DoD's $13M Commercial Building Construction Contract Awarded to DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,086,973 ($13.1M)

Contractor: DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-08-27

End Date: 2012-03-17

Contract Duration: 1,298 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: BASE BID

Place of Performance

Location: CAMP LEJEUNE, ONSLOW County, NORTH CAROLINA, 28542

State: North Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.1 million to DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC for work described as: BASE BID Key points: 1. Contract awarded for commercial and institutional building construction services. 2. The contract was secured through full and open competition. 3. The base bid amount was $13,086,973. 4. The contract duration spans 1298 days. 5. The award was a delivery order under a larger contract. 6. The contractor, DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC, is based in North Carolina.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific delivery order is challenging without knowing the scope of work and the overall contract it falls under. The base bid of $13,086,973 for 1298 days of construction services suggests a daily rate, but without comparable projects or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. The firm fixed-price contract type implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the pricing was competitive.

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 four bidders (no=4) suggests a reasonable level of competition for this specific delivery order. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process likely resulted in a more competitive price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from the construction services provided under this contract. The contract supports the development and maintenance of commercial and institutional buildings. The geographic impact is likely concentrated in the area where the construction takes place, potentially within North Carolina. The contract supports the construction workforce, including skilled trades and project management personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed scope of work makes it difficult to assess if the $13M bid represents optimal value.
The duration of the contract (1298 days) is substantial, requiring ongoing monitoring for performance and cost control.
Without knowing the specific type of buildings and their purpose, it's hard to gauge the strategic importance of this investment.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment.
Firm fixed-price contract type shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The contractor, DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC, is a registered entity, implying a level of established business practice.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. This sector encompasses the building of non-residential structures such as offices, retail spaces, educational facilities, and healthcare buildings. Federal spending in this area supports infrastructure development and maintenance critical for government operations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot or cost per project for similar government construction projects.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses (sb=false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities if DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC engages them. The extent of small business participation would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the nature of the construction work required.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Navy personnel responsible for construction projects. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, delivery schedules, and quality requirements. Transparency is facilitated by contract award databases, though detailed project-specific information might be limited. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Facilities Management

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns impacting fixed-price contract
Risk of quality compromise if contractor faces financial pressure
Long contract duration increases exposure to market volatility
Need for robust government oversight to ensure performance

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.1 million to DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC. BASE BID

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DTC ENGINEERS & CONSTRUCTORS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-08-27. End: 2012-03-17.

What is the track record of DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Assessing the track record of DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC requires a deeper dive into federal procurement databases beyond this single award. Information such as past performance ratings on similar contracts, any history of contract disputes or terminations, and the volume and types of previous federal awards would be crucial. A contractor with a strong history of successful project completion, adherence to schedule and budget, and positive past performance reviews generally presents lower risk. Conversely, a history of issues could indicate potential performance challenges for this current contract. Without access to detailed performance data for DTC Engineers & Constructors, LLC, it is difficult to definitively assess their reliability for this $13 million construction project.

How does the $13,086,973 base bid compare to similar commercial building construction projects undertaken by the Department of Defense?

To benchmark the $13,086,973 base bid, one would need to compare it against similar Department of Defense (DoD) construction projects in terms of size (square footage), complexity, location, and type of facility. Key metrics for comparison could include cost per square foot, cost per cubic yard of concrete, or cost per linear foot of structural elements. Without specific details on the project's scope, such as the type of building (e.g., office, warehouse, barracks), its intended use, and its specific location, a direct comparison is challenging. However, if this project involves standard commercial construction, the bid should align with industry averages for similar government projects, adjusted for regional labor and material costs. A bid significantly higher or lower than comparable projects could signal either an exceptional deal or potential risks.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this contract, given its firm fixed-price nature and duration?

The primary risk indicator for the government in a firm fixed-price contract is the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if costs escalate unexpectedly. Given the 1298-day duration, there's a significant risk of material price fluctuations, labor availability issues, or unforeseen site conditions that could strain the contractor's ability to deliver within the fixed price. The government's risk is mitigated by robust oversight, clear performance specifications, and penalties for non-compliance. However, the contractor's financial stability and project management capacity are critical. If the contractor faces financial distress or lacks adequate expertise, the project could face delays or quality compromises, posing a risk to the government's intended use of the facility.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' process in ensuring competitive pricing for construction contracts of this magnitude?

The 'full and open competition' process is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring competitive pricing for federal contracts, including construction projects of this magnitude. By allowing all responsible sources to submit offers, it maximizes the pool of potential bidders, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive bids. This process fosters price discovery and encourages contractors to offer their best pricing to win the contract. The presence of four bidders (as indicated by 'no': 4) suggests that the competition was reasonably robust for this specific delivery order. However, the effectiveness can be influenced by factors such as the complexity of the requirement, the clarity of the solicitation documents, and the overall market conditions for construction services.

What are the historical spending patterns for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Navy, and how does this contract fit?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for commercial and institutional building construction by the Department of the Navy (DoN) would involve examining aggregate data over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract awards, average contract values, dominant contract types (e.g., firm fixed-price vs. cost-plus), and the primary contracting vehicles used (e.g., IDIQs, specific delivery orders). This $13 million delivery order represents a single instance of spending within that broader pattern. Understanding the historical context helps determine if this award is typical in size and scope, or if it represents a significant deviation. It also informs whether the DoN is consistently investing in such facilities and if spending levels are increasing or decreasing, providing insight into the program's strategic priorities and budget allocation.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N4008506R6029

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 556 WASHINGTON AVE STE 101, NORTH HAVEN, CT, 06473

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,086,973

Exercised Options: $13,086,973

Current Obligation: $13,086,973

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N4008506D4008

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline