Department of the Army awards $24M industrial building construction contract to ALFA CONSULT SA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $23,969,847 ($24.0M)

Contractor: Alfa Consult SA

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-08-01

End Date: 2007-02-18

Contract Duration: 566 days

Daily Burn Rate: $42.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $24.0 million to ALFA CONSULT SA for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract value of $23.97M for industrial building construction. 2. Awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense. 3. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, indicating defined cost and scope. 4. Duration of 566 days suggests a medium-term project. 5. Competition level was 'Full and Open', implying broad market participation. 6. No small business set-aside was utilized for this contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $23.97 million for industrial building construction over a period of 566 days appears within a reasonable range for such projects. However, without specific details on the scope of work, location, and complexity of the industrial building, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar construction projects of comparable size and complexity would be necessary for a more definitive evaluation of pricing and value.

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 6 bidders suggests a healthy level of interest and competition for this particular contract. This broad competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition typically leads to better pricing for taxpayers by encouraging multiple companies to vie for the contract, driving down costs through competitive bidding.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are likely the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the constructed industrial facilities. The contract delivers essential industrial building infrastructure, supporting military operations and logistics. The geographic impact is localized to the site of the industrial building construction, likely within a military installation. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, and project managers involved in the building process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen construction challenges arise, despite the firm fixed price structure.
Delays in project completion could impact the operational readiness of the facility.
Quality control and adherence to building codes are critical for long-term structural integrity.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type helps manage budget certainty.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process that could lead to cost efficiencies.
The contractor, ALFA CONSULT SA, has a track record that can be reviewed for performance history.

Sector Analysis

Industrial building construction is a significant sector within the broader construction industry, encompassing the design and erection of facilities for manufacturing, warehousing, and other industrial purposes. The market size for such specialized construction is substantial, driven by both private sector demand and government infrastructure needs. This contract fits within the government's broader strategy of maintaining and upgrading its operational facilities.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, nor is there information indicating significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses. The focus appears to be on securing the best offer through open competition, which may or may not prioritize small business participation. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business involvement through subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant project management office within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified building within the agreed-upon cost and timeline. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting mechanisms, though specific project oversight details may not be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Industrial Infrastructure Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined.
Risk of contractor performance issues impacting schedule or quality.
Market volatility in construction material prices over the contract duration.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $24.0 million to ALFA CONSULT SA. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALFA CONSULT SA.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-08-01. End: 2007-02-18.

What is the specific nature and scope of the industrial building being constructed?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'Industrial Building Construction' (NAICS code 236210) awarded to ALFA CONSULT SA by the Department of the Army. However, the specific details regarding the size, purpose (e.g., manufacturing, storage, maintenance), and location of the industrial building are not explicitly stated in the summary data. Further investigation into the contract's statement of work (SOW) or performance work statement (PWS) would be required to understand the precise scope, including architectural requirements, materials, and intended use, which are crucial for a comprehensive assessment of the contract's value and impact.

How does the awarded price of $23.97 million compare to similar industrial building construction projects?

Benchmarking the $23.97 million award requires comparing it to similar industrial building construction projects undertaken by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies. Key comparison factors include the square footage of the building, complexity of design, materials used, geographic location (which affects labor and material costs), and the duration of the construction period (566 days). Without access to a database of comparable projects with detailed cost breakdowns, it is difficult to definitively state whether this contract represents excellent, good, or fair value. However, the 'Full and Open Competition' with 6 bidders suggests a competitive environment that likely contributed to a reasonable price.

What is ALFA CONSULT SA's track record with federal contracts, particularly in construction?

The provided data identifies ALFA CONSULT SA as the contractor but does not offer details on their past performance or track record with federal contracts. A thorough assessment would involve reviewing their contract history, including past awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any past disputes or claims, and their experience with similar types of industrial construction projects. A positive performance history would indicate a lower risk for this contract, while a history of issues might raise concerns about potential delays or cost overruns, even under a firm fixed price agreement.

What are the potential risks associated with this firm fixed price contract?

While a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract is designed to provide cost certainty, risks can still emerge. For ALFA CONSULT SA, the primary risk is underestimating the costs or encountering unforeseen site conditions, material price escalations, or labor shortages, which could lead to reduced profit margins or financial losses if not adequately managed. For the government, the risk lies in the contractor potentially cutting corners on quality to maintain profitability, or in disputes arising if the scope of work is not clearly defined, leading to change orders that could increase the overall cost. Effective oversight and clear communication are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How does the duration of 566 days impact the overall cost and risk profile?

A contract duration of 566 days (approximately 1.5 years) for industrial building construction is a significant timeframe. This duration allows for a methodical approach to construction, potentially reducing the risk of rushed work and improving quality. However, a longer duration also increases exposure to market fluctuations in material costs and labor availability. It also means the project's funding is committed for a longer period. For the government, it implies a longer wait for the facility to become operational. The risk profile is influenced by the potential for economic changes or unforeseen events over this extended period.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Industrial 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

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 142-144 RUE ALBERT UNDEN, LUXEMBOURG

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline