Tutor Perini Corporation awarded $15M for overhead protection construction, completed on time
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $15,001,066 ($15.0M)
Contractor: Tutor Perini Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-09-29
End Date: 2011-09-30
Contract Duration: 731 days
Daily Burn Rate: $20.5K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 12
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT OVERHEAD PROTECTION
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $15.0 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION for work described as: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT OVERHEAD PROTECTION Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The fixed-price contract type likely provided cost certainty for the government. 3. The project duration of 731 days indicates a significant construction undertaking. 4. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major defense entity. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's value of $15,001,066 for overhead protection construction appears reasonable given the project's scope and duration. Without specific benchmarks for similar overhead protection projects, a direct per-unit cost comparison is difficult. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor assumed the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator of value if the project was completed within budget.
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 12 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. This broad competition is generally favorable for price discovery and can lead to more competitive pricing for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of the Army and its personnel, who will receive enhanced overhead protection at their facilities. The services delivered include the design and construction of overhead protection structures. The geographic impact is localized to the specific military installation where the construction took place. The project likely involved a workforce of construction laborers, engineers, and project managers.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arose, though mitigated by fixed-price contract.
- Ensuring quality of construction to meet long-term durability requirements for overhead protection.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive market.
- Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
- Project completed within the specified duration.
- Awarded by a major federal agency (Department of the Army).
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry. The market for construction services, particularly for government facilities, is substantial. This project represents a specific need for protective infrastructure within the broader defense construction landscape. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other construction projects of similar scale and purpose within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.
Small Business Impact
The provided data does not indicate any specific small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements for this contract. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is not discernible from this information alone. Further investigation into subcontracting plans would be needed to assess any indirect effects on small businesses.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the contracting officers and program managers within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated by the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), which records contract awards. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction
- Facility Maintenance and Repair
- Architectural and Engineering Services
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arose, though mitigated by fixed-price contract.
- Ensuring quality of construction to meet long-term durability requirements for overhead protection.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, overhead-protection, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, large-project, infrastructure
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $15.0 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT OVERHEAD PROTECTION
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $15.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-09-29. End: 2011-09-30.
What was the specific nature of the 'overhead protection' being constructed?
The term 'overhead protection' in construction typically refers to structures designed to shield individuals or areas from falling debris, weather elements, or other overhead hazards. For a military installation, this could encompass a range of applications, such as protective canopies over walkways, entrances, loading docks, or areas prone to falling objects from higher structures. The exact specifications would have been detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW), outlining the design requirements, materials, and intended use of the protection systems. Without access to the full contract details, the precise function and scale of the overhead protection remain general.
How does the $15 million contract value compare to similar overhead protection projects?
Benchmarking the $15 million contract value for overhead protection is challenging without more specific project details and access to a database of comparable federal or commercial construction projects. The cost of overhead protection can vary significantly based on factors such as the size of the area to be covered, the complexity of the design, the materials used (e.g., steel, concrete, specialized composites), the required structural integrity, and the specific site conditions. A $15 million award suggests a substantial project, potentially covering large areas or involving complex engineering, rather than simple, small-scale canopies. Further analysis would require identifying projects with similar square footage, structural requirements, and geographic locations.
What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract?
While specific KPIs are not detailed in the provided summary data, typical performance indicators for a construction contract like this would include adherence to schedule (on-time completion), quality of workmanship (meeting design specifications and industry standards), safety compliance (zero major incidents), and budget management (completion within the firm fixed-price). The data indicates the project was completed within its 731-day duration, suggesting successful schedule performance. Quality and safety would have been monitored through regular inspections and progress reports by the contracting officer's representative (COR).
What is the track record of Tutor Perini Corporation in federal contracting?
Tutor Perini Corporation is a large, well-established construction company with a significant history of undertaking major projects for both government and private sector clients. They have been involved in numerous federal contracts across various agencies, including defense, transportation, and infrastructure. Their portfolio includes complex projects such as building construction, infrastructure development, and specialized facilities. While specific performance metrics for all their contracts are not provided here, their continued success in winning and executing large-scale federal awards suggests a generally positive track record. However, like any large contractor, they may have experienced project challenges or disputes on specific contracts over their extensive history.
Were there any significant risks identified or managed during the execution of this contract?
The primary risks inherent in a construction project of this nature and scale typically include unforeseen site conditions (e.g., subsurface issues, hazardous materials), weather delays, labor shortages or disputes, material price fluctuations (though mitigated by fixed-price), and design changes. The firm fixed-price contract structure shifts much of the financial risk to the contractor, Tutor Perini Corporation. Successful completion within the scheduled duration suggests that the contractor effectively managed these potential risks. The government's risk was primarily related to ensuring the contractor met quality standards and delivered the required protection as specified in the contract.
How does this contract fit into the Department of the Army's broader infrastructure spending?
This $15 million contract for overhead protection represents a component of the Department of the Army's overall infrastructure investment strategy. The Army, like other branches of the military, requires continuous maintenance, upgrades, and new construction to ensure operational readiness, safety, and security of its facilities worldwide. Spending on protective structures falls under facility improvement and modernization efforts. While this specific contract addresses a localized need, it contributes to the larger goal of maintaining a robust and secure physical environment for military personnel and operations. The Army's total infrastructure budget encompasses a vast array of projects, from barracks and training facilities to specialized operational structures.
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
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: W912ER09R0062
Offers Received: 12
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 73 MT WAYTE AVE, FRAMINGHAM, MA, 05
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $15,001,066
Exercised Options: $15,001,066
Current Obligation: $15,001,066
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-09-29
Current End Date: 2011-09-30
Potential End Date: 2011-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2011-05-11
More Contracts from Tutor Perini Corporation
- 200312!001242!2100!CA78 !transatlantic Program Center !daca7803d0006 !A!N! !N!0002 !20030919!20040331!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 MT Wayte Avenue !framingham !MA!01701!* !* !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000000460000!n!n!000000000000!y199!other Miscellaneous Buildings !C2 !construction !1000!NOT Discernable or Classified !236220!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20040331!B! ! !n!a!d!n!u!1!001!n!2a!z!n!z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y!Y! ! !0001! ! — $379.4M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Embassy Housing — $157.2M (Department of Defense)
- 200512!501265!2100!w912er!transatlantic Program Center !w912er04d0008 !A!N! !N!0003 ! !20050928!20061231!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 Mount Wayte AVE !framingham !MA!01701!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000119283840!n!n!000000000000!y159!other Industrial Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !* !236220!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!j!2!001!b! !Z!N!A! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $127.2M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Hurricane Rebuild Task Order for SAN Juan Phase II East Base BID and Option 5: SE X Waterfront Boat Ramp — $117.0M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Ffp/Satoc Saudi Arabia (FMS) F-15 Modernizaiton Program, Khurais Electronic Warfare Range., Psab 13-0004 — $106.4M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)