DoD's $53.9M contract for Afghanistan electrical repairs lacked competition, raising cost concerns

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $53,942,311 ($53.9M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-07-07

End Date: 2011-06-30

Contract Duration: 358 days

Daily Burn Rate: $150.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MIPR0J3MPB0114, OM 12A, TF REPAIR- TO PREVENT LOSS OF LIFE & EQUIPMENT PROVIDE ELECTRICAL CREWS ELECTRICAL INSPECTION AND REPAIR OF U.S. OCCUPIED CAMPS NOT SUPPORTED BY LOGCAP THROUGHOUT AFGHANISTAN

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $53.9 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: MIPR0J3MPB0114, OM 12A, TF REPAIR- TO PREVENT LOSS OF LIFE & EQUIPMENT PROVIDE ELECTRICAL CREWS ELECTRICAL INSPECTION AND REPAIR OF U.S. OCCUPIED CAMPS NOT SUPPORTED BY LOGCAP THROUGHOUT AFGHANISTAN Key points: 1. The contract's value, while substantial, was awarded without open competition, potentially limiting price discovery. 2. Electrical repair services are critical for maintaining safe operational environments in deployed locations. 3. The lack of disclosed domestic awardees makes direct comparison and value assessment challenging. 4. The contract duration of nearly a year suggests a significant and ongoing need for these services. 5. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but competition is key to ensuring optimal pricing. 6. The absence of small business set-asides means opportunities for smaller firms were not explicitly prioritized.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Assessing the value for money is difficult due to the lack of disclosed awardees and competitive bidding. The $53.9 million price tag for electrical inspection and repair services over approximately one year in Afghanistan is substantial. Without comparable contracts or market benchmarks for similar services in austere environments, it's hard to definitively state if this represents a fair price. The 'not competed' status is a significant indicator that the government may not have achieved the best possible pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was explicitly marked as 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a sole-source award. This means the agency did not solicit bids from multiple potential contractors. The reasons for this approach are not detailed in the provided data, but it typically suggests a belief that only one source could fulfill the requirement, or it was awarded under specific emergency or urgency circumstances. The lack of competition means there was no direct price comparison among multiple vendors.

Taxpayer Impact: When a contract is not competed, taxpayers may not benefit from the cost savings that typically arise from a competitive bidding process. This can lead to higher prices than might otherwise be achievable.

Public Impact

U.S. military personnel and personnel operating in U.S.-occupied camps in Afghanistan benefit from improved electrical safety and operational continuity. The contract delivers essential electrical inspection and repair services, crucial for preventing equipment damage and ensuring safety. The geographic impact is Afghanistan, specifically within U.S.-occupied camps not supported by LOGCAP. The contract supports the need for skilled electrical labor, though the specific workforce implications (e.g., local vs. U.S. hires) are not detailed.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition limits price discovery and potentially increases costs for taxpayers.
Opaque awardee information hinders performance and value assessment.
The 'not competed' status warrants further investigation into the justification for sole-sourcing.
The significant dollar amount without competitive justification raises a red flag for fiscal responsibility.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type helps to cap potential cost overruns.
The contract addresses a critical need for operational safety and equipment preservation.
The award was made to a domestic entity, potentially keeping some economic benefit within the U.S.

Sector Analysis

The contract falls within the 'Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors' industry (NAICS 238210). This sector is vital for infrastructure development and maintenance across various industries, including government services. Federal spending in this area often supports base operations, facility upgrades, and critical infrastructure repairs. The market size for electrical contracting is substantial, with significant government procurement activity. This specific contract addresses a niche but critical need for electrical services in a challenging operational environment, distinct from typical domestic construction projects.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This means that large businesses were eligible to compete, and there was no specific requirement for subcontracting to small businesses. Consequently, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular award is likely minimal, as opportunities were not intentionally channeled towards them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. However, as a Department of Defense contract, it would typically fall under the purview of the relevant DoD Inspector General's office for audit and investigation. Accountability would be managed through contract administration by the Army contracting command. Transparency is limited by the lack of disclosed awardee information and the non-competitive nature of the award.

Related Government Programs

Base Operations Support (BOS)
Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP)
Contingency Contracting
Facility Maintenance and Repair

Risk Flags

Non-competitive award
Lack of disclosed awardee
High contract value without clear justification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $53.9 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). MIPR0J3MPB0114, OM 12A, TF REPAIR- TO PREVENT LOSS OF LIFE & EQUIPMENT PROVIDE ELECTRICAL CREWS ELECTRICAL INSPECTION AND REPAIR OF U.S. OCCUPIED CAMPS NOT SUPPORTED BY LOGCAP THROUGHOUT AFGHANISTAN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DOMESTIC 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 $53.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-07-07. End: 2011-06-30.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' which signifies a sole-source award. However, the specific justification for this approach is not detailed. Typically, sole-source awards are made when only one responsible source can provide the required supplies or services, or in cases of urgent and compelling need. Without further documentation from the awarding agency (Department of the Army), the precise rationale remains unknown. This lack of transparency regarding the justification is a key area for further inquiry, as it directly impacts the assessment of value and potential cost savings missed due to the absence of competition.

How does the $53.9 million cost compare to similar electrical repair contracts in contingency environments?

Direct comparison of the $53.9 million cost is challenging without more specific data points. Key factors influencing cost in contingency environments include the level of risk, security requirements, logistical complexities, and the availability of qualified local labor versus imported labor. Contracts for similar services in Afghanistan or other operational theaters would need to be identified, considering the duration, scope of work (inspection vs. full repair), and specific location. The 'not competed' status further complicates benchmarking, as there's no clear market price established through bidding. A thorough analysis would require access to historical contract data for similar services and potentially expert consultation on pricing in austere regions.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding a large contract without competition?

The primary risk of awarding a large contract without competition is the potential for paying a higher price than necessary. Without multiple bids, there is less incentive for the contractor to offer the most competitive rate, and the government lacks a benchmark to ensure fair pricing. Other risks include a reduced pool of qualified contractors, potentially leading to lower quality services or delays if the sole provider faces issues. Furthermore, a lack of competition can stifle innovation and discourage new entrants into the market. For taxpayers, the risk is a less efficient use of public funds.

What performance metrics or oversight mechanisms were in place to ensure the quality of electrical work?

The provided data does not specify the performance metrics or detailed oversight mechanisms for this contract. Typically, government contracts include performance standards, quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs), and defined deliverables. Oversight would likely be managed by a contracting officer's representative (COR) responsible for monitoring the contractor's performance and ensuring compliance with the contract terms. However, the extent and effectiveness of this oversight, especially in a remote operational environment like Afghanistan, are not detailed here. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work and associated quality assurance documents would be necessary.

What is the historical spending trend for electrical repair services in Afghanistan by the Department of Defense?

The provided data snippet focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending trends for electrical repair services in Afghanistan. To analyze historical spending, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for similar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or Department of the Army within Afghanistan over multiple fiscal years. This would involve filtering by relevant NAICS codes (e.g., 238210), keywords related to electrical repair, and the geographic location. Such an analysis could reveal patterns of spending, identify periods of increased or decreased investment, and highlight whether non-competitive awards are a recurring issue for these types of services.

Were there any specific security or logistical challenges that necessitated a sole-source award?

The data does not explicitly state the security or logistical challenges that may have necessitated a sole-source award for this contract. However, operating in Afghanistan presents inherent security risks and complex logistical hurdles. In some contingency situations, the urgency of need, the specific security environment, or the unique requirements of a particular location (e.g., U.S.-occupied camps not covered by larger support contracts like LOGCAP) might lead contracting officers to determine that only one contractor can meet the immediate requirements. Without official documentation detailing these challenges and the subsequent justification for non-competition, this remains speculative.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Building Equipment Contractors › Electrical Contractors and Other Wiring Installation Contractors

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD EQUIPMENT › MAINT, REPAIR, REBUILD OF EQUIPMENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

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

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $53,942,311

Exercised Options: $53,942,311

Current Obligation: $53,942,311

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline