Over $36M for Taxiway Repair and Replacement by HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE, awarded by the Department of Defense

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $36,316,598 ($36.3M)

Contractor: Head, Inc/Diaz, Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2015-09-28

End Date: 2020-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,737 days

Daily Burn Rate: $20.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF REPAIR AND REPLACE TAXIWAY

Place of Performance

Location: DYESS AFB, TAYLOR County, TEXAS, 79607

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $36.3 million to HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF REPAIR AND REPLACE TAXIWAY Key points: 1. The contract value of over $36 million represents a significant investment in critical infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding process, which can lead to better pricing. 3. The definitive contract type indicates a commitment to a specific scope of work over a defined period. 4. The project's duration of approximately 1737 days highlights the scale and complexity of the taxiway infrastructure needs. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237310 points to a focus on highway, street, and bridge construction, indicating specialized expertise is required. 6. The absence of small business set-aside or subcontracting flags suggests this contract was not specifically targeted to boost small business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract requires more granular data on the specific scope of work and the condition of the taxiways. However, a $36 million contract for infrastructure repair and replacement over nearly five years is substantial. Without comparable project costs for similar airfield infrastructure projects, it is difficult to definitively assess value for money. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract shifts risk to the contractor, which can be beneficial if managed effectively, but could also lead to higher initial bids to account for unforeseen issues.

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. The presence of 4 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, a competitive field of four indicates that the market was engaged and that the government had options to choose from, likely leading to a more favorable price than a sole-source award.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more efficient use of funds and potentially lower contract prices compared to less competitive procurement methods.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its operational units, ensuring safe and efficient aircraft movement. The services delivered include the repair and replacement of critical taxiway infrastructure, essential for airfield operations. The geographic impact is localized to the specific military installation where the taxiways are located, likely within Texas given the 'TX' state code. The workforce implications involve construction labor and specialized engineering services, contributing to employment in the relevant sectors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen structural issues arise during repair, despite the firm-fixed-price contract.
Risk of schedule delays impacting airfield operations if the contractor faces challenges in material procurement or labor availability.
Ensuring the long-term durability and quality of repairs to avoid premature degradation and future costly interventions.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government, assuming the contractor manages risks effectively.
Awarding to a joint venture (HEAD, INC/DIAZ) may indicate a combination of expertise and capacity to handle complex infrastructure projects.
The use of full and open competition suggests a robust procurement process that likely identified a qualified contractor at a competitive price.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically focusing on heavy and civil engineering construction, as indicated by NAICS code 237310. The market for airfield infrastructure maintenance and repair is specialized, often involving a limited number of firms with the requisite experience and security clearances. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain operational readiness and safety at military installations. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within Department of Defense infrastructure budgets or broader federal transportation construction outlays.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor does it appear to have specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses flagged. This suggests that the primary focus was on securing the best value through open competition, rather than specifically promoting small business participation. The absence of these provisions means that the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract is likely minimal, unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Army. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the government's primary oversight will focus on ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope, quality standards, and delivery schedule. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Program
Airfield Pavement Maintenance
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Improvement Program
Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation if market prices for construction materials increase significantly during the contract period.
Risk of contractor performance issues impacting airfield operational availability.
Need for robust quality assurance to ensure repairs meet long-term durability standards.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $36.3 million to HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE. IGF::OT::IGF REPAIR AND REPLACE TAXIWAY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $36.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2015-09-28. End: 2020-06-30.

What is the specific scope of work for the taxiway repair and replacement, and what are the key performance indicators for success?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of work beyond 'REPAIR AND REPLACE TAXIWAY'. A comprehensive analysis would require access to the contract's Statement of Work (SOW). Key performance indicators (KPIs) would typically include metrics related to pavement condition index (PCI) improvements, reduction in surface defects (e.g., cracking, spalling), adherence to airfield safety standards (e.g., FOD prevention), and timely completion of repair phases. Without the SOW, it's impossible to define precise success metrics, but they would likely revolve around restoring taxiway integrity, ensuring operational safety, and meeting project timelines within budget.

How does the $36.3 million contract value compare to similar taxiway repair projects at other military installations?

Direct comparison of the $36.3 million contract value to similar projects is challenging without more specific data points. Factors influencing cost include the size of the taxiway system, the extent of damage (e.g., surface repairs vs. full reconstruction), material costs, labor rates in the specific geographic region (Texas, in this case), and the duration of the project (1737 days, approximately 4.75 years). Larger, more complex projects involving full reconstruction or expansion would naturally cost more. A benchmark analysis would require a database of comparable airfield infrastructure projects, ideally with similar scope, scale, and location, to determine if this contract represents a fair market price.

What is the track record of HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE in performing large-scale infrastructure projects for the Department of Defense?

The provided data identifies HEAD, INC/DIAZ, JOINT VENTURE as the contractor. To assess their track record, one would need to examine their past performance on similar contracts, including project size, complexity, timeliness, and quality of work. Information on past performance is often available through sources like the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) or through agency-specific performance evaluations. A joint venture structure suggests a pooling of resources and expertise, which can be advantageous for large projects, but the individual track records of HEAD, INC and DIAZ would also be relevant.

Given the firm-fixed-price contract type, what are the potential risks for the government regarding cost overruns or scope creep?

With a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, the contractor assumes most of the cost risk. This means the government pays a set price regardless of the contractor's actual costs. Potential risks for the government are generally lower concerning cost overruns compared to cost-reimbursement contracts. However, scope creep remains a risk if the government requests modifications or additional work not covered in the original SOW without a formal change order and price adjustment. The primary risk for the government with FFP is ensuring the contractor delivers the specified quality and scope at the agreed-upon price, and that the initial price adequately accounted for all foreseeable risks.

What is the historical spending pattern for taxiway repair and replacement at this specific military installation or within the Department of the Army?

The provided data focuses on a single contract award. To understand historical spending patterns, one would need to analyze contract data over several fiscal years for the specific installation or the Department of the Army's broader infrastructure maintenance budget. This would involve querying databases like FPDS or USASpending for similar contract actions (e.g., by NAICS code 237310, relevant PSC codes, or keywords like 'taxiway repair'). Analyzing trends in spending, contract values, and the frequency of such awards would reveal patterns and inform future budgeting and procurement strategies.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge 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: W9126G15R0123

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4477 E FIFTH AVE, COLUMBUS, OH, 43219

Business Categories: Category Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $36,316,598

Exercised Options: $36,316,598

Current Obligation: $36,316,598

Actual Outlays: $1,657,044

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline