DoD's $23.3M aviation facility construction contract awarded via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,266,256 ($23.3M)

Contractor: Domestic Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-09-22

End Date: 2015-06-28

Contract Duration: 1,740 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 7

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCT ROTARY WING RAMS AND TAXIWAYS AND AVIATION HANGAR AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES IN SHARANA

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $23.3 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: CONSTRUCT ROTARY WING RAMS AND TAXIWAYS AND AVIATION HANGAR AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES IN SHARANA Key points: 1. The contract's value of $23.3 million for aviation facility construction appears reasonable given the scope. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive pricing environment. 3. The contract duration of 1740 days (approx. 4.8 years) indicates a long-term project. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor. 5. The project involves constructing rotary wing ramps, taxiways, and maintenance facilities. 6. The undisclosed domestic awardee makes direct contractor performance assessment difficult.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The $23.3 million contract for constructing aviation facilities, including ramps, taxiways, and hangars, represents a significant investment. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for military aviation infrastructure suggests this price point is within a reasonable range, especially considering the specialized nature of the work. The firm-fixed-price structure implies that the contractor bears the primary financial risk, which can be a positive indicator of value if managed effectively. However, without specific details on the awardee's track record or a breakdown of costs, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging.

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 7 bids suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this project. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and can result in more favorable terms for the government. The number of bidders provides a good indication that the market was engaged and that the government likely received competitive proposals.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the potential for cost savings through competitive bidding, ensuring that the government secures the best possible price for the construction services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and its aviation units, gaining essential infrastructure for operations and maintenance. The services delivered include the construction of critical aviation infrastructure: rotary wing ramps, taxiways, and maintenance facilities. The geographic impact is localized to the specific military installation where the construction takes place (Sharana). Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, and project managers during the project's duration.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific awardee information hinders assessment of past performance and potential risks.
Project duration of nearly 5 years could be subject to delays and cost overruns if not managed diligently.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract type transfers cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition with 7 bidders suggests a competitive environment likely leading to better pricing.
Construction of essential aviation infrastructure supports military readiness and operational capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically focusing on specialized aviation infrastructure. The market for military construction is substantial, with significant government spending allocated annually to maintain and upgrade facilities. This project aligns with broader defense spending trends aimed at modernizing military bases and ensuring operational readiness. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar large-scale military construction projects would typically range in the tens of millions of dollars, depending on scale and complexity.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While the primary awardee is undisclosed, there is no explicit information regarding subcontracting goals for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses would likely depend on the prime contractor's own subcontracting strategy and the availability of qualified small businesses within the construction supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting command. Given the firm-fixed-price nature, oversight would focus on ensuring adherence to contract specifications, timelines, and quality standards. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific project details and ongoing progress reports may be less publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction, Army
Airfield Paving and Construction
Aircraft Maintenance Facilities Construction
Defense Infrastructure Projects
Rotary Wing Operations Support

Risk Flags

Undisclosed Awardee
Long Project Duration
Potential for Scope Creep

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $23.3 million to DOMESTIC AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). CONSTRUCT ROTARY WING RAMS AND TAXIWAYS AND AVIATION HANGAR AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES IN SHARANA

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 $23.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-09-22. End: 2015-06-28.

What is the track record of the undisclosed prime contractor for similar large-scale aviation construction projects?

The provided data does not disclose the identity of the prime contractor, making it impossible to assess their track record for similar large-scale aviation construction projects. Without knowing the awardee, we cannot review their past performance, project completion history, safety records, or client satisfaction on previous contracts. This lack of transparency is a significant limitation in evaluating the contractor's reliability and the potential risks associated with their ability to successfully execute this project. Further investigation would require identifying the specific awardee through alternative means, such as agency procurement records or specialized databases.

How does the cost per square foot or per unit of this construction project compare to industry benchmarks for similar military aviation facilities?

The provided data does not include specific cost breakdowns such as cost per square foot or cost per unit of construction (e.g., per hangar bay, per linear foot of taxiway). Therefore, a direct comparison to industry benchmarks for similar military aviation facilities is not possible. To perform such an analysis, detailed cost information from the contract, including the total construction area, the scope of specialized features (like maintenance equipment installation), and the specific types of facilities built, would be necessary. Benchmarking would then involve comparing these metrics against publicly available data for comparable projects within the Department of Defense or other government agencies.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with a nearly five-year construction project of this magnitude?

The primary risk indicators for a construction project of this magnitude and duration (1740 days, approx. 4.8 years) include potential for schedule delays due to unforeseen site conditions, weather impacts, supply chain disruptions, or labor shortages. Cost escalation is another significant risk, although mitigated by the firm-fixed-price contract type, which shifts this risk to the contractor. Scope creep, where project requirements change or expand beyond the original agreement, can also pose a risk if not managed through strict change control processes. Furthermore, the complexity of constructing specialized aviation facilities introduces technical risks related to design, engineering, and integration of specific operational requirements. Finally, the long duration increases the potential for changes in regulatory requirements or funding availability.

How effective has the Department of the Army been in managing similar large-scale construction contracts in terms of cost and schedule adherence?

Assessing the overall effectiveness of the Department of the Army in managing similar large-scale construction contracts requires a broad analysis of historical project performance, which is beyond the scope of the data provided for this specific contract. Generally, large military construction projects can face challenges related to cost overruns and schedule delays, common in complex infrastructure development. However, the Army employs various contract types, project management methodologies, and oversight mechanisms to mitigate these risks. Performance can vary significantly based on the specific project, location, contracting team, and economic conditions. A comprehensive review would involve analyzing data from multiple completed projects to identify trends in cost variance, schedule adherence, and dispute resolution.

What is the historical spending pattern for aviation facility construction by the Department of Defense over the last decade?

The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending patterns for aviation facility construction by the Department of Defense. To analyze such patterns, one would need access to comprehensive historical contract data, categorized by agency, service, and project type (e.g., aviation facilities). This would involve examining annual spending trends, identifying major projects, tracking fluctuations in contract values, and understanding the drivers behind spending changes, such as modernization initiatives, operational needs, or geopolitical factors. Such an analysis would typically be conducted using large federal procurement databases over a defined period.

Are there any specific performance metrics or KPIs associated with this contract that indicate success beyond project completion?

The provided data does not specify any performance metrics or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) beyond the basic contract terms like completion date and adherence to specifications. For construction contracts of this nature, success is typically measured by the timely completion of the facility according to the approved design and quality standards, within the agreed-upon budget (especially critical for fixed-price contracts), and ensuring the facility meets its intended operational purpose. Post-occupancy evaluations or long-term durability metrics are usually not detailed in initial contract award data. Specific KPIs might include safety incident rates during construction or adherence to environmental standards, but these are not explicitly listed here.

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: W912ER10R0019

Offers Received: 7

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: $23,269,883

Exercised Options: $23,266,256

Current Obligation: $23,266,256

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline