Army Awards $13.1M Fort Drum Operations Facility to Vetco Contracting Services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,089,959 ($13.1M)

Contractor: Vetco Contracting Services, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-12-28

End Date: 2009-06-30

Contract Duration: 550 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: W912DS-08-C-0001 UNIT OPERATIONS FACILITY, 63D EOD BATTALION, FORT DRUM, NEW YORK, NY CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMPANY OPS FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: FORT DRUM, JEFFERSON County, NEW YORK, 13602

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.1 million to VETCO CONTRACTING SERVICES, LLC for work described as: W912DS-08-C-0001 UNIT OPERATIONS FACILITY, 63D EOD BATTALION, FORT DRUM, NEW YORK, NY CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMPANY OPS FACILITY Key points: 1. The contract awarded to Vetco Contracting Services, LLC for $13.1 million covers the construction of a company operations facility at Fort Drum, NY. 2. The project falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code (236220). 3. The award was made under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources', indicating a specific, but competitive, procurement method. 4. The contract duration was 550 days, with a firm fixed price, suggesting clear cost expectations. 5. No small business participation was reported for this contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $13.1 million for a company operations facility appears within a reasonable range for construction projects of this nature. Benchmarking against similar government construction contracts would provide a more precise assessment of value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The procurement method 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' suggests that while competition was sought, certain sources were intentionally excluded. This could impact price discovery if the excluded sources were significant competitors.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayer funds are utilized for this construction project. The effectiveness of the competition method in securing the best price for the government is a key consideration for taxpayer impact.

Public Impact

Military personnel at Fort Drum will benefit from improved operational facilities. Local economy may see a boost through construction-related jobs and material sourcing. The project contributes to the modernization and readiness of Army infrastructure. Transparency in the procurement process is crucial for public trust in government spending.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
No reported small business participation.
Potential for cost overruns if initial pricing was not fully optimized.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed price contract provides cost certainty.
Project addresses a specific military operational need.
Construction completed within a defined timeframe.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction. Government spending in this sector is substantial, supporting infrastructure development for various agencies. Benchmarks for similar facilities would be necessary for a precise comparison.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract did not involve small business participation. Further investigation would be needed to understand if opportunities were missed or if the nature of the contract precluded small business involvement.

Oversight & Accountability

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method warrants scrutiny to ensure fairness and maximize value. Oversight is needed to confirm adherence to procurement regulations and effective use of funds.

Related Government Programs

Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Limited competition.
Lack of small business participation.
Potential for unoptimized pricing due to source exclusion.
Need for detailed cost benchmarking.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.1 million to VETCO CONTRACTING SERVICES, LLC. W912DS-08-C-0001 UNIT OPERATIONS FACILITY, 63D EOD BATTALION, FORT DRUM, NEW YORK, NY CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMPANY OPS FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is VETCO CONTRACTING SERVICES, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-12-28. End: 2009-06-30.

What was the rationale behind excluding specific sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' procurement method for this facility construction?

The rationale for excluding sources typically relates to specific technical requirements, past performance issues, or unique capabilities needed for the project. Understanding the exact criteria used by the Department of the Army to exclude certain contractors is essential to assess if the exclusion was justified and did not unduly limit competition, thereby potentially impacting the final price and overall value for the taxpayer.

How does the final cost of $13.1 million compare to industry benchmarks for similar military operations facilities of this size and complexity?

A direct cost comparison requires detailed project specifications and local construction cost indices. However, $13.1 million for a company operations facility suggests a significant investment. Benchmarking against recently awarded similar contracts by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would reveal if this project's cost was competitive or potentially higher than average, indicating potential value concerns.

What measures were in place to ensure the effectiveness and long-term utility of the constructed facility, beyond the initial build?

Effectiveness is often measured by the facility meeting operational needs and durability. While a firm fixed price contract addresses initial build costs, long-term effectiveness depends on quality of construction, adherence to specifications, and potential for future adaptability. Post-occupancy evaluations or warranty provisions would offer insights into the government's measures for ensuring the facility's sustained utility and value.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912DS07R0017

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 26460 NYS ROUTE 37, WATERTOWN, NY, 13601

Business Categories: Category Business, HUBZone Firm, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Veteran Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $13,089,959

Exercised Options: $13,089,959

Current Obligation: $13,089,959

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline