DoD's $27.7M Canal Project Awarded to Buck Town Contractors & Co. for Louisiana Infrastructure

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $27,710,415 ($27.7M)

Contractor: Buck Town Contractors & CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2011-04-18

End Date: 2015-09-03

Contract Duration: 1,599 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNNETTE

Place of Performance

Location: METAIRIE, JEFFERSON County, LOUISIANA, 70003

State: Louisiana Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $27.7 million to BUCK TOWN CONTRACTORS & CO for work described as: SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNNETTE Key points: 1. The contract's value of $27.7 million for civil engineering construction suggests a significant investment in regional infrastructure. 2. The award method, 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' warrants further investigation into the specific reasons for source exclusion. 3. A contract duration of 1599 days indicates a long-term commitment to project completion. 4. The firm fixed-price contract type aims to provide cost certainty for the government. 5. The project's location in Louisiana highlights its potential impact on local economic development and workforce. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags suggests the primary contractor is not a small business, and subcontracting opportunities for small businesses should be examined.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $27.7 million contract is challenging without specific details on the scope of work for the SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNETTE project. However, the duration of nearly four and a half years suggests a substantial undertaking. The firm fixed-price nature provides cost predictability, but the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' raises questions about whether the most competitive pricing was achieved. Further analysis would require comparing the per-unit costs or overall project cost against similar Army Corps of Engineers civil works projects in the region.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, specific sources were excluded. The reasons for this exclusion are not detailed in the provided data and would need further investigation to understand the implications for competition. With three bidders, the level of competition was limited, which could potentially impact price discovery and lead to higher costs compared to a broader, unrestricted full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of certain sources, even in an otherwise open competition, may have limited the number of competitive bids, potentially resulting in a higher price for taxpayers than if all qualified sources had been allowed to compete.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely residents and businesses in Louisiana who will benefit from improved canal infrastructure, potentially enhancing flood control, navigation, or water management. The project delivers heavy and civil engineering construction services, crucial for maintaining and upgrading critical infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated in Louisiana, specifically within the area served by the SONIAT CANAL. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, engineers, and related support staff during the project's multi-year duration.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The 'Exclusion of Sources' in the competition type raises concerns about potential limitations on competitive pricing and fairness.
Lack of explicit small business participation details suggests potential missed opportunities for small business engagement.
The long contract duration could introduce risks related to cost overruns or scope creep if not managed effectively.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract type offers cost certainty to the government, mitigating budget risks.
The project addresses critical infrastructure needs, indicating a focus on essential public services.
Awarding to Buck Town Contractors & Co. suggests they possess the necessary qualifications and capacity for this significant civil engineering project.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction sector, a critical component of the broader construction industry. This sector is responsible for large-scale public works projects such as infrastructure development, including canals, bridges, and highways. The market size for such projects is substantial, often driven by government funding for infrastructure renewal and development. This specific contract for canal improvement aligns with typical Army Corps of Engineers activities aimed at managing waterways and related infrastructure, representing a significant but not unusual investment within this sector.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). The primary contractor, Buck Town Contractors & Co., is likely a larger entity. While there's no explicit mention of subcontracting goals, large federal construction contracts often include provisions for small business participation. The absence of a specific set-aside suggests that the focus was on securing the best overall bid from qualified contractors, and the impact on the small business ecosystem will depend on whether Buck Town Contractors & Co. actively seeks small business subcontractors for specialized work.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of the Army contract would typically be managed by the Army Corps of Engineers, which is responsible for executing civil works projects. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which penalizes cost overruns for the contractor. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS, where this information is published. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Programs
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Projects
Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority Projects
Waterways and Navigation Improvement Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to source exclusion.
Long contract duration may increase risk of cost escalation or performance issues.
Lack of explicit small business subcontracting information.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $27.7 million to BUCK TOWN CONTRACTORS & CO. SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNNETTE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BUCK TOWN CONTRACTORS & CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $27.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2011-04-18. End: 2015-09-03.

What is the specific scope of work for the SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNETTE project, and how does it compare to similar canal improvement projects undertaken by the Army Corps of Engineers?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of work for the SELA 08, SONIAT CANAL, LESTER TO LYNETTE project beyond it being 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.' To assess its comparability, one would need to research the project's technical specifications, such as dredging volumes, levee construction, structural repairs, or environmental mitigation efforts. Subsequently, these details would be compared against publicly available project descriptions and costs for similar Army Corps of Engineers canal, levee, or waterway projects in the Gulf Coast region or other areas with comparable geological and hydrological conditions. Factors like project complexity, material costs, and regulatory requirements would be key comparison points.

What were the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award type for this contract?

The data indicates the contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' meaning that while the competition was open to all responsible sources, certain entities were specifically excluded. The reasons for such exclusions are typically documented in the contract file and can include factors like national security concerns, proprietary technology limitations, or specific performance issues with potential bidders on prior contracts. Without access to the contract's justification or procurement file, the precise reasons remain unknown. Understanding these exclusions is crucial for assessing whether the competition was truly as robust as possible and if it potentially impacted the final price achieved for the government.

How does the awarded amount of $27.7 million compare to the average cost of similar civil engineering construction projects managed by the Department of the Army?

Comparing the $27.7 million award to the average cost of similar Department of the Army civil engineering projects requires access to a broader dataset of historical contract awards within the 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction' (NAICS 237990) category managed by the Army. Factors such as project scale, complexity, location, and specific type of construction (e.g., dredging, levee construction, flood control) significantly influence costs. If this project involves extensive dredging or complex structural work in a challenging environment like Louisiana's coast, the $27.7 million might be within a reasonable range. However, without a benchmark of comparable projects, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents high or low value.

What is the track record of Buck Town Contractors & Co. in performing large-scale civil engineering projects for the federal government, particularly the Department of Defense?

The provided data identifies Buck Town Contractors & Co. as the awardee but does not offer details on their past performance or track record. To assess their suitability and reliability for this $27.7 million project, a review of their contract history with federal agencies, particularly the Department of Defense and Army Corps of Engineers, would be necessary. This would involve examining past contract values, types of projects completed, performance evaluations (e.g., CPARS reports), and any history of disputes or contract terminations. A strong track record on similar projects would indicate a lower performance risk for this current contract.

Given the firm fixed-price contract type and the 'limited' competition level, what is the estimated profit margin for Buck Town Contractors & Co. on this project?

Estimating the profit margin for Buck Town Contractors & Co. on this firm fixed-price contract is not possible with the provided data. Profit margins are determined by the contractor's internal cost accounting, efficiency, and the negotiated price relative to their estimated costs. While a firm fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, the 'limited' competition (3 bidders after source exclusion) might have allowed for a slightly higher profit margin than in a highly competitive scenario. A typical profit margin in heavy civil construction can range from 5% to 15%, but this is highly variable and specific to the contractor and project.

What are the potential risks associated with the 1599-day duration of this contract, and what mitigation strategies are likely in place?

The 1599-day (approximately 4.4 years) duration of this contract presents several potential risks, including: inflation impacting material and labor costs (though mitigated by fixed-price), potential for scope creep if project requirements evolve, contractor performance degradation over a long period, and changes in regulatory or environmental conditions. Mitigation strategies likely include: robust contract management by the Army Corps of Engineers, clear performance metrics and milestones, contingency planning for unforeseen site conditions, and potentially contract clauses addressing escalation or changes. The firm fixed-price nature itself incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently throughout the project lifecycle.

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: W912P810R0074

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1005 VETERANS BLVD STE 201, KENNER, LA, 70062

Business Categories: Category Business, Community Developed Corporation Owned Firm, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Emerging Small Business, HUBZone Firm, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $27,710,415

Exercised Options: $27,710,415

Current Obligation: $27,710,415

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline