DoD awards $28.15M for Fort Eustis 3rd Port Improvements, with 3 bidders competing

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $28,152,772 ($28.2M)

Contractor: Cianbro Corporation

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-09-30

End Date: 2025-08-31

Contract Duration: 1,066 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 3RD PORT IMPROVEMENTS AT FT. EUSTIS, VA

Place of Performance

Location: FORT EUSTIS, NEWPORT NEWS CITY County, VIRGINIA, 23604

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $28.2 million to CIANBRO CORPORATION for work described as: 3RD PORT IMPROVEMENTS AT FT. EUSTIS, VA Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of heavy civil engineering construction. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for this type of work. 3. Contract duration of nearly three years indicates a significant, long-term project. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, potentially stabilizing costs. 5. Project location in Virginia aligns with significant military infrastructure needs. 6. The award to Cianbro Corporation, a large established firm, suggests capacity for complex projects.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $28.15 million for port improvements at Fort Eustis is within a reasonable range for major civil engineering projects of this nature. Benchmarking against similar Army Corps of Engineers or Department of Transportation projects for port or pier construction reveals comparable cost profiles for projects of similar scale and complexity. The firm-fixed-price structure, while common, necessitates careful contractor management to ensure value delivery. Without specific per-unit cost breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging, but the competitive nature of the award provides a positive signal.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that the solicitation was broadly advertised, allowing all responsible sources to submit bids. Three bids were received, which suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific project. While three bidders are better than one or two, a higher number could potentially drive prices down further. However, the complexity and specialized nature of port construction may limit the pool of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, even with three bidders, is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages competitive pricing and ensures that the government explores a reasonable range of options, potentially leading to cost savings compared to less competitive solicitations.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army, specifically units operating out of Fort Eustis, which will gain enhanced logistical capabilities. The project will deliver critical infrastructure improvements to the port facilities, likely increasing operational efficiency and capacity. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Eustis, Virginia, but the improved logistics can have broader national defense implications. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, and project managers in the Virginia region during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the firm-fixed-price structure.
Contract duration of over two years could be subject to delays due to weather, material availability, or labor issues.
Ensuring compliance with environmental regulations during construction in a port environment requires diligent oversight.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process and potential for competitive pricing.
The contractor, Cianbro Corporation, has a history of undertaking large-scale infrastructure projects, indicating capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically focusing on maritime infrastructure. The market for port and terminal construction is significant, driven by both commercial and defense needs. Spending in this area is often project-specific and influenced by government infrastructure investment priorities, military readiness requirements, and economic development initiatives. Comparable benchmarks would include other federal or state projects involving dredging, pier construction, or terminal upgrades.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large-scale construction project, it is likely that the prime contractor, Cianbro Corporation, will engage subcontractors. The extent to which small businesses will participate through subcontracting opportunities is not detailed in this data but is a common practice in federal construction awards to meet small business subcontracting goals.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Army, potentially involving contracting officers' representatives (CORs) and quality assurance personnel. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the contractor bears much of the cost risk, but the government must still monitor progress, quality, and adherence to specifications. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS, and specific project progress may be available through agency reporting channels.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects
Military Construction (MILCON)
Port and Terminal Infrastructure Development
Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for contractor cost overruns due to inflation over the contract's multi-year duration.
Risk of project delays related to unforeseen site conditions or environmental factors.
Moderate competition level (3 bidders) may indicate limited market options for highly specialized construction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $28.2 million to CIANBRO CORPORATION. 3RD PORT IMPROVEMENTS AT FT. EUSTIS, VA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CIANBRO CORPORATION.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $28.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-09-30. End: 2025-08-31.

What is Cianbro Corporation's track record with similar large-scale civil engineering and port construction projects for the Department of Defense?

Cianbro Corporation has a substantial track record in heavy civil construction, including significant experience with marine and port facilities. While specific project details for DoD contracts are not provided in the abbreviated data, their portfolio typically includes bridge construction, industrial facilities, and infrastructure development. Their history suggests they possess the technical expertise and capacity to manage complex projects like the 3rd Port Improvements at Fort Eustis. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings and any past performance issues on similar DoD contracts would provide further insight into their reliability for this specific award.

How does the awarded amount of $28.15 million compare to the estimated cost or budget for this specific 3rd Port Improvement project?

The provided data indicates the awarded amount ($28,152,772.19) but does not include the government's independent government cost estimate (IGCE) or the initial budget allocated for this project. The fact that it was awarded under full and open competition with three bidders suggests the award price was likely competitive and potentially within the government's expected range. However, without access to the IGCE or pre-solicitation budget information, a direct comparison to assess if the award represents significant savings or an overage is not possible from this dataset alone.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and risk mitigation strategies outlined in the contract for the 3rd Port Improvements?

The provided data does not detail specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or explicit risk mitigation strategies embedded within the contract. However, the firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type itself is a primary risk mitigation strategy for the government, placing the financial risk of cost overruns on the contractor. Further oversight would involve monitoring project milestones, quality control reports, and adherence to the schedule. Specific KPIs related to construction quality, safety, and timely completion would typically be defined in the contract's statement of work and performance standards.

What is the historical spending trend for similar port improvement or maritime infrastructure projects at Fort Eustis or within the Department of the Army?

Historical spending data for similar projects at Fort Eustis or within the Department of the Army is not provided in the abbreviated dataset. To analyze this, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending.gov) for contracts related to 'port improvements,' 'pier construction,' 'maritime facilities,' or similar terms, specifically filtered for the Department of the Army and potentially the specific installation (Fort Eustis). Analyzing trends would involve looking at the number, value, and frequency of such contracts over several fiscal years to understand typical investment levels and identify any significant shifts.

Given the 1066-day duration, what are the potential impacts of inflation or material cost escalation on this firm-fixed-price contract?

For a firm-fixed-price contract spanning 1066 days (approximately 3 years), inflation and material cost escalation pose a significant risk to the contractor. Unlike cost-reimbursement contracts, FFP contracts generally do not include economic price adjustment (EPA) clauses unless specifically negotiated and included. This means Cianbro Corporation is responsible for absorbing any increases in labor, materials, or equipment costs that occur during the contract period. This risk is factored into their initial bid price; if their cost projections are inaccurate, their profit margins could be severely impacted. The government benefits from price certainty, but the contractor assumes the escalation risk.

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: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: W9123622B2017

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 101 CIANBRO SQ, PITTSFIELD, ME, 04967

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $28,152,772

Exercised Options: $28,152,772

Current Obligation: $28,152,772

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 18

Total Subaward Amount: $318,511,014

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline