risk of delays impacting the operational readiness of the facility.
Dependency on the financial stability and performance of a single prime contractor.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract mitigates budget uncertainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
Award to an established entity implies a degree of reliability.

Sector Analysis

The construction industry is a significant sector for federal spending, particularly for infrastructure projects supporting defense, transportation, and other government functions. This contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code (236220). Federal construction spending often involves large, complex projects requiring specialized expertise and adherence to stringent regulations. Benchmarks for similar large-scale military construction projects can vary widely based on location, scope, and specific requirements, but projects in the tens of millions of dollars are common for major facility development.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it appear to have a small business subcontracting plan explicitly mentioned. This suggests that the primary bidders and the eventual awardee were likely larger construction firms capable of undertaking projects of this magnitude. While this may limit direct opportunities for small businesses as prime contractors on this specific award, larger prime contractors often engage small businesses for specialized subcontracting work, which could still provide some indirect benefits to the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of Defense construction contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and project management personnel within the relevant Army command. Accountability measures would be enforced through contract clauses, performance monitoring, and payment schedules tied to milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Department of Defense Facilities
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
General Services Administration (GSA) Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation over the 3-year duration.
Risk of project delays impacting military readiness.
Dependence on contractor's financial stability and performance.
Need for robust oversight to ensure quality and compliance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $45.7 million to ACC CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. BASE - CONSTRUCTION OF BSTB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ACC CONSTRUCTION CO., INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $45.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-06-26. End: 2011-07-12.

What is the track record of ACC Construction Co., Inc. with the Department of Defense?

A review of ACC Construction Co., Inc.'s contract history with the Department of Defense would be necessary to assess their track record. This would involve examining past performance on similar construction projects, including adherence to schedule, budget, quality standards, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. A positive performance history with the DoD would indicate a lower risk for this current project. Conversely, a history of issues could raise concerns about their capacity to successfully execute this $45.7 million contract within the specified timeframe and budget.

How does the awarded price compare to similar construction projects in Tennessee?

To benchmark the value-for-money, the awarded price of $45.7 million should be compared to similar commercial and institutional building construction projects undertaken by the government or private sector in Tennessee during the same period. Factors such as square footage, complexity of design, materials used, and specific site conditions would need to be considered for a fair comparison. If comparable projects in the region were completed at a significantly lower cost per square foot or overall, it might suggest that this contract's price is on the higher end, although unique project requirements could justify a premium.

What are the primary risks associated with a 1111-day construction contract?

A contract duration of 1111 days (approximately 3 years) for a construction project introduces several risks. These include potential escalation of material and labor costs over the extended period, which could impact the contractor's profitability if not adequately accounted for in the fixed price. There's also an increased risk of unforeseen site conditions, design changes, or regulatory updates that could lead to delays and cost overruns. Furthermore, the longer duration increases the likelihood of personnel turnover for the contractor and potential shifts in project priorities for the government, both of which can affect project continuity and successful completion.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in managing costs for large construction projects?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective for managing costs in large construction projects when the scope of work is well-defined and risks are understood. It shifts the primary cost-control responsibility to the contractor, as they bear the risk of cost overruns. This incentivizes the contractor to be efficient and manage resources effectively to maintain profitability. For the government, an FFP contract provides budget certainty. However, if the scope is not clearly defined or unforeseen issues arise, contractors may build in significant contingencies, potentially leading to a higher initial price, or disputes may arise over change orders.

What is the historical spending trend for similar construction contracts by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending by the Department of the Army on similar construction contracts (NAICS 236220) would provide context for this $45.7 million award. This involves examining the volume and value of contracts awarded over the past several fiscal years. Understanding whether spending in this category has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable can indicate budget priorities and market conditions. Comparing the number of bidders and award values for past projects can also reveal trends in competition and pricing within the defense construction sector, helping to assess if this particular contract aligns with historical patterns or represents an outlier.

What are the implications of awarding a large construction contract in Tennessee?

Awarding a $45.7 million construction contract in Tennessee has several implications. Economically, it is likely to stimulate local employment for construction workers, material suppliers, and related service providers. It can also boost the revenue of the selected contractor and any subcontractors. From a logistical standpoint, it requires coordination with local authorities for permits and compliance with state and local regulations. The presence of a large federal project can also influence local real estate values and infrastructure demands. The long duration of the project means these economic impacts will be sustained over several years.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W912HN07R0011

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 635 NW FRONTAGE RD, AUGUSTA, GA, 30907

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Emerging Small Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $45,735,580

Exercised Options: $45,735,580

Current Obligation: $45,735,580

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912HN07D0042

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline