DoD's $17.5M Rotary Wing Ramp Contract Awarded to Undisclosed Foreign Entities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,524,817 ($17.5M)

Contractor: Foreign Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-11-27

End Date: 2011-12-19

Contract Duration: 752 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 22

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ROTARY WING RAMP & TAXIWAY

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.5 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: ROTARY WING RAMP & TAXIWAY Key points: 1. Contract awarded to foreign entities with undisclosed specifics, raising transparency concerns. 2. The contract was competed fully and openly, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. A firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that cost risks are primarily borne by the contractor. 4. The duration of 752 days suggests a significant project scope. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237990 points to heavy and civil engineering construction. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to the lack of specific details regarding the services rendered and the identity of the foreign awardees. The firm-fixed-price nature is generally favorable for the government in managing cost overruns. However, without comparable projects or detailed cost breakdowns, assessing true value-for-money is difficult. The undisclosed nature of the foreign awardees prevents a direct comparison to domestic market rates or known contractor performance.

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 22 bidders suggests a robust level of competition for this project. A high number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a greater likelihood of selecting the best value offer. The specific details of the bidding process and the identities of the other bidders are not publicly available.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with 22 bidders is positive for taxpayers, as it likely drove down prices and ensured a competitive selection process, maximizing the value received for the allocated funds.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely military aviation units requiring improved ramp and taxiway infrastructure for rotary wing aircraft. The services delivered involve heavy and civil engineering construction, specifically focused on airfield facilities. The geographic impact is likely within a Department of Defense facility, though the specific location is not detailed. Workforce implications would involve construction labor and potentially specialized engineering roles, though the extent is unknown.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of transparency regarding the identity of foreign awardees.
Potential for undisclosed foreign ownership or control impacting national security.
Difficulty in assessing contractor past performance and reliability due to anonymity.
Limited public information on the specific scope of work and deliverables.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a fair and accessible bidding process.
A large number of bidders (22) suggests strong market interest and competitive pricing.
Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Contract supports critical infrastructure for military aviation operations.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically related to airfield infrastructure. The market for such specialized construction services is significant, often involving large government contracts. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other airfield construction or renovation projects undertaken by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. The scale of this contract, at over $17 million, places it in the mid-to-large range for individual construction awards.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, which does not preclude small businesses from bidding but does not prioritize them. Given the nature of heavy civil engineering construction, it is possible that larger firms dominated the bidding pool. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, but these are not explicitly detailed in the provided data.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and engineering divisions. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which holds the contractor responsible for delivering the specified work within the agreed price. Transparency is limited by the undisclosed nature of the foreign awardees. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Army Corps of Engineers Projects
Airfield Infrastructure Development
Heavy and Civil Engineering Services
Foreign Military Sales Support (potential, though not explicit)

Risk Flags

Lack of transparency regarding awardee identity.
Potential national security implications due to foreign awardees.
Difficulty in assessing contractor performance and reliability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.5 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). ROTARY WING RAMP & TAXIWAY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED).

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-11-27. End: 2011-12-19.

What specific construction services were performed under this contract?

The contract, identified by NAICS code 237990, pertains to 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.' This broadly covers the building of infrastructure projects not elsewhere classified, such as highways, streets, bridges, tunnels, and potentially, airfield facilities like ramps and taxiways. Given the contract title 'ROTARY WING RAMP & TAXIWAY,' the specific services likely involved the design, grading, paving, and marking of areas designated for helicopter operations. This could include new construction or rehabilitation of existing surfaces to meet specific load-bearing requirements and operational safety standards for rotary-wing aircraft. The exact scope, including the size of the area, materials used, and specific engineering requirements, is not detailed in the provided summary data.

Why were the foreign awardees not disclosed, and what are the implications?

The non-disclosure of specific foreign awardees is a significant transparency issue. In many government contracting scenarios, especially those involving national security or sensitive infrastructure, the identities of contractors are publicly available to ensure accountability and allow for due diligence. The lack of disclosure here could stem from various reasons, such as national security protocols, the involvement of intermediary entities, or specific treaty agreements that permit anonymity. The implications are substantial: it hinders the ability to assess the contractor's past performance, financial stability, and potential conflicts of interest. It also makes it difficult to determine if the contract complies with 'Buy American' or similar domestic preference policies, although this contract was competed openly. This anonymity raises questions about oversight and the ability to hold the responsible parties accountable if issues arise.

How does the firm-fixed-price contract type benefit the government in this scenario?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally advantageous for the government when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks of cost overruns are manageable. In this case, the Department of the Army agreed on a total price for the construction of the rotary wing ramp and taxiway. This means the contractor bears the primary responsibility for any cost increases due to labor, materials, or unforeseen site conditions. For the government, this provides budget certainty and predictability, as the total expenditure is capped at the agreed-upon price. While the government might forgo potential savings if the contractor completes the work under budget, the FFP structure significantly reduces the risk of the project exceeding its allocated funding, which is particularly important for large infrastructure projects where costs can escalate.

What does the high number of bidders (22) suggest about the market for airfield construction?

The fact that 22 bidders submitted proposals for this rotary wing ramp and taxiway project suggests a healthy and competitive market for airfield construction services, at least within the scope relevant to this contract. A large number of bidders typically indicates that the market is not dominated by a few large players and that there is sufficient capacity and interest among various firms to undertake such projects. This level of competition is beneficial for the government as it increases the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing, innovative solutions, and a higher quality of service. It implies that the project's requirements were clear enough to attract a wide range of potential contractors and that the contract's value was sufficient to warrant the bidding effort.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding construction contracts to undisclosed foreign entities?

Awarding construction contracts, especially those potentially related to military infrastructure, to undisclosed foreign entities presents several risks. Firstly, there's a lack of transparency regarding the entity's background, including their financial stability, technical capabilities, and adherence to safety and labor standards. This makes it difficult to vet the contractor thoroughly. Secondly, national security concerns may arise if the foreign entity has ties to adversarial nations or if the project involves sensitive locations or technologies. Thirdly, enforcing contractual obligations or seeking remedies in case of non-performance or defects can be significantly more complex and costly when dealing with foreign entities, especially if their jurisdiction and assets are outside the government's reach. Finally, the lack of public disclosure can erode public trust and raise questions about the fairness and integrity of the procurement process.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering 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: W917PM09R0120

Offers Received: 22

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1800 F ST NW, WASHINGTON, DC, 20405

Business Categories: Category Business, Foreign Owned, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $17,524,817

Exercised Options: $17,524,817

Current Obligation: $17,524,817

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline