DoD's $18.3M Paper Products Contract Awarded to Fort James Operating Company Lacks Competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $18,353,935 ($18.4M)
Contractor: Fort James Operating Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2010-04-01
End Date: 2010-06-30
Contract Duration: 90 days
Daily Burn Rate: $203.9K/day
Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: RESALE - PAPER PRODUCTS
Place of Performance
Location: ATLANTA, FULTON County, GEORGIA, 30303
State: Georgia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $18.4 million to FORT JAMES OPERATING COMPANY for work described as: RESALE - PAPER PRODUCTS Key points: 1. Significant spending on paper products by the Defense Commissary Agency. 2. Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and value. 3. The contract's short duration (90 days) may limit opportunities for competitive bidding. 4. The sector is paper manufacturing, with a specific NAICS code for paper mills.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract value of $18.3M for a 90-day period is substantial. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to assess if this price represents fair market value for paper products.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was not available for competition, indicating a limited source selection. This lack of competition hinders price discovery and may lead to less favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may be overpaying due to the absence of competitive pressure to secure the best possible price for these essential paper products.
Public Impact
Military families and personnel rely on commissary stores for goods, including paper products. The Defense Commissary Agency's spending impacts the availability and potentially the price of everyday items. Government procurement practices, especially regarding competition, directly affect taxpayer dollars.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition
- Potential for overpricing
- Limited transparency in award
Positive Signals
- Essential goods provided
- Defined contract period
Sector Analysis
The paper products sector is generally characterized by established manufacturers and competitive markets. A contract of this size, awarded without competition, is unusual and warrants scrutiny within this sector.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not awarded to a small business. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses were considered or excluded from this procurement.
Oversight & Accountability
The award was a delivery order, suggesting it might be part of a larger contract or framework. Oversight is needed to ensure the justification for limited competition is sound and documented.
Related Government Programs
- Paper (except Newsprint) Mills
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Defense Commissary Agency Programs
Risk Flags
- Lack of competition
- Potential for inflated pricing
- Limited transparency
- No small business participation indicated
- Unclear justification for limited competition
Tags
paper-except-newsprint-mills, department-of-defense, ga, delivery-order, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $18.4 million to FORT JAMES OPERATING COMPANY. RESALE - PAPER PRODUCTS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is FORT JAMES OPERATING COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Commissary Agency).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $18.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2010-04-01. End: 2010-06-30.
What is the justification for awarding this contract without competition, and how was the price determined to be fair?
The justification for awarding this contract without competition is not provided in the data. Typically, such awards require a formal justification, such as a sole-source justification or limited competition rationale. Without this, it's impossible to assess the price determination process. The government should have mechanisms in place to ensure fair and reasonable pricing even in non-competitive scenarios, often through market research or cost analysis.
What is the risk associated with awarding a large contract for essential goods without competitive bidding?
The primary risk is financial: the government may pay a higher price than necessary, leading to inefficient use of taxpayer funds. There's also a risk of reduced quality or service if the contractor faces no competitive pressure. Furthermore, it can stifle innovation and discourage potential competitors from entering the market in the future, creating a cycle of non-competitive awards.
How does this non-competitive award impact the overall effectiveness of the Defense Commissary Agency's procurement strategy?
This non-competitive award potentially reduces the overall effectiveness of the agency's procurement strategy by foregoing the benefits of competition, such as lower prices and better quality. It raises questions about whether the agency is consistently achieving the best value for its spending. While necessary in some cases, a pattern of non-competitive awards can signal systemic issues in procurement planning or execution.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Manufacturing › Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Mills › Paper (except Newsprint) Mills
Product/Service Code: MISCELLANEOUS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 133 PEACHTREE STREET NE, ATLANTA, GA, 30303
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $18,353,935
Exercised Options: $18,353,935
Current Obligation: $18,353,935
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: HDEC0106G3497
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2010-04-01
Current End Date: 2010-06-30
Potential End Date: 2010-06-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-06-07
More Contracts from Fort James Operating Company
- Resale - Paper Products — $15.2M (Department of Defense)
- Resale - Paper Products — $15.0M (Department of Defense)
- Resale - Paper Products — $14.7M (Department of Defense)
- Resale - Paper Products — $14.4M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)