DoD's $18.4M Industrial Building Construction Contract Awarded to BACO - EPIK - METIS

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,398,643 ($18.4M)

Contractor: Baco - Epik - Metis

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-09-30

End Date: 2011-09-14

Contract Duration: 1,079 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION OF THE FY 08 S O F PROGRAM

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.4 million to BACO - EPIK - METIS for work described as: CONSTRUCTION OF THE FY 08 S O F PROGRAM Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in industrial infrastructure. 2. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (1079 days) indicates a substantial project scope. 4. The fixed-price nature of the contract shifts cost risk to the contractor. 5. The specific industrial building construction services are critical for operational readiness.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $18.4 million contract is challenging without specific project details and comparable construction costs for similar industrial facilities. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumed the primary cost risk. However, without data on the contractor's performance, cost overruns, or schedule adherence, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult. Further analysis would require comparing the final cost against initial estimates and the delivered facility's utility and lifespan.

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 6 bidders (no) suggests a competitive environment, which typically leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government. The level of competition is a positive sign for achieving value.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more competitive bid, potentially saving taxpayer dollars compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the specific Army unit that will utilize the new industrial building. The contract delivers essential industrial building construction services, likely supporting military operations, maintenance, or logistics. The geographic impact is localized to the site of the construction, contributing to regional economic activity through labor and material sourcing. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, and project managers during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract did not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges.
  • Risk of schedule delays impacting operational readiness if construction is not completed on time.
  • Quality control concerns inherent in large-scale construction projects.

Positive Signals

  • The firm fixed-price contract structure incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
  • Award under full and open competition suggests a competitive pricing environment.
  • The substantial contract value indicates a critical need for the facility.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Industrial Building Construction. The construction industry is a significant component of the US economy, with federal contracts often focusing on infrastructure, military facilities, and specialized government buildings. The market size for federal construction is substantial, driven by defense, transportation, and energy needs. This contract represents a specific instance of federal investment in maintaining and expanding its operational facilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (sb) was not a specific set-aside (false) for this contract. Without explicit subcontracting plans or goals mentioned, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear. However, prime contractors often utilize small businesses for specialized services or material supply, so indirect benefits may exist. Further investigation into subcontracting reports would be needed to fully assess the impact.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures would include adherence to the contract's terms, specifications, schedule, and budget. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

  • Military Construction
  • Industrial Facility Modernization
  • Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
  • Army Base Development

Risk Flags

  • Potential for scope creep if 'S O F PROGRAM' requirements were not fully defined at award.
  • Risk associated with contractor performance on a large-value, multi-year project.
  • Dependency on timely delivery of materials and specialized labor in the construction sector.

Tags

construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, industrial-building, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, infrastructure, military-facility, project-management

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.4 million to BACO - EPIK - METIS. CONSTRUCTION OF THE FY 08 S O F PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BACO - EPIK - METIS.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-09-30. End: 2011-09-14.

What was the specific purpose and scope of the industrial building construction?

The contract data identifies the project as 'CONSTRUCTION OF THE FY 08 S O F PROGRAM' and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code as '236210 - Industrial Building Construction'. While the exact nature of 'S O F PROGRAM' is not detailed in the provided data, it strongly suggests the construction of a facility intended for industrial operations within a Department of the Army context. This could encompass a wide range of uses, such as manufacturing plants, maintenance depots, storage facilities, or specialized operational centers critical to military readiness. The scope would typically include site preparation, foundation work, structural erection, installation of utilities, and finishing, all tailored to the specific industrial requirements of the program it supports.

How does the awarded price of $18.4 million compare to similar industrial building construction contracts?

Comparing the $18.4 million award requires context regarding the size, complexity, and location of the facility. Without specific details on square footage, specialized equipment integration, or unique structural requirements, a direct cost-per-square-foot benchmark is difficult. However, for large-scale industrial facilities, $18.4 million is a substantial but not necessarily excessive amount, especially considering potential inflation from FY08 (when the program was initiated) to the award date. To provide a more accurate comparison, one would need to identify other DoD or federal industrial building contracts of similar scale and purpose awarded around the same timeframe and analyze their cost structures, factoring in regional labor and material cost variations.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract, and how was performance measured?

The provided data does not explicitly list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this specific contract. However, for industrial building construction contracts, typical KPIs would include adherence to the project schedule (on-time completion), quality of construction (meeting specifications and building codes), safety performance (low incident rates), and budget management (staying within the firm fixed price). Performance measurement would likely involve regular site inspections by government representatives (Contracting Officer's Representative - COR), progress reports from the contractor, milestone reviews, and final acceptance testing of the completed facility. The firm fixed-price nature implies that meeting all specifications within the agreed price is paramount.

What is the track record of the contractor, BACO - EPIK - METIS, on similar federal projects?

The provided data does not include information on the contractor's track record. To assess this, one would need to consult federal procurement databases like SAM.gov (System for Award Management) or FPDS (Federal Procurement Data System) to review BACO - EPIK - METIS's past performance ratings, history of contract awards, and any instances of disputes, terminations, or performance issues on similar construction projects. A positive track record with successful completion of comparable federal contracts would indicate lower risk, while a history of problems might raise concerns about project execution.

Were there any significant cost variances or change orders associated with this contract?

The provided data does not contain information regarding cost variances or change orders for this contract. As this was a firm fixed-price contract, the expectation is minimal cost variance, as the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns. However, change orders can still occur if the scope of work changes significantly due to unforeseen circumstances or government-directed modifications. Investigating the contract's modification history in a more detailed procurement database would be necessary to determine if any significant change orders were issued and their impact on the final cost.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ConstructionNonresidential Building ConstructionIndustrial Building Construction

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICESARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912ER08R0011

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: PARK LABREA 357 S ORANGE GROVE AVE, LOS ANGELES, CA, 90

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $19,144,337

Exercised Options: $18,398,643

Current Obligation: $18,398,643

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2008-09-30

Current End Date: 2011-09-14

Potential End Date: 2011-09-14 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2011-09-15

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending