Department of Defense awarded $82.7M for construction services, with a significant portion for restoration activities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,351,527 ($31.4M)

Contractor: Biltwell Development CO.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-03-08

End Date: 2009-03-27

Contract Duration: 1,115 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200606!600755!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123806C0012 !A!N! !N! ! !20060308!20080530!826778086!826778086!826778086!N!BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO INC !4745 GEARY BLVD !SAN FRANCISCO !CA!94118!18345!077!06!DEFENSE DEPOT, TRACY!SAN JOAQUIN !CALIFORNIA!+000028342974!N!N!000030575974!Y300!RESTORATION ACTIVITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!B! !D!N!Z! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!Y!U!N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: TRACY, SAN JOAQUIN County, CALIFORNIA, 95376

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.4 million to BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO. for work described as: 200606!600755!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123806C0012 !A!N! !N! ! !20060308!20080530!826778086!826778086!826778086!N!BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO INC !4745 GEARY BLVD !SAN FRANCISCO !CA!94118!18345!077!06!DEFENSE DEPOT, TRACY!SAN … Key points: 1. Contract value of $82.7M for construction services indicates a substantial investment in infrastructure. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (over 3 years) implies a complex or long-term project. 4. The primary service category is construction, with a specific focus on restoration activities. 5. The contract was awarded to Biltwell Development Co. Inc., a single entity for the entire scope. 6. The contract's geographic focus is California, specifically San Joaquin County.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total contract value of $82.7 million for construction services is a significant sum. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale construction projects within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government. Without specific details on the scope of 'restoration activities,' it's challenging to compare pricing directly to market rates for comparable services.

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 4 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this particular contract. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, a competitive process was indeed followed, which is a positive sign for price discovery and achieving a fair market price.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging multiple companies to bid, which can lead to more competitive pricing and better value for the government's investment.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Army Corps of Engineers, for infrastructure improvements. Services delivered include general construction and specialized restoration activities. The geographic impact is concentrated in California, particularly San Joaquin County. The contract supports the construction workforce, likely involving skilled trades and project management personnel.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed scope for 'restoration activities' makes it difficult to assess the full value and potential risks.
The contract's large dollar value could present execution risks if the contractor lacks sufficient capacity or experience for the specific restoration work.
Limited information on the specific type of construction beyond 'restoration activities' hinders a deeper risk assessment.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a structured and accessible bidding process.
The contract is firm fixed-price, transferring cost overrun risk to the contractor.
The contract duration of over three years allows for structured project execution and potential for phased delivery.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broad construction sector, specifically focusing on building construction and restoration. The federal government is a significant consumer of construction services, particularly for maintaining and upgrading its vast inventory of facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve looking at other large-scale federal construction contracts, especially those managed by the Army Corps of Engineers for infrastructure and facility maintenance. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms capable of undertaking large projects.

Small Business Impact

There is no explicit indication of a small business set-aside for this contract, and the prime contractor, Biltwell Development Co. Inc., is a substantial entity. The contract does not specify subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army, likely managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, requiring the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed budget. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed project-specific oversight reports are not always readily available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Federal Building and Infrastructure Projects
Defense Facility Maintenance and Repair
Restoration and Renovation Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep in restoration activities
Contractor's capacity for large-scale, long-duration projects
Unforeseen site conditions impacting restoration costs
Quality control for complex restoration work

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.4 million to BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO.. 200606!600755!2100!W91238!USA ENGINEER DIST SACRAMENTO !W9123806C0012 !A!N! !N! ! !20060308!20080530!826778086!826778086!826778086!N!BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO INC !4745 GEARY BLVD !SAN FRANCISCO !CA!94118!18345!077!06!DEFENSE DEPOT, TRACY!SAN JOAQUIN !CALIFORNIA!+000028342974!N!N!000030575974!Y300!RESTORATION ACTIVITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BILTWELL DEVELOPMENT CO..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $31.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-03-08. End: 2009-03-27.

What specific types of restoration activities are covered under this contract, and what is the estimated cost breakdown for these activities?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'Restoration Activities' within the 'Construction' category. However, it does not specify the exact nature of these activities. This could range from structural repairs, environmental remediation, historical building restoration, or damage repair. Without further details, it's impossible to provide a cost breakdown. A deeper dive into the contract's statement of work (SOW) or task orders would be necessary to understand the specifics of the restoration work and allocate costs accordingly. This lack of specificity is a common challenge when analyzing high-level contract data and can obscure the true value and risks associated with the project.

How does the awarded amount of $82.7 million compare to the estimated cost or budget for this specific restoration project?

The data shows a total award of $82,677,808.60. This figure represents the final contract value. To compare this to an estimated cost or budget, one would need access to the initial solicitation documents, pre-negotiation objectives, or internal government cost estimates. Federal agencies typically develop independent government cost estimates (IGCE) before soliciting bids. The difference between the IGCE and the final award price can indicate the effectiveness of the competition and negotiation process. Without access to the IGCE for this specific contract (W9123806C0012), it is not possible to definitively state how the awarded amount compares to the initial budget or estimate.

What is the track record of Biltwell Development Co. Inc. with similar large-scale restoration or construction projects for the Department of Defense?

Biltwell Development Co. Inc. was awarded this $82.7 million contract for restoration activities. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their past performance on similar federal contracts. This would involve searching contract databases for previous awards to Biltwell, particularly those involving large-scale construction or specialized restoration work for the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. Key performance indicators to look for include on-time delivery, adherence to budget (especially for cost-reimbursable contracts, though this is firm-fixed-price), quality of work, and any history of disputes or contract terminations. Without this historical data, it's difficult to gauge their specific expertise and reliability for this type of project.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration for restoration activities?

A firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor, which is generally favorable for the government. However, for a large contract ($82.7M) with a significant duration (over 3 years) focused on 'restoration activities' (which can be unpredictable), there are still risks. If the scope of restoration is not fully defined or if unforeseen conditions arise (e.g., hazardous materials, structural issues), the contractor might face significant cost increases. While they are obligated to complete the work at the fixed price, this could lead to quality compromises if the contractor struggles financially, or potential disputes over scope changes. The government's risk lies in ensuring the contractor has adequately accounted for all potential issues in their fixed price and that the quality of work is maintained throughout the project lifecycle.

How does the number of bidders (4) in this full and open competition impact the potential value for taxpayers?

Having four bidders in a full and open competition suggests a reasonably competitive environment. Generally, more bidders tend to drive down prices as companies vie for the contract. While not as robust as a competition with, say, ten or more bidders, four offers indicate that multiple firms found the opportunity attractive and believed they could successfully bid. This level of competition likely helped the Department of the Army secure a fair market price for the construction services. However, without knowing the specific market dynamics for this type of restoration work in California, it's hard to say definitively if four bidders represent the optimal level of competition for maximizing taxpayer value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4745 GEARY BLVD, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline