Army awards $879M construction contract to R&L Brosamer, Inc. for facility upgrades

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $11,202,379 ($11.2M)

Contractor: R & L Brosamer, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-08-22

End Date: 2008-12-09

Contract Duration: 1,205 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200512!501851!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123805C0020 !A!N! !N! ! !20050822!20070930!879072908!879072908!879072908!N!R & L BROSAMER, INC !333 CAMILLE AVENUE !ALAMO !CA!94507!50258!055!06!NAPA !NAPA !CALIFORNIA!+000000500000!N!N!000019792959!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !A!Y!J!2!002!B! !D!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!C!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: NAPA, NAPA County, CALIFORNIA, 94558

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $11.2 million to R & L BROSAMER, INC. for work described as: 200512!501851!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123805C0020 !A!N! !N! ! !20050822!20070930!879072908!879072908!879072908!N!R & L BROSAMER, INC !333 CAMILLE AVENUE !ALAMO !CA!94507!50258!055!06!NAPA !NAPA… Key points: 1. Contract value significantly exceeds initial estimates, raising questions about cost efficiency. 2. Limited competition dynamics may have influenced final pricing. 3. Long contract duration suggests potential for scope creep and cost overruns. 4. Firm Fixed Price contract type offers some cost certainty but can penalize contractors for unforeseen issues. 5. The contract falls within the broad 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction' NAICS code, indicating a focus on infrastructure development.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The final award amount of $879,072,908 is substantially higher than the initial estimated value of $501,851, indicating a significant increase in project scope or cost. While the contract is Firm Fixed Price, the large discrepancy warrants scrutiny into the factors driving the cost escalation. Benchmarking against similar large-scale civil engineering projects would be necessary to determine if the final price represents fair value for the services rendered.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders were likely considered. However, the data indicates only two bids were received. A low number of bids in a full and open competition can sometimes signal challenges in the market's ability or willingness to compete on such large-scale projects, potentially impacting price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers, a low bid count could mean less competitive pressure than ideal, potentially leading to higher costs than if more firms had participated.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the U.S. Army personnel and operations supported by the upgraded facilities. The contract delivers construction and renovation services for non-building facilities. The geographic impact is centered in California, specifically Napa County, where the contractor is located. The contract implies significant workforce implications, requiring skilled labor for heavy civil engineering construction.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Significant cost increase from initial estimate to final award.
Low number of bids received despite full and open competition.
Long contract duration (over 3 years) increases risk of cost overruns and scope creep.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition.
Firm Fixed Price contract type provides some cost certainty.
Contractor is based in California, potentially supporting local economy.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the construction sector, specifically within the 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction' category (NAICS 237990). This sector is characterized by large-scale infrastructure projects. The market size for federal construction contracts is substantial, with significant annual spending across various agencies. This particular contract represents a considerable investment in facility upgrades for the Department of the Army.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the award was not set aside for small businesses and the contractor, R & L Brosamer, Inc., is likely a larger entity. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses within the provided data, which could represent missed opportunities for small business engagement in this large federal project.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and inspection offices. The Inspector General's office may also conduct audits or investigations into contract performance and financial management. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS, but detailed performance reports are not publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Department of the Army Construction Contracts
Federal Heavy and Civil Engineering Projects
Military Base Infrastructure Upgrades
Large-Scale Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Significant cost increase from estimate to award.
Low bid count in full and open competition.
Long contract duration.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $11.2 million to R & L BROSAMER, INC.. 200512!501851!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123805C0020 !A!N! !N! ! !20050822!20070930!879072908!879072908!879072908!N!R & L BROSAMER, INC !333 CAMILLE AVENUE !ALAMO !CA!94507!50258!055!06!NAPA !NAPA !CALIFORNIA!+000000500000!N!N!000019792959!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is R & L BROSAMER, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $11.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-08-22. End: 2008-12-09.

What specific types of non-building facilities were upgraded or constructed under this contract?

The provided data indicates the contract was for 'ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES' under NAICS code 237990. This broad category typically encompasses infrastructure such as roads, bridges, levees, dams, utility systems (water, sewer, electrical distribution), airfields, and other site improvements that are not housed within traditional buildings. Without more specific contract line item details or project descriptions, the exact nature of the facilities remains general, but it points towards significant civil engineering and infrastructure work rather than vertical construction.

How does the final award value of $879M compare to the initial estimated value of $501K?

There appears to be a significant discrepancy between the initial estimated value and the final award value. The data shows an initial estimate of $501,851 and a final award of $879,072,908. This represents an increase of over 175,000%. Such a vast difference suggests either a substantial change in the project's scope, requirements, or market conditions between the initial estimate and the final award, or a potential error in the initial estimate or data recording. Further investigation into the contract modifications and justifications would be necessary to understand this magnitude of change.

What are the implications of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type for a project of this scale and duration?

A Firm Fixed Price contract type means the contractor, R & L Brosamer, Inc., is obligated to complete the work for a predetermined price, regardless of their actual costs. For a large-scale, long-duration project like this (over 3 years), an FFP contract offers cost certainty to the government. However, it places the risk of cost overruns on the contractor. If the contractor underestimated costs or encountered unforeseen issues, their profit margin would decrease, or they could incur a loss. Conversely, if they managed costs efficiently, their profit would be higher. This contract type incentivizes the contractor to control costs but can also lead to less flexibility in adapting to changing requirements without formal change orders, which can be costly.

What does the low number of bids (2) in a full and open competition suggest about the market for this type of contract?

Receiving only two bids in a 'full and open competition' scenario for a contract valued at nearly $879 million suggests potential challenges in the market's capacity or willingness to compete. This could be due to the specialized nature of the work, the large scale of the project requiring significant bonding capacity and resources, or perhaps the specific geographic location or timeline. A limited number of bidders can reduce competitive pressure, potentially leading to higher prices than if a broader range of firms had participated. It might also indicate consolidation within the heavy civil engineering construction sector or specific barriers to entry for this type of government work.

What is the historical spending pattern for this contractor (R & L Brosamer, Inc.) with the federal government?

The provided data snippet focuses on a single contract awarded in 2005. To assess the contractor's historical spending pattern, a broader analysis of their federal contract awards over time would be required. This would involve querying databases like FPDS or USAspending for all contracts awarded to R & L Brosamer, Inc. Examining past contract values, agencies served, types of services rendered, and performance history would provide insight into their track record, typical contract sizes, and reliability as a federal contractor. Without this broader context, it's difficult to determine if this $879M contract is an outlier or representative of their typical engagement with the government.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Walsh Group Ltd., the (UEI: 121476675)

Address: 333 CAMILLE AVENUE, ALAMO, CA, 94507

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

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline