DoD's $18.3M Camp McGregor training complex contract awarded to LMG Construction Services LLC
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $18,270,821 ($18.3M)
Contractor: LMG Construction Services LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2011-06-27
End Date: 2012-12-22
Contract Duration: 544 days
Daily Burn Rate: $33.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 11
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: DESIGN/BUILD SERVICES FOR THE FT. BLISAA OPERATIONAL READINESS TRAINING COMPLEX AT CAMP MCGREGOR
Place of Performance
Location: FORT BLISS, EL PASO County, TEXAS, 79916
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $18.3 million to LMG CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC for work described as: DESIGN/BUILD SERVICES FOR THE FT. BLISAA OPERATIONAL READINESS TRAINING COMPLEX AT CAMP MCGREGOR Key points: 1. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumes the risk for cost overruns. 3. The duration of 544 days for the project suggests a moderately complex construction undertaking. 4. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD. 5. The project is located in Texas, potentially impacting the local construction workforce and economy.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this $18.3 million contract requires more detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar military construction projects. Without specific cost data per unit or phase, it's difficult to definitively assess if the pricing was competitive. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests the government secured a predictable cost, shifting risk to the contractor.
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 presence of 11 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this project, which generally benefits price discovery and can lead to more favorable terms for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely drove down the final contract price compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel who will utilize the operational readiness training complex. The contract delivers construction services for a critical training facility, enhancing military preparedness. The geographic impact is localized to Camp McGregor, Texas, potentially creating temporary jobs in the region. The project supports the defense sector by providing necessary infrastructure for training.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for construction delays impacting training schedules.
- Ensuring the quality of construction meets operational readiness standards.
- Managing the logistics and environmental impact of a large construction project.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract mitigates cost overrun risk for the government.
- Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
- Project contributes to essential military training infrastructure.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically for government facilities. The market for military construction is substantial, driven by the Department of Defense's continuous need for updated and new infrastructure. This project represents a specific investment in training capabilities, a key area for defense spending.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses, nor is there information on subcontracting plans. Given the scale of the project, it's possible that larger firms were the primary bidders, though they may engage small businesses for specialized tasks or labor.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer and project managers within the Department of the Army. The contract's firm-fixed-price nature implies less oversight on cost management but requires diligent monitoring of performance and quality. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction
- Operational Readiness Training Facilities
- Department of Defense Construction Contracts
- Camp McGregor Infrastructure Projects
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if scope is not tightly managed.
- Risk of construction delays impacting operational readiness.
- Ensuring contractor meets quality and performance specifications.
- Environmental compliance during construction.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, military-construction, training-facility, texas, large-contract, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $18.3 million to LMG CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC. DESIGN/BUILD SERVICES FOR THE FT. BLISAA OPERATIONAL READINESS TRAINING COMPLEX AT CAMP MCGREGOR
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LMG CONSTRUCTION SERVICES LLC.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $18.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2011-06-27. End: 2012-12-22.
What is the track record of LMG Construction Services LLC in completing similar government contracts?
Information regarding LMG Construction Services LLC's specific track record on similar government contracts is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance ratings, any prior awards for military construction, and their history of meeting deadlines and quality standards on comparable projects. Without this, it's difficult to gauge their experience level and reliability for this specific type of operational readiness training complex.
How does the awarded price compare to similar military construction projects of comparable size and scope?
Direct comparison of the $18.3 million award to similar projects is challenging without a detailed cost breakdown of the contract and access to benchmarks for comparable military construction projects. Factors such as location, specific facility requirements, and prevailing market conditions for construction materials and labor can significantly influence costs. However, the firm-fixed-price structure and the number of bids received (11) suggest an attempt to achieve competitive value within the constraints of the project's scope.
What are the primary risks associated with this specific construction contract?
Key risks for this contract include potential construction delays due to unforeseen site conditions, weather, or supply chain disruptions, which could impact the operational readiness timeline. Ensuring the constructed facility meets the stringent quality and performance standards required for military training is another critical risk. Furthermore, managing the environmental impact and ensuring compliance with all relevant regulations during construction are also significant considerations. The firm-fixed-price nature shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, but performance and schedule risks remain.
How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for this project?
The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring value for projects where the scope of work is well-defined, as it shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. This provides the government with cost certainty. For a construction project like the training complex, where the design and requirements are likely established, FFP encourages the contractor to manage costs efficiently to maximize profit. However, it requires thorough pre-award evaluation to ensure the price is fair and reasonable, and post-award monitoring of performance and quality.
What is the historical spending pattern for operational readiness training complexes within the Department of Defense?
Historical spending on operational readiness training complexes within the Department of Defense is part of a broader category of military construction (MILCON) funding. This spending fluctuates based on geopolitical needs, modernization efforts, and infrastructure replacement cycles. While specific figures for 'operational readiness training complexes' are not readily available as a distinct line item in public budgets, overall MILCON appropriations can range from billions to tens of billions annually, reflecting the continuous investment in facilities to maintain and enhance military capabilities.
What does the competition level (11 bidders) indicate about the market for this type of construction service?
A total of 11 bids for this contract suggests a reasonably competitive market for design and build services for military training facilities in the region. This level of competition indicates that multiple firms possess the capability and interest to undertake such projects. It generally leads to better price discovery for the government and encourages contractors to offer competitive terms. A higher number of bidders typically correlates with a greater likelihood of achieving a fair and reasonable price.
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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: W912QR11R0003
Offers Received: 11
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 1700 CHERRY ST, KANSAS CITY, MO, 05
Business Categories: Category Business, Emerging Small Business, HUBZone Firm, Limited Liability Corporation, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $18,270,821
Exercised Options: $18,270,821
Current Obligation: $18,270,821
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2011-06-27
Current End Date: 2012-12-22
Potential End Date: 2012-12-22 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2013-07-15
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)