Army awards $103.2M for construction materials, with a significant portion for Fort Riley, Kansas
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $10,320,920 ($10.3M)
Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2005-11-04
End Date: 2008-03-04
Contract Duration: 851 days
Daily Burn Rate: $12.1K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: 200602!600286!2100!W912DQ!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT KANSAS CTY!W912DQ05D0015 !A!N! !N!0007 ! !20051104!20051102!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!23965!161!20!FORT RILEY !RILEY !KANSAS !+000009665240!N!N!000000000000!5680!MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236210!A!A!5!B!M! !A! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!007!B! !A!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! !
Place of Performance
Location: FORT RILEY, GEARY County, KANSAS, 66442
State: Kansas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $10.3 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: 200602!600286!2100!W912DQ!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT KANSAS CTY!W912DQ05D0015 !A!N! !N!0007 ! !20051104!20051102!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!23965!161!20!FORT RILEY !RILE… Key points: 1. Contract value of $103.2 million indicates substantial investment in construction materials. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Delivery order type suggests a phased approach to material procurement. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor for cost overruns. 5. Contract duration of 851 days points to a long-term need for these materials. 6. The specific materials procured are categorized as 'Miscellaneous Construction Materials', indicating broad applicability.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $103.2 million for miscellaneous construction materials appears reasonable given the duration and the nature of the procurement. Without specific benchmarks for 'miscellaneous construction materials' across various federal agencies, a direct per-unit cost comparison is difficult. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract suggests the government secured a set price, which is generally favorable for value. The award to M. A. Mortenson Company, a known entity in construction, provides some assurance of capability.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 7 bids suggests a healthy level of competition for this requirement. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive down prices and encourage efficient service delivery, benefiting the government.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers benefit from a competitive process that likely resulted in a more favorable price than a sole-source or limited competition award.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Army, which will receive essential construction materials. Services delivered include the provision of miscellaneous construction materials, supporting various infrastructure projects. The geographic impact is concentrated in Kansas, specifically Fort Riley, where the materials are likely to be utilized. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for M. A. Mortenson Company and its suppliers, as well as construction personnel at Fort Riley.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for price fluctuations in raw materials impacting the fixed-price contract over its long duration.
- Ensuring the 'miscellaneous' nature of materials doesn't lead to scope creep or unexpected requirements.
- Logistical challenges in delivering a wide variety of construction materials to a specific military installation.
Positive Signals
- Award to an established contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, suggests a degree of reliability.
- Fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- Full and open competition indicates a robust bidding process, likely yielding competitive pricing.
Sector Analysis
The procurement falls under the 'Miscellaneous Construction Materials' category, which is a broad segment within the broader construction and defense industrial base. This sector is characterized by a wide range of suppliers, from large manufacturers to specialized distributors. Federal spending in construction materials is substantial, supporting military base maintenance, infrastructure upgrades, and new construction projects. Benchmarks for such a diverse category are hard to establish without more specific material details, but the contract value is significant for a single delivery order.
Small Business Impact
The contract data indicates that this was not a small business set-aside, and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem through this specific award appears limited, though M. A. Mortenson Company may engage small businesses in its supply chain.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the fixed-price delivery order structure, requiring the contractor to deliver specified materials. Transparency is facilitated by the public availability of contract data, though detailed project-specific oversight information is not provided.
Related Government Programs
- Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
- Department of Defense Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
- Federal Procurement of Construction Materials
- Fort Riley Infrastructure Development
Risk Flags
- Long contract duration increases exposure to market volatility.
- Broad 'miscellaneous' category requires careful definition to avoid scope disputes.
- Potential for logistical challenges in timely delivery of diverse materials.
Tags
department-of-defense, army, construction, materials, fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, delivery-order, fort-riley, kansas, miscellaneous-construction-materials, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $10.3 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. 200602!600286!2100!W912DQ!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT KANSAS CTY!W912DQ05D0015 !A!N! !N!0007 ! !20051104!20051102!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!23965!161!20!FORT RILEY !RILEY !KANSAS !+000009665240!N!N!000000000000!5680!MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS !S1 !SERVICES !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !236210!A!A!5!B!M! !A! !999
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is M. A. MORTENSON 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 $10.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-11-04. End: 2008-03-04.
What is the track record of M. A. Mortenson Company with the Department of Defense?
M. A. Mortenson Company has a significant history of contracting with the Department of Defense, particularly for construction and facilities-related projects. Their involvement often spans large-scale construction, renovations, and infrastructure development at various military installations. While this specific contract focuses on materials, Mortenson's broader experience suggests a familiarity with government contracting requirements, quality control standards, and project execution within the defense sector. Analyzing their past performance on similar DoD contracts would provide further insight into their reliability and capacity to fulfill this delivery order effectively.
How does the $103.2 million value compare to similar federal procurements for construction materials?
The $103.2 million value for miscellaneous construction materials is substantial for a single delivery order, especially considering its 851-day duration. However, comparing it directly to 'similar' federal procurements is challenging due to the broad 'miscellaneous' classification. Federal spending on construction materials can range from tens of thousands for specific items to billions for large-scale infrastructure programs. For a single installation like Fort Riley, this value suggests a significant, ongoing need for a variety of materials over a prolonged period. It is likely within the upper range for materials-focused delivery orders but may be moderate compared to full construction projects.
What are the primary risks associated with a fixed-price contract for miscellaneous construction materials over 851 days?
The primary risk for the government in a fixed-price contract for a long duration (851 days) is potential price escalation of raw materials. If market prices for key components rise significantly, the contractor may face reduced profit margins or, in extreme cases, seek contract modifications. For the contractor, the risk lies in accurately estimating all costs, including labor, transportation, and potential unforeseen issues, over the contract period. If costs exceed estimates, their profit will be diminished. Additionally, defining 'miscellaneous' materials adequately is crucial to avoid disputes over scope and quantity, which can introduce risk for both parties.
How effective is 'full and open competition' in ensuring value for money in construction material procurements?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal procurements, including construction materials. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation and efficiency. The presence of 7 bidders in this case suggests that the market was sufficiently robust to support multiple offers. This competition helps the government secure materials at or near market rates, reducing the likelihood of paying inflated prices that might occur in sole-source or limited-competition scenarios. However, the effectiveness also depends on clear solicitation requirements and thorough evaluation criteria.
What are the historical spending patterns for construction materials at Fort Riley or similar Army installations?
Historical spending patterns for construction materials at Fort Riley and similar Army installations typically reflect ongoing maintenance, repair, and minor construction needs, punctuated by larger capital investment projects. Spending can fluctuate based on military readiness requirements, infrastructure modernization initiatives, and funding allocations. Contracts for 'miscellaneous construction materials' are common to support day-to-day operational needs. Analyzing past contract awards for similar material categories at Fort Riley would reveal trends in volume, types of materials procured, and average pricing, providing context for the current $103.2 million award over 851 days.
What are the implications of the 'Delivery Order' contract type for material availability and project timelines?
A 'Delivery Order' contract type, often used under a larger indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) or requirements contract, allows the government to order specific quantities of goods or services as needed over a defined period. For construction materials, this means the government can procure items incrementally, aligning with actual project demands at Fort Riley. This approach offers flexibility, preventing the government from holding excessive inventory while ensuring materials are available when required for construction or repair activities. It helps manage cash flow and reduces the risk of material obsolescence or damage from prolonged storage.
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: M. a. Mortenson Companies, Inc.
Address: 700 MEADOW LN N, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55422
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912DQ05D0015
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-11-04
Current End Date: 2008-03-04
Potential End Date: 2008-03-04 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2023-09-29
More Contracts from M. a. Mortenson Company
- TAS::47 4543::TAS Modernization of the Byron G. Rogers Federal Office Building and the Byron G. Rogers Federal Courthouse Window Replacement in Denver, CO — $160.4M (General Services Administration)
- Construction Contract 2 for the Dept. of State, Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (fastc) in Blackstone, VA. Includes an Indoor Firing Range, Indoor/Outdoor Tactical Range, Tactical Training Building, Office and Classroom Building, Driving Tracks, Mock Urban Driving Track and Mock Embassy — $154.6M (General Services Administration)
- Clin 0001 Base BID Repair EHW 1 Phase 2 NSB Kings BAY GA — $154.6M (Department of Defense)
- Design-Build-Bridging Construction Services for the Modernization of the U.S. National Poultry Research Center (usnprc), Seprl Campus in Athens, GA This IS a Two-Phase Design-Build Acquisition. ONE Solicitation Covers Both Phases. Phase I IS the Pre-Selection Phase in Which the Government Will "shortlist" Maximum of (4) of the Most Highly Qualified Offerors. Only Those Firms Selected in Phase I Will BE Allowed to Continue to the Phase II. Detailed Design Criteria Will Then BE Added by Amendment to the Solicitation to Start the Phase II Stage of the Request for Proposals. Each Firm Selected for Participation in Phase II Will Then Submit a Design-Build Technical Proposal, the Remainder of the Performance Capability Proposal and Price Proposal. Igf::ot::igf — $149.6M (Department of Agriculture)
- Ibct — $141.3M (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)