DoD's $10M environmental restoration contract for Phoenix's Rio Salado awarded to Macro-Z-Technology Company
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $10,045,155 ($10.0M)
Contractor: Macro-Z-Technology Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2007-05-23
End Date: 2010-01-14
Contract Duration: 967 days
Daily Burn Rate: $10.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: PHASE 3 RIO SALADO PHOENIX REACH, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, PHOENIX, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA
Place of Performance
Location: PHOENIX, MARICOPA County, ARIZONA, 85001
State: Arizona Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $10.0 million to MACRO-Z-TECHNOLOGY COMPANY for work described as: PHASE 3 RIO SALADO PHOENIX REACH, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, PHOENIX, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract's duration of 967 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 3. Fixed-price contract type may offer cost certainty but could limit flexibility. 4. The project falls under heavy and civil engineering construction, a critical infrastructure sector. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting defense-related infrastructure needs. 6. The contract was awarded after exclusion of sources, warranting further investigation into the rationale.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this environmental restoration contract is challenging without specific performance metrics or comparable project data. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to control costs, but the final value depends on the contractor's efficiency. Given the nature of environmental restoration, unforeseen complexities can arise, potentially impacting the overall cost-effectiveness.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources were excluded, suggesting a specific reason or requirement that narrowed the field. The number of bidders is not specified, making it difficult to fully assess the level of competition and its impact on price discovery.
Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, even within an open competition framework, raises questions about whether taxpayers received the most competitive pricing possible. Further details on the exclusion criteria are needed to determine if this limited the potential for cost savings.
Public Impact
Benefits the environmental health of the Rio Salado area in Phoenix, Arizona. Delivers critical environmental restoration services, likely addressing contamination or ecological damage. Geographic impact is localized to Phoenix, Maricopa County, Arizona. Workforce implications include employment for construction and environmental specialists.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- The 'after exclusion of sources' clause requires scrutiny to ensure fair competition and optimal taxpayer value.
- Lack of detailed performance metrics makes it difficult to assess the true value for money.
- The fixed-price nature might lead to change orders if unforeseen environmental conditions are encountered.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through a competitive process, indicating an effort to secure a qualified contractor.
- The project addresses a critical environmental need, contributing to public health and safety.
- The firm-fixed-price contract provides a degree of cost predictability for the government.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction sector (NAICS 237990), which encompasses a wide range of infrastructure projects. Environmental restoration is a specialized segment within this sector, often involving complex remediation techniques. The market for such services is driven by regulatory requirements and government initiatives to address environmental liabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found within other large-scale environmental remediation projects undertaken by federal agencies.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. However, the prime contractor, Macro-Z-Technology Company, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on the project's needs and their own subcontracting policies. The overall impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent of such subcontracting.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this Department of the Army contract would typically be managed by contracting officers and program managers within the agency. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency would be enhanced through contract reporting mechanisms and public contract databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.
Related Government Programs
- Environmental Remediation Services
- Department of Defense Construction Contracts
- Army Corps of Engineers Projects
- Civil Engineering and Construction
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions in fixed-price contract.
- Limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause may impact price.
- Need for detailed performance data to fully assess value for money.
Tags
construction, environmental-restoration, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, firm-fixed-price, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, arizona, phoenix, heavy-and-civil-engineering-construction, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $10.0 million to MACRO-Z-TECHNOLOGY COMPANY. PHASE 3 RIO SALADO PHOENIX REACH, ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, PHOENIX, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is MACRO-Z-TECHNOLOGY COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $10.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2007-05-23. End: 2010-01-14.
What were the specific reasons for excluding certain sources in this 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award?
The designation 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' implies that while the solicitation was intended to be open to all responsible sources, specific entities were pre-emptively excluded from consideration. The reasons for such exclusions can vary widely, including but not limited to, national security concerns, specific technical expertise requirements that only a limited number of firms possess, past performance issues with certain contractors, or unique proprietary technologies. Without access to the detailed justification documents or the solicitation itself, it is impossible to definitively state why sources were excluded. This exclusion mechanism can sometimes limit the breadth of competition and potentially impact the final price achieved for the government. Further investigation would require reviewing the contract file and any associated documentation that outlines the rationale for the exclusion.
How does the $10 million contract value compare to similar environmental restoration projects undertaken by the Department of Defense?
Comparing the $10 million value of this environmental restoration contract to similar projects requires access to a database of comparable contracts, including their scope, location, and complexity. Environmental restoration projects can vary significantly in cost based on the type and extent of contamination, the remediation technologies employed, and the geographic location. A $10 million contract for a moderately complex site remediation might be considered typical. However, if this project involved extensive hazardous waste removal or large-scale ecosystem restoration, it could be on the lower end. Without specific details on the project's scope and benchmarks for similar DoD environmental restoration efforts, a precise comparison is difficult. Generally, larger, more complex sites requiring advanced technologies or long-term monitoring would command higher contract values.
What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for environmental restoration?
The primary risk associated with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for environmental restoration lies in the potential for unforeseen conditions. Environmental sites often harbor unknown contaminants, geological complexities, or historical data inaccuracies that can significantly increase the cost and difficulty of remediation. If such unforeseen conditions arise, the contractor, having agreed to a fixed price, may seek change orders, leading to cost overruns. Conversely, if the contractor underestimates the work or encounters fewer difficulties than anticipated, they may realize a higher profit margin. For the government, the risk is that the fixed price may not accurately reflect the true cost of the work, potentially leading to either paying more than necessary or facing contractor claims for additional compensation due to unexpected site conditions. Effective risk management often involves thorough site assessments prior to contract award and clear contract language addressing unforeseen conditions.
What is the historical spending pattern for environmental restoration contracts by the Department of the Army in Arizona?
Analyzing historical spending patterns for environmental restoration contracts by the Department of the Army in Arizona requires access to historical contract data. This specific contract, awarded in 2007, represents a single data point. To establish a pattern, one would need to examine contracts awarded over several fiscal years, looking at the total amount spent, the number of contracts awarded, the types of services procured (e.g., site assessment, remediation, monitoring), and the specific Army commands or installations involved. Factors influencing historical spending include regulatory changes, the identification of new environmental liabilities on military installations, and the availability of federal funding. Without a broader dataset, it's impossible to determine if this $10 million contract is indicative of a trend or an outlier in the Army's environmental restoration efforts in Arizona.
What performance metrics are typically used to evaluate the success of environmental restoration contracts?
The success of environmental restoration contracts is typically evaluated using a combination of technical, environmental, and contractual metrics. Key performance indicators (KPIs) often include the extent of contaminant removal or containment achieved, adherence to cleanup standards set by regulatory agencies (e.g., EPA, state environmental departments), and the successful restoration of ecological functions. Contractual metrics focus on adherence to schedule, budget, and quality control requirements. For instance, meeting milestones for soil excavation, groundwater treatment, or habitat restoration would be critical. Environmental metrics might involve post-remediation sampling results demonstrating that contaminant levels are below regulatory limits. The overall success is often determined through final sign-off by regulatory bodies and the contracting agency, confirming that the site's environmental risks have been adequately addressed.
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: W912PL06B0002
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 841 E WASHINGTON AVE, SANTA ANA, CA, 92701
Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Hispanic American Owned Business, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $10,213,155
Exercised Options: $10,045,155
Current Obligation: $10,045,155
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2007-05-23
Current End Date: 2010-01-14
Potential End Date: 2010-01-14 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-02-25
More Contracts from Macro-Z-Technology Company
- FY07 Whole Barracks Renewal Complex, Stryker Avenue, AIR Support Operations Squadron (asos) Facility — $13.3M (Department of Defense)
- 200606!356790!1700!n62473!navfac Southwest !N6247306C5001 !A!N! !N! ! !20060331!20070614!605897420!605897420!605897420!n!macro-Z-Technology Company !841 E Washington AVE !santa ANA !ca!92701!16350!065!06!corona !riverside !california!+000009883000!n!n!000009883000!z119!maint/Other Administrative & Service Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !NOT Discernable !236220!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !B! !a!u!j!2!004!b! !D!N!Z! ! !n!a!n!n!d! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!y!t!y! ! !1700!N00025!0001! ! — $12.6M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)