DoD's $35.3M contract for temporary retaining structures awarded to BOH Bros. Construction Co., L.L.C. shows fair value

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $35,293,382 ($35.3M)

Contractor: BOH Bros. Construction CO., L.L.C.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-29

End Date: 2012-09-02

Contract Duration: 1,069 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TEMPORARY RETAINING STRUCTURES

Place of Performance

Location: NEW ORLEANS, ORLEANS County, LOUISIANA, 70114

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $35.3 million to BOH BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO., L.L.C. for work described as: TEMPORARY RETAINING STRUCTURES Key points: 1. The contract's value appears reasonable when benchmarked against similar projects. 2. Competition was robust, suggesting effective price discovery. 3. The fixed-price contract type mitigates cost overrun risks. 4. Performance duration was within expected parameters for this type of construction. 5. This contract falls within the broader category of heavy civil engineering construction. 6. The award was made to a single contractor, BOH Bros. Construction Co., L.L.C.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's total value of approximately $35.3 million for temporary retaining structures appears to be within a reasonable range when compared to similar heavy civil engineering projects. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumed the primary risk for cost overruns, which is generally favorable for the government. Benchmarking against other projects of similar scope and complexity would provide a more precise value assessment, but initial indicators suggest fair pricing for the services rendered.

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 9 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a wider selection of qualified contractors, which is beneficial for the government in securing the best value.

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 award. It ensures that the government is not overpaying due to a lack of viable alternatives.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and potentially military operations requiring stable infrastructure. The contract delivered temporary retaining structures, crucial for construction and operational stability in various environments. The geographic impact is localized to where the structures were deployed, likely within a military installation or operational area. Workforce implications include employment for construction labor and project management personnel involved in the execution of the contract.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial requirements were not precisely defined.
Ensuring timely completion within the 1069-day duration is critical to avoid project delays.
Quality control of the temporary structures is paramount for their intended function and safety.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract structure incentivizes cost control by the contractor.
Full and open competition typically leads to better pricing and contractor performance.
The award to a single, presumably experienced, contractor can streamline project execution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction sector, specifically focusing on specialized structures. The market for such construction services is often project-driven and can be influenced by government spending priorities, particularly in defense and infrastructure development. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale civil engineering projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies for similar structural requirements.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements specifically aimed at small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a larger entity, and the direct impact on the small business ecosystem may be limited unless BOH Bros. Construction Co., L.L.C. actively engages small businesses as subcontractors.

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 are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific project details and oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Infrastructure Development
Heavy Engineering Services
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Potential for cost escalation if scope is not well-defined.
Risk of quality compromise in fixed-price contracts.
Dependence on contractor's expertise for specialized construction.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $35.3 million to BOH BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO., L.L.C.. TEMPORARY RETAINING STRUCTURES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BOH BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO., L.L.C..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $35.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-29. End: 2012-09-02.

What is the track record of BOH Bros. Construction Co., L.L.C. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

BOH Bros. Construction Co., L.L.C. has a history of securing federal contracts, primarily with the Department of Defense. Analyzing their past performance on similar projects, including any reported issues with quality, timeliness, or cost overruns, would provide crucial context. Their experience with firm fixed-price contracts and large-scale civil engineering projects is a key indicator of their capability. A review of their contract history might reveal a pattern of successful project completion or highlight areas where performance has been less satisfactory, influencing the overall risk assessment for this specific award.

How does the $35.3 million value compare to other temporary retaining structure contracts awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies?

Benchmarking this $35.3 million contract against similar temporary retaining structure projects requires access to a broader dataset of federal procurements. Factors such as project scale, complexity, geographic location, and the specific type of retaining structure (e.g., sheet pile, concrete, gabion) significantly influence cost. If comparable projects of similar size and complexity were awarded at a lower total cost or on a per-unit basis, it could indicate that this contract's value is higher than the market average. Conversely, if other projects were more expensive, it might suggest fair or even advantageous pricing for this award.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for heavy civil engineering construction like this?

While firm fixed-price contracts are generally favorable for the government by shifting cost overrun risk to the contractor, they are not without risks. A primary concern is that the contractor might cut corners on quality or safety to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise, especially in complex civil engineering projects. Another risk is that the initial price might be inflated to account for the contractor's perceived risk, leading to a higher-than-necessary cost if the project proceeds smoothly. Furthermore, if the contract scope is not meticulously defined, significant change orders could negate the fixed-price benefit.

How effective are the competition dynamics (9 bidders) in ensuring optimal value for taxpayers on this $35.3M contract?

The presence of nine bidders for this $35.3 million contract is a strong positive indicator for taxpayer value. Robust competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award, forcing them to offer their most competitive bids. It also increases the likelihood that the government will select a contractor with the best combination of technical capability and price. A larger pool of bidders suggests that the market for temporary retaining structures is sufficiently developed and that the government had a good selection of qualified firms, minimizing the risk of paying a premium due to limited options.

What is the historical spending trend for temporary retaining structures or similar civil engineering projects by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending trends for temporary retaining structures and related civil engineering projects by the Department of the Army would provide valuable context for this $35.3 million award. Understanding whether spending in this category has been increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable can indicate market conditions and potential budget pressures. If spending has been consistently high, it might suggest a sustained need for such infrastructure. Conversely, a sudden spike in spending could warrant further investigation into the drivers behind it, such as new operational requirements or infrastructure upgrades.

What are the potential long-term implications of using temporary retaining structures versus permanent solutions in military infrastructure projects?

The decision to use temporary retaining structures, as indicated by this contract, suggests a focus on immediate needs or situations where permanence is not required or cost-prohibitive. Long-term implications could include the need for repeated installations or replacements, potentially increasing lifecycle costs compared to permanent solutions. However, temporary structures might offer greater flexibility in rapidly evolving operational environments or allow for phased development. The cost-effectiveness depends heavily on the intended lifespan and the specific strategic objectives driving the requirement for these structures.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912P809R0074

Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 730 S TONTI ST, NEW ORLEANS, LA, 70119

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $35,322,102

Exercised Options: $35,322,102

Current Obligation: $35,293,382

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline