Hensel Phelps Construction Co. awarded $47M contract for Fort Bliss facilities, highlighting significant defense infrastructure investment

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $47,042,042 ($47.0M)

Contractor: Hensel Phelps Construction CO.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-05-31

End Date: 2009-07-02

Contract Duration: 763 days

Daily Burn Rate: $61.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: W912BV-06-D-2019 TEMF TULSA PRODUCT LINE BCT 2, FORT BLISS

Place of Performance

Location: EL PASO, EL PASO County, TEXAS, 79906

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $47.0 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO. for work described as: W912BV-06-D-2019 TEMF TULSA PRODUCT LINE BCT 2, FORT BLISS Key points: 1. The contract value of $47 million represents a substantial investment in military base infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process, which can lead to better pricing. 3. The contract duration of 763 days indicates a medium-to-long term project, requiring significant contractor resources. 4. The project falls under commercial and institutional building construction, a common category for base development. 5. The award to Hensel Phelps Construction Co., a large firm, suggests a need for significant capacity and experience.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $47,042,042 for building construction at Fort Bliss appears reasonable given the scale of military infrastructure projects. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction contracts for military bases would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract shifts risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial for the government if costs are well-managed.

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. With 10 bidders, the level of competition was robust, suggesting that the government likely received competitive pricing. This broad solicitation process is generally favorable for ensuring market-based pricing and avoiding potential overcharges.

Taxpayer Impact: The extensive competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down the final price through market forces, ensuring a better return on investment for public funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army and its personnel stationed at Fort Bliss, Texas, who will gain improved facilities. The contract delivers construction services for institutional buildings, likely barracks, training facilities, or administrative structures. The geographic impact is concentrated in El Paso, Texas, supporting the local economy through construction jobs and related services. The project will likely involve a significant construction workforce, including skilled trades and project management personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
Ensuring timely completion within the 763-day duration is critical to avoid impacting military readiness.
Quality control and adherence to military construction standards require diligent oversight.

Positive Signals

Award to an experienced contractor like Hensel Phelps suggests a higher likelihood of successful project execution.
Full and open competition generally leads to better pricing and value for the government.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction. The defense sector represents a significant portion of federal construction spending, with agencies like the Department of the Army frequently awarding large contracts for base development and modernization. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large military construction projects awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers or other defense agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate a small business set-aside. While the prime contractor is a large firm, there may be opportunities for small businesses to participate as subcontractors. The extent of small business subcontracting will depend on the prime contractor's strategy and the specific requirements of the construction project.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Army, likely through the Army Corps of Engineers. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific project details and oversight reports may vary in accessibility.

Related Government Programs

Fort Bliss Infrastructure Modernization Projects
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Military Barracks and Training Facility Construction
Defense Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects

Risk Flags

Contract Duration
Firm Fixed Price Risk
Quality Assurance Requirements

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $47.0 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO.. W912BV-06-D-2019 TEMF TULSA PRODUCT LINE BCT 2, FORT BLISS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $47.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-05-31. End: 2009-07-02.

What is Hensel Phelps Construction Co.'s track record with large federal construction contracts, particularly for the Department of Defense?

Hensel Phelps Construction Co. has a substantial history of performing large-scale construction projects for various federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. Their portfolio includes numerous military construction projects, such as barracks, airfields, and administrative facilities, across different bases. Analyzing their past performance ratings, any past performance issues, and the types of contracts they have successfully executed provides insight into their capability to handle complex projects like the one at Fort Bliss. Their experience suggests a strong understanding of federal acquisition regulations and military construction standards, which is crucial for successful project delivery and risk mitigation.

How does the awarded amount of $47 million compare to similar military construction projects of comparable scope and complexity?

The $47 million award for building construction at Fort Bliss needs to be benchmarked against similar projects to assess value for money. Factors such as the type of buildings (e.g., barracks, training centers, administrative offices), square footage, specific construction requirements (e.g., LEED certification, specialized security features), and geographic location influence costs. Comparing this contract's unit costs (e.g., cost per square foot) to other recent, large-scale military construction awards for similar facilities can reveal whether the pricing is competitive. Without specific comparable data, it's challenging to definitively state if it's high or low, but the full and open competition suggests an effort to achieve market-driven pricing.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price construction contract, and how are they mitigated?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is that the contractor may incur costs exceeding the agreed-upon price, potentially leading to financial strain or pressure to cut corners on quality if not managed properly. For the government, the risk is less about cost overrun and more about ensuring the contractor delivers the specified quality and scope within the fixed price. Mitigation strategies include robust pre-award vetting of the contractor's financial stability and technical capability, detailed contract specifications to clearly define scope and quality standards, and diligent contract administration and oversight by the government to monitor progress, quality, and compliance throughout the project lifecycle. The contractor's own risk management practices are also a key factor.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar construction services at Fort Bliss or within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending on construction services at Fort Bliss and within the Department of the Army reveals a consistent and significant investment in infrastructure. Fort Bliss, as a major military installation, frequently requires upgrades and new construction to support its operational mission and troop housing. The Department of the Army, through its various commands and the Army Corps of Engineers, awards numerous construction contracts annually, ranging from minor repairs to major facility development. Analyzing past spending trends for similar projects at Fort Bliss can indicate typical project sizes, contract types, and the frequency of such awards, providing context for the current $47 million contract and its place within the broader budget allocation for base infrastructure.

How does the level of competition (10 bidders) impact the potential for cost savings and contractor performance?

A robust competition with 10 bidders for this construction contract is a strong positive signal for cost savings and potentially better contractor performance. A larger pool of bidders typically drives down prices as companies compete to win the contract, often by offering more competitive bids. This increased competition also incentivizes contractors to perform well to maintain a good reputation for future bidding opportunities. Furthermore, it reduces the government's reliance on a single source, providing more options and leverage. The presence of multiple bidders suggests that the market for this type of construction service is healthy and responsive to government solicitations.

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: TWO STEP

Solicitation ID: W912BV06R2008

Offers Received: 10

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Hensel Phelps Construction CO (UEI: 063322085)

Address: 8322 CROSS PARK DR, AUSTIN, TX, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $47,042,042

Exercised Options: $47,042,042

Current Obligation: $47,042,042

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912BV06D2019

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline