DoD's $27.6M Weapons Generation Facility B contract awarded to SLSCO, LTD. for construction

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,651,037 ($27.7M)

Contractor: Slsco, Ltd.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-05-19

End Date: 2024-08-02

Contract Duration: 806 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: WEAPONS GENERATION FACILITY B EARLY STAR

Place of Performance

Location: BARKSDALE AFB, BOSSIER County, LOUISIANA, 71110

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.7 million to SLSCO, LTD. for work described as: WEAPONS GENERATION FACILITY B EARLY STAR Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a large-scale construction project of this nature. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process was utilized. 3. Potential risks include project delays and cost overruns common in large construction. 4. This contract supports the Department of the Navy's infrastructure modernization efforts. 5. The project falls within the broader defense construction sector, focusing on specialized facilities.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $27.6 million for the Weapons Generation Facility B construction is within the expected range for major defense infrastructure projects. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction contracts for specialized facilities within the Department of Defense suggests this pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price structure provides cost certainty, though it places the risk of cost overruns on the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. While the specific number of bidders is not provided, this method generally fosters a competitive environment, leading to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government. The use of this procurement method suggests a robust market for the required construction services.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for receiving the best value through a wide range of bids, driving down costs and ensuring a fair market price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the U.S. Navy, who will gain enhanced capabilities for weapons generation. The contract delivers essential construction services for a specialized facility critical to national defense. The geographic impact is localized to the facility's location in Louisiana. The project will likely create numerous jobs in the construction sector, benefiting the local workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for construction delays impacting operational readiness.
Risk of unforeseen site conditions leading to cost increases.
Ensuring compliance with stringent defense construction standards.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
Supports critical national defense infrastructure.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically for specialized defense facilities. The market for large-scale defense construction is characterized by significant barriers to entry, requiring specialized expertise and security clearances. Spending in this area is driven by modernization needs, infrastructure upgrades, and the development of new defense capabilities. Comparable benchmarks would involve other large military construction projects, such as barracks, hangars, or specialized testing facilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. This suggests that the primary awardee, SLSCO, LTD., is likely a large business. The absence of specific small business set-aside provisions means that opportunities for small businesses would primarily arise through subcontracting, the extent of which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and engineering divisions, with potential involvement from the Naval Facilities Engineering Command. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified facility within budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may be internal.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Naval Facilities Modernization
Defense Infrastructure Projects
Weapons Systems Support Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise.
Risk of project delays impacting operational timelines.
Ensuring contractor compliance with stringent defense construction standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.7 million to SLSCO, LTD.. WEAPONS GENERATION FACILITY B EARLY STAR

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SLSCO, LTD..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $27.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-05-19. End: 2024-08-02.

What is the track record of SLSCO, LTD. in completing large-scale defense construction projects?

SLSCO, LTD. has a history of performing construction services, including for government entities. To fully assess their track record for this specific type of project, a deeper dive into their past performance on similar-sized and complexity defense construction contracts would be necessary. This would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any instances of contract disputes or delays, and their ability to meet stringent military specifications and timelines. Without specific project history details for SLSCO, LTD. related to weapons generation facilities, it's difficult to provide a definitive assessment of their suitability beyond the fact they were selected through a competitive process.

How does the $27.6 million cost compare to similar weapons generation facility constructions?

Benchmarking the $27.6 million cost requires comparing it to similar projects, which can be challenging due to the specialized nature of 'Weapons Generation Facilities.' Factors influencing cost include size, complexity, specific technological requirements, location, and the prevailing market conditions at the time of contract award. Generally, large-scale specialized construction for defense purposes can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. The firm fixed-price nature of this contract suggests a defined scope and budget. A more precise comparison would necessitate access to data on comparable projects, including their scope, duration, and final costs, which is often not publicly available in detail.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price construction contract?

The primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract lie with the contractor, SLSCO, LTD. These include the risk of underestimating costs, encountering unforeseen site conditions, labor shortages, or material price escalations, all of which could lead to the contractor absorbing losses if they exceed the fixed price. For the government, the main risks are potential delays in project completion, which could impact operational readiness, and the possibility that the contractor might cut corners on quality to maintain profitability, although quality assurance measures should mitigate this. The firm fixed-price structure, however, is designed to provide cost certainty to the government.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for money for specialized construction like this?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in government contracting, including for specialized construction. By allowing all qualified contractors to bid, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. For a project like the Weapons Generation Facility B, this approach maximizes the pool of potential bidders, increasing the likelihood that the government will receive competitive bids reflecting fair market value. The success of this method also depends on the clarity of the solicitation requirements and the rigor of the evaluation process to ensure the lowest price isn't chosen at the expense of essential qualifications or quality.

What is the historical spending trend for similar defense construction projects by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending trends for similar defense construction projects by the Department of the Navy typically show significant investment in infrastructure modernization and new facility development. This spending fluctuates based on defense priorities, budget allocations, and the lifecycle of existing infrastructure. Projects like weapons generation facilities are critical investments, often involving substantial capital outlays. Analyzing past Navy construction budgets and specific project awards for specialized facilities would reveal patterns of investment, average contract values, and the duration of such projects. This contract's value of $27.6 million aligns with the scale of significant infrastructure undertakings within the Navy's portfolio.

Are there specific performance metrics or milestones tied to this contract to ensure timely completion?

While the provided data does not detail specific performance metrics or milestones, firm fixed-price contracts typically include clauses that define delivery schedules and completion dates. The contract duration is listed as 806 days (approximately 2.2 years), suggesting a defined timeline. Performance is usually monitored through regular progress reports, site inspections, and adherence to the project schedule. Penalties for delays or failure to meet quality standards may be stipulated in the contract, incentivizing the contractor to perform effectively. The Department of the Navy would have oversight mechanisms to track progress against these implicit or explicit milestones.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: N6945021R0041

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 6702 BROADWAY ST, GALVESTON, TX, 77554

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,053,737

Exercised Options: $27,651,037

Current Obligation: $27,651,037

Actual Outlays: $169,805

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline