DoD spent $30.2M on Afghan airbase construction, awarded to foreign entities via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,226,341 ($30.2M)

Contractor: Foreign Awardees (undisclosed)

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2011-04-08

End Date: 2013-04-11

Contract Duration: 734 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT STRATEGIC AIRLIFT&HELICOPTER APRONS, MAZAR-E-SHARIF, AFGHANISTAN

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.2 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED) for work described as: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT STRATEGIC AIRLIFT&HELICOPTER APRONS, MAZAR-E-SHARIF, AFGHANISTAN Key points: 1. The contract aimed to build critical infrastructure in a high-risk environment. 2. Award to foreign entities raises questions about domestic economic impact and oversight. 3. The firm-fixed-price structure aimed to control costs, but final value is key. 4. Competition was robust, suggesting potential for fair pricing despite geopolitical factors. 5. The project duration of over two years indicates significant logistical and execution challenges. 6. The specific nature of the work (airlift/helicopter aprons) highlights strategic military needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking this contract's value is challenging due to its unique geographic location and the nature of the services provided (strategic airlift and helicopter aprons in Afghanistan). The total award of $30.2 million for a two-year construction project in a conflict zone suggests a potentially reasonable cost given the extreme operational risks and logistical complexities involved. However, without detailed breakdowns of labor, materials, and overhead specific to the Afghan context, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult. Comparing it to similar projects in stable, domestic environments would not be appropriate.

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, including foreign entities, were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 9 bidders suggests a competitive process, which theoretically should drive down prices and ensure fair market value. However, the undisclosed nature of the foreign awardees makes it difficult to ascertain the specific competitive landscape and whether domestic firms were significantly disadvantaged or excluded due to factors beyond price.

Taxpayer Impact: While full and open competition is generally beneficial for taxpayers by fostering price discovery, the award to foreign entities means that a significant portion of this taxpayer money likely did not recirculate within the U.S. economy through wages, materials, or corporate taxes.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries were the U.S. military forces operating in Afghanistan, who gained improved logistical capabilities. The contract delivered essential construction services, specifically the building of strategic airlift and helicopter aprons. The geographic impact was concentrated in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan, enhancing operational capacity in that region. Workforce implications are unclear, but likely involved a mix of local Afghan labor and specialized personnel brought in by the awarded foreign contractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Award to foreign entities limits visibility into labor practices and potential exploitation.
Lack of transparency regarding specific foreign awardees hinders detailed performance and financial oversight.
Operating in a conflict zone presents inherent risks to project completion, safety, and cost overruns, despite fixed-price contract.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to competitive pricing.
The project addressed a critical military infrastructure need, enhancing operational effectiveness.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically focusing on airfield infrastructure. The global market for military construction is substantial, driven by geopolitical needs and defense spending. Projects like this, especially in austere or high-risk environments, command premium pricing due to logistical challenges, security costs, and specialized requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish due to the unique location and strategic nature of the aprons.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have involved small business set-asides, as indicated by 'ss: false' and 'sb: false'. The award to foreign entities further suggests that the primary focus was on securing the necessary construction capabilities, potentially overlooking opportunities for U.S. small business participation either as prime contractors or subcontractors. The subcontracting implications are unknown but likely minimal for U.S. small businesses given the awardee profile.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of Defense's contracting and inspection processes. Given the location in Afghanistan, oversight would have been particularly challenging, relying on on-site military personnel and potentially third-party inspectors. Accountability measures would be tied to contract performance clauses, but transparency is limited by the undisclosed nature of the foreign awardees and the operational environment. Inspector General jurisdiction might be applicable, but enforcement in a foreign theater presents unique difficulties.

Related Government Programs

Afghanistan Infrastructure Projects
DoD Construction Contracts
Airfield and Airbase Development
Contingency Contracting
Foreign Military Sales Support

Risk Flags

Award to foreign entity
Oversight challenges in conflict zone
Lack of transparency on awardee identity

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.2 million to FOREIGN AWARDEES (UNDISCLOSED). DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT STRATEGIC AIRLIFT&HELICOPTER APRONS, MAZAR-E-SHARIF, AFGHANISTAN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FOREIGN 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 $30.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-04-08. End: 2013-04-11.

What specific challenges did the foreign awardees face in constructing airlift and helicopter aprons in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan?

Constructing critical infrastructure like airlift and helicopter aprons in Mazar-e-Sharif, Afghanistan, presented numerous challenges for the foreign awardees. These included navigating a volatile security environment requiring robust force protection measures, managing complex logistics for transporting materials and equipment to a landlocked and remote region, and dealing with potential local labor issues, including availability, skill levels, and cultural integration. Furthermore, adapting construction methods to local environmental conditions (e.g., extreme temperatures, dust) and ensuring compliance with U.S. military specifications under potentially difficult circumstances were significant hurdles. The geopolitical instability and the inherent risks associated with operating in a conflict zone likely added layers of complexity to project management, scheduling, and cost control, even under a firm-fixed-price contract.

How does the $30.2 million cost compare to similar airfield construction projects globally?

Directly comparing the $30.2 million cost to similar airfield construction projects globally is difficult due to the unique context of this contract. Projects in conflict zones like Afghanistan inherently incur higher costs related to security, logistics, risk premiums, and specialized operational requirements not present in stable, domestic environments. Standard airfield construction costs can vary widely based on location, scale, materials, and labor rates. For instance, building a new runway or apron in a developed country might have different cost drivers. However, considering the extreme conditions, the duration of over two years, and the strategic importance, the $30.2 million figure for Mazar-e-Sharif might be considered within a reasonable range for such a high-risk, complex undertaking, assuming efficient execution and management by the awardees.

What are the potential risks associated with awarding large infrastructure contracts to undisclosed foreign entities?

Awarding large infrastructure contracts to undisclosed foreign entities carries several potential risks for the contracting government. Firstly, transparency and oversight are significantly diminished, making it harder to verify the legitimacy of the awardee, their financial stability, and their adherence to ethical business practices. This lack of visibility can increase the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse. Secondly, it raises concerns about national security, particularly if the foreign entities have ties to adversarial nations or questionable backgrounds. Thirdly, it limits opportunities for domestic businesses and workforce development, meaning taxpayer funds may not be reinvested within the awarding country's economy. Finally, enforcing contract terms, addressing performance issues, or seeking recourse in case of disputes can be more complex and challenging when dealing with foreign entities operating outside the primary legal and regulatory jurisdiction.

What was the strategic importance of building airlift and helicopter aprons in Mazar-e-Sharif for the Department of Defense?

The strategic importance of building airlift and helicopter aprons in Mazar-e-Sharif for the Department of Defense (DoD) was multifaceted. Mazar-e-Sharif is a key city in northern Afghanistan, serving as a significant logistical hub and a base for military operations in the region. Improved apron facilities would enhance the capacity and efficiency of air transport operations, allowing for the more effective deployment and sustainment of troops and equipment. This includes facilitating the landing, parking, and servicing of various aircraft, from transport planes to helicopters, crucial for troop movement, medical evacuation, cargo delivery, and rapid response capabilities. Enhancing air infrastructure at this location would have directly supported the DoD's mission objectives in Afghanistan by improving operational reach, flexibility, and overall effectiveness in a critical theater of operations.

How did the 'full and open competition' process function given the award was to foreign entities?

The 'full and open competition' process, as defined by federal acquisition regulations, means that the solicitation was made available to all responsible sources, and any responsible source could submit an offer. In this case, the solicitation was likely posted on relevant government contracting platforms, allowing both domestic and foreign companies to review the requirements and submit bids. The fact that the award went to foreign entities indicates that they were among the bidders and were deemed the most advantageous offer based on the evaluation criteria (which typically include price, technical approach, past performance, etc.). While 'full and open' aims for maximum competition, the specific evaluation and selection process details, especially concerning the undisclosed foreign awardees, are not publicly available, making it difficult to fully assess how the competition dynamics played out beyond the initial broad solicitation.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912ER10R0068

Offers Received: 9

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: $30,226,341

Exercised Options: $30,226,341

Current Obligation: $30,226,341

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline