Army awards $10.4M dredging contract to Marinex Construction, highlighting civil engineering construction needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,390,993 ($10.4M)

Contractor: Marinex Construction Company, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-09-10

End Date: 2008-09-30

Contract Duration: 386 days

Daily Burn Rate: $26.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PRODUCTION DREDGING

Place of Performance

Location: SAVANNAH, CHATHAM County, GEORGIA, 31401

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.4 million to MARINEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. for work described as: PRODUCTION DREDGING Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for specialized heavy civil engineering services. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these services. 3. Fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor. 4. Contract duration of 386 days is typical for such projects. 5. Geographic focus on Georgia indicates regional infrastructure investment. 6. The contract falls under the 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction' NAICS code.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $10.4 million for production dredging services is within a reasonable range for specialized heavy civil engineering projects. Benchmarking against similar Army Corps of Engineers dredging contracts in the Southeast region suggests competitive pricing. The fixed-price nature of the award indicates that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which is generally favorable for the government when the scope is well-defined. The award amount is consistent with the scale of infrastructure maintenance and development projects undertaken by the Army.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The specific exclusion of sources suggests a targeted approach to ensure qualified contractors participated. The presence of multiple bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government. The fact that it was competed broadly suggests a competitive market for production dredging services.

Taxpayer Impact: The broad competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down the final award price, ensuring better value for the allocated funds. It also signals that the government is leveraging market forces effectively to procure necessary services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially other federal agencies requiring navigation channel maintenance or port infrastructure development. The services delivered include production dredging, essential for maintaining navigable waterways and port access. The geographic impact is focused on Georgia (ST: GA, SN: GEORGIA), likely supporting regional economic activity through improved maritime transport. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled labor in dredging operations, marine construction, and related support services within the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial dredging estimates are inaccurate.
Environmental compliance risks associated with dredging operations.
Weather delays could impact project timeline and costs.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract limits government's financial exposure.
Contractor's specialization in heavy civil engineering suggests capability.
Full and open competition indicates a robust bidding process.

Sector Analysis

The dredging and heavy civil engineering sector is critical for national infrastructure, particularly for maritime commerce and defense readiness. This contract falls under NAICS code 237990 (Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction). The market is characterized by specialized equipment, significant capital investment, and stringent environmental regulations. Comparable spending benchmarks for dredging projects vary widely based on volume, depth, material, and location, but projects in the multi-million dollar range are common for significant channel maintenance or construction.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (SB: false). There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific set-aside provisions or subcontracting goals, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract is likely limited, though larger prime contractors may engage small businesses for specialized support services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Army Corps of Engineers district responsible for the project. Accountability measures are embedded in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Programs
Port and Waterway Infrastructure Projects
Coastal Navigation Dredging
Inland Waterways Dredging

Risk Flags

Potential for environmental impact
Risk of unforeseen subsurface conditions
Weather-related schedule delays

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.4 million to MARINEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.. PRODUCTION DREDGING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MARINEX CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-09-10. End: 2008-09-30.

What is Marinex Construction Company, Inc.'s track record with the Department of Defense and other federal agencies?

Marinex Construction Company, Inc. has a history of performing contracts primarily with the Department of the Army, as indicated by this award. While specific details on past performance metrics, past issues, or the full scope of their federal contracting history require deeper database analysis, their selection for this significant dredging project suggests they meet the qualifications and performance standards set by the agency. Further investigation into their contract history, including any past performance evaluations or disputes, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and capabilities as a federal contractor.

How does the $10.4 million award compare to other similar dredging contracts awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers?

The $10.4 million award for production dredging is a substantial but not unusual figure for major civil engineering projects undertaken by the Army Corps of Engineers. Contracts for dredging can range significantly, from smaller maintenance tasks costing hundreds of thousands to large-scale capital projects exceeding tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on the volume of material, complexity, location, and environmental requirements. This specific award appears to be in the mid-to-upper range for routine production dredging, suggesting a significant scope of work, possibly involving substantial channel deepening or widening in a specific geographic area like Georgia.

What are the primary risks associated with this specific dredging contract, and how are they mitigated?

The primary risks associated with this dredging contract include potential environmental impacts (e.g., sediment disturbance, impact on marine life), unforeseen subsurface conditions (e.g., harder materials than expected, buried obstructions), weather-related delays, and contractor performance issues. Mitigation strategies are typically embedded within the contract. Environmental risks are addressed through strict compliance with environmental permits and monitoring. Unforeseen conditions might be managed through contract clauses allowing for equitable adjustments if conditions differ materially from those expected. Weather delays are often accounted for in the project schedule, and performance is monitored by the government's technical representative. The fixed-price nature of the contract also incentivizes the contractor to manage these risks efficiently.

What is the historical spending pattern for production dredging services by the Department of the Army over the last five years?

Historical spending by the Department of the Army on production dredging services has been substantial and relatively consistent, reflecting the ongoing need for maintaining and improving navigable waterways, ports, and coastal defenses. While precise figures require detailed analysis of federal procurement databases (like FPDS), annual spending often runs into the hundreds of millions of dollars across various Army commands, particularly the Army Corps of Engineers. Spending can fluctuate based on infrastructure priorities, congressional appropriations, and the lifecycle of major civil works projects. Factors like increased focus on port modernization, climate resilience, and economic stimulus initiatives can influence year-over-year spending trends in this sector.

What does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' contract type imply about the procurement process and potential bidder pool?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' (FOUC AES) designation suggests a procurement process that initially aimed for broad competition but ultimately excluded certain potential sources before the final award. This could occur if specific technical capabilities, past performance requirements, or unique certifications were necessary, leading the agency to identify a subset of qualified vendors. While it started as full and open, the exclusion implies a narrowing of the field, potentially reducing the number of bidders considered for the final award compared to a purely unrestricted full and open competition. This approach aims to ensure that only highly capable contractors participate, balancing competition with specialized needs.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912HN07R0053

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2008 CHERRY HILL LN, NORTH CHARLESTON, SC, 29405

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,390,993

Exercised Options: $10,390,993

Current Obligation: $10,390,993

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline