Department of Defense awards $73.8M contract for roads and bridges construction in Georgia

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $73,840,875 ($73.8M)

Contractor: Ttec-Tesoro Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2008-04-26

End Date: 2011-06-27

Contract Duration: 1,157 days

Daily Burn Rate: $63.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ROADS AND BRIDGES

Place of Performance

Location: FORT BENNING, MUSCOGEE County, GEORGIA, 31905

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $73.8 million to TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE for work described as: ROADS AND BRIDGES Key points: 1. Contract awarded to TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE for infrastructure development. 2. Project duration spans over three years, indicating a significant undertaking. 3. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the DoD. 7. Geographic focus is Georgia, with the specific location identified as Savannah (SN: GEORGIA).

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount of $73.8 million for roads and bridges construction over a three-year period appears to be within a reasonable range for large-scale infrastructure projects. However, without specific details on the scope of work, quantity of deliverables, or comparable project costs in the Georgia region, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The firm fixed-price contract structure implies that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the contractor's bid was competitive.

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 4 bids (no: 4) suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While full and open competition is generally preferred for maximizing price discovery and ensuring fair market value, the specific number of bidders can influence the intensity of that competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to lower prices and better quality services. The fact that four bids were received suggests that the government received multiple offers, increasing the likelihood of a cost-effective award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and potentially military personnel and their families stationed in or utilizing facilities in Georgia. The services delivered include the construction and repair of roads and bridges, crucial for logistical support and base accessibility. The geographic impact is concentrated in Savannah, Georgia, contributing to local infrastructure development and potentially improving transportation networks. The project is expected to create employment opportunities within the construction sector in the Savannah area, benefiting the local workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope of work was underestimated by the contractor, despite the firm fixed-price structure.
The duration of the contract (1157 days) could lead to potential delays if unforeseen issues arise during construction.
Dependence on a single joint venture for a project of this magnitude carries inherent risks related to contractor performance and capacity.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract type transfers cost risk to the contractor, potentially protecting the government from budget overruns.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process and potential for competitive pricing.
The contract is for essential infrastructure development, which is critical for military operations and base functionality.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically commercial and institutional building construction, as indicated by the NAICS code 236220. The construction industry is a significant part of the U.S. economy, with substantial government spending on infrastructure projects, including military bases and facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale road and bridge construction projects can vary widely based on location, complexity, and materials, but multi-million dollar awards are common for such undertakings.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (sb: false) and the prime contractor is a joint venture, which may or may not include small business participation. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities exist for small businesses within this project. The absence of a small business set-aside suggests that the primary focus was on securing the most capable and competitive bidders for this large-scale infrastructure project.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases and public reporting, though specific project oversight details may not be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Construction
Infrastructure Development Projects
Federal Road and Bridge Maintenance
Department of Defense Procurement

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if not clearly defined.
Contractor performance risk on a large-scale project.
Unforeseen site conditions impacting cost and schedule.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $73.8 million to TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE. ROADS AND BRIDGES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $73.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-04-26. End: 2011-06-27.

What specific types of roads and bridges are included in this contract, and what are their current conditions?

The provided data does not specify the exact types or current conditions of the roads and bridges covered by this contract. The NAICS code 236220, 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction,' suggests that the project may involve construction related to facilities rather than purely public transportation infrastructure, or it could encompass access roads and bridges within a larger construction scope. To understand the specifics, one would need to review the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS), which would detail the project's objectives, deliverables, and any existing infrastructure assessments.

How does the awarded amount of $73.8 million compare to similar roads and bridges construction contracts awarded by the Department of Defense in the past three years?

A comprehensive comparison requires access to a broader dataset of federal contract awards. However, $73.8 million for a project spanning over three years is a substantial sum, indicative of a significant infrastructure undertaking. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify contracts with similar scopes (e.g., new construction, major repairs), geographic locations, and contract durations awarded by the DoD or other federal agencies. Factors like inflation, material costs, and specific project complexities would need to be considered for a meaningful comparison. Without such detailed comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state if this award represents exceptional value or is on the higher end.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) and milestones outlined in the contract for TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE?

The provided summary data does not include the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) or milestones for this contract. Typically, these would be detailed within the contract's Statement of Work (SOW) or Performance Work Statement (PWS). For a construction project of this nature, KPIs might include adherence to project schedules, quality of workmanship, safety compliance, and timely completion of specific phases (e.g., foundation work, paving, structural completion). Milestones would likely be tied to the delivery of specific project components or the achievement of certain progress percentages, often linked to payment schedules.

What is the track record of TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE in executing large-scale federal construction projects?

The provided data identifies 'TTEC-TESORO JOINT VENTURE' as the contractor but does not offer details on their specific track record or past performance on federal construction projects. To assess their capabilities, one would need to research their project history, including the types and sizes of previous contracts, client satisfaction ratings (if available through sources like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or contract terminations. As a joint venture, their performance would also be influenced by the individual track records of TTEC and TESORO, if they are distinct entities.

What are the potential risks associated with the firm fixed-price contract type for this specific project?

While a firm fixed-price (FFP) contract shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor, potential risks remain. For this roads and bridges project, unforeseen site conditions (e.g., unexpected soil issues, underground utilities, environmental remediation needs) could significantly increase the contractor's costs, potentially leading to disputes or claims if the scope isn't clearly defined. If the initial bid was too low due to aggressive competition or miscalculation, the contractor might face financial strain, potentially impacting quality or schedule adherence. Furthermore, if the government requires changes to the scope, the process for equitable adjustments can be complex and time-consuming under an FFP contract.

How does the geographic focus on Savannah, Georgia, align with the Department of Defense's infrastructure needs?

Savannah, Georgia, is home to significant military installations, including the Hunter Army Airfield and the Marine Corps Air Station in Beaufort, South Carolina (which is geographically close and often considered in regional planning). Robust transportation infrastructure, including roads and bridges, is critical for the efficient operation, deployment, and logistical support of these bases. Ensuring the integrity and capacity of local infrastructure can directly impact military readiness and the ability to move personnel and equipment. Therefore, focusing on this region aligns with the DoD's need for secure and functional support facilities.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W912HN07R0062

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 302 RESEARCH DR #200, NORCROSS, GA, 04

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $111,248,875

Exercised Options: $73,840,875

Current Obligation: $73,840,875

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912HN07D0058

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline