APS Contracting Inc. awarded $12.9M for Combined Maintenance Facility construction in New Jersey

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,903,897 ($12.9M)

Contractor: APS Contracting Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-02-20

End Date: 2012-10-25

Contract Duration: 1,709 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMBINED MAINTENANCE FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: FORT DIX, BURLINGTON County, NEW JERSEY, 08640

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.9 million to APS CONTRACTING INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMBINED MAINTENANCE FACILITY Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a large-scale construction project of this nature. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for this type of construction service. 3. Project duration of 1709 days indicates a significant undertaking with potential for schedule risks. 4. Firm-fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, potentially impacting final cost if unforeseen issues arise. 5. The project falls within the broad category of commercial and institutional building construction. 6. Awarding agency is the Department of the Army, indicating a defense-related infrastructure need.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.9 million for the construction of a combined maintenance facility is within the expected range for a project of this scale and complexity. Benchmarking against similar Department of Defense construction projects of comparable size and scope would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the initial bid was expected to cover all costs, but potential for cost overruns exists if significant unforeseen issues arise during the extended project duration.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to bid. With 11 bids received, the competition level appears robust, suggesting that the government likely received competitive pricing. This broad competition is a positive sign for price discovery and ensures a wide pool of potential contractors were considered.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process for this construction project helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, which will receive a new maintenance facility to support its operations. The project delivers essential infrastructure for vehicle and equipment maintenance, enhancing military readiness. The geographic impact is concentrated in New Jersey, potentially creating local construction jobs and economic activity. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, and project managers in the New Jersey area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Extended project duration (1709 days) increases the risk of cost escalation due to inflation or unforeseen site conditions.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to contractors cutting corners on quality if not adequately overseen, especially on long projects.
Dependence on a single contractor for a multi-year project can create leverage issues if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition with 11 bidders suggests a competitive market and potentially good pricing.
The Department of the Army's oversight is expected to ensure adherence to specifications and quality standards.
The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty for the government, assuming no major change orders.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction. The market for large-scale military facility construction is significant, often involving specialized contractors capable of meeting stringent government requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be assessed against other Department of Defense construction projects of similar size and function, such as barracks, hangars, or vehicle depots.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). While the prime contractor, APS Contracting Inc., is not explicitly identified as a small business in this data snippet, the absence of set-aside provisions means that subcontracting opportunities for small businesses would depend on the prime contractor's own subcontracting plan and the availability of qualified small businesses in the construction supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this Department of the Army construction project would typically be managed by the Army Corps of Engineers or a designated project management office. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract, with penalties for delays and adherence to specifications. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific oversight reports may not always be publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Construction
Department of Defense Facilities
Vehicle Maintenance Depots
General Building Construction
Army Corps of Engineers Projects

Risk Flags

Long project duration may increase risk of cost escalation.
Firm-fixed-price contract requires careful monitoring to ensure quality is not compromised.
Potential for unforeseen site conditions in construction projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.9 million to APS CONTRACTING INC.. CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMBINED MAINTENANCE FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is APS CONTRACTING 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 $12.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-02-20. End: 2012-10-25.

What is the track record of APS Contracting Inc. on similar government construction projects?

Information regarding the specific track record of APS Contracting Inc. on similar government construction projects is not provided in the data snippet. A comprehensive analysis would require reviewing past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), other awarded contracts, and any history of disputes or litigation. Understanding their experience with firm-fixed-price contracts, project scale, and adherence to schedules and budgets would be crucial for assessing their reliability on this $12.9 million Combined Maintenance Facility project.

How does the $12.9 million cost compare to similar maintenance facility constructions by the Department of Defense?

The $12.9 million cost for the Combined Maintenance Facility is a significant investment. To benchmark its value, it would need to be compared against similar facilities constructed for the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. Factors such as square footage, specific functional requirements (e.g., specialized repair bays, storage capacity), location (influencing labor and material costs), and the year of construction are critical for a fair comparison. Without these details, it's difficult to definitively state if the cost is high or low, but it falls within the expected range for substantial infrastructure projects.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a project spanning over 1700 days?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, especially for a long duration project like this (1709 days), is the potential for unforeseen cost increases that are not adequately accounted for in the initial bid. While the FFP shifts cost risk to the contractor, significant changes in material prices, labor costs due to inflation, or unexpected site conditions (e.g., environmental issues, subsurface obstructions) could lead to contractor claims for equitable adjustments or, in extreme cases, project delays or default. The government's risk is primarily related to potential disputes, schedule slippage if the contractor struggles, and ensuring the contractor doesn't compromise quality to maintain profitability.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring optimal pricing for large-scale construction contracts?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring optimal pricing for large-scale construction contracts. By allowing all responsible sources to submit bids, it maximizes the number of potential offerors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving the lowest possible price that still allows for acceptable performance. The presence of 11 bidders in this case suggests a competitive environment that should drive prices down. However, effectiveness also depends on the clarity of the solicitation documents and the government's ability to evaluate bids accurately to avoid awarding to the lowest bidder if they lack the capability to perform adequately.

What are the historical spending patterns for similar 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' contracts awarded by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending patterns for 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' by the Department of the Army are substantial, reflecting the continuous need for infrastructure upgrades and new facilities. This specific contract for a Combined Maintenance Facility represents a portion of that broader spending. Analyzing past awards within this NAICS code (236220) would reveal average contract values, typical project durations, and the frequency of such awards. This context helps determine if the $12.9 million award is typical, high, or low compared to historical norms for similar projects.

What oversight mechanisms are typically in place for Department of the Army construction projects of this magnitude?

Oversight for Department of the Army construction projects of this magnitude typically involves multiple layers. The Army Corps of Engineers often plays a key role in project management, design review, and construction oversight. Contract specialists manage the administrative aspects, ensuring compliance with contract terms. Quality assurance representatives monitor the work on-site to ensure it meets specifications. Periodic progress reports, site inspections, and potentially audits by the Inspector General's office are common mechanisms to ensure accountability, transparency, and proper use of funds throughout the project lifecycle.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912QR07R0080

Offers Received: 11

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 27 E 33RD ST STE 1, PATERSON, NJ, 09

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,903,897

Exercised Options: $12,903,897

Current Obligation: $12,903,897

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline