DOE awards $24.8M contract to S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD for services in Texas

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,822,170 ($24.8M)

Contractor: S & B Infrastructure Ltd

Awarding Agency: Department of Energy

Start Date: 2000-03-15

End Date: 2005-03-08

Contract Duration: 1,819 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Other

Place of Performance

Location: TEXAS

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Energy obligated $24.8 million to S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1819 days indicates a significant, long-term commitment. 3. The Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contract type may present cost control challenges. 4. Awarded by the Department of Energy, likely supporting critical infrastructure or operational needs. 5. The contractor, S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD, has secured a substantial federal award. 6. The contract was awarded in March 2000 and completed in March 2005.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $24.8 million contract is challenging without specific service details. However, the CPFF structure can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed tightly, as the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs plus a fixed fee. Comparing this to similar infrastructure projects within the Department of Energy would provide better context on whether the pricing was competitive for the scope of work.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely invited to submit proposals. The presence of six bidders (no=6) suggests a healthy level of competition for this award. This broad competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive offers.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down prices and encouraging contractors to offer their best value.

Public Impact

The Department of Energy benefits from the services provided under this contract, likely related to infrastructure maintenance or development. Residents and businesses in Texas may have benefited from improved or maintained infrastructure. The contract supported jobs and economic activity within the state of Texas. The specific services delivered are not detailed but are assumed to be critical to DOE operations in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader category of federal infrastructure and support services, a significant sector for government spending. The Department of Energy often engages contractors for a wide range of services, from construction and maintenance to specialized technical support. The market for such services is competitive, with numerous firms vying for federal contracts. Benchmarking against similar DOE infrastructure projects would be necessary for a precise comparison.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract was specifically set aside for small businesses (sb=false). Given the contract's value and nature, it is unlikely that significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses were mandated, though they may have occurred organically. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of Energy. As a completed contract, its performance and financial accountability would have been subject to internal DOE review and potentially audits. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports are often not publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

department-of-energy, infrastructure, texas, cost-plus-fixed-fee, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, completed-contract, engineering-services, construction-services

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Energy awarded $24.8 million to S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Energy (Department of Energy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-03-15. End: 2005-03-08.

What specific services did S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD provide under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the exact services rendered by S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. However, given the contractor's name and the awarding agency (Department of Energy), it is highly probable that the contract involved infrastructure development, construction, maintenance, or related engineering services. Such contracts often support the operational needs of DOE facilities, including power generation, research laboratories, or environmental remediation sites. Without more detailed contract documentation, the precise nature of the work remains inferred.

How does the Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) structure compare to other contract types in terms of value for money?

Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts reimburse the contractor for all allowable costs incurred, plus a predetermined fixed fee representing profit. This structure is often used when the scope of work is not precisely defined or is expected to evolve, such as in research and development or complex construction projects. While it allows for flexibility, it can incentivize contractors to incur higher costs, as their fee remains constant. From a value-for-money perspective, CPFF contracts require stringent oversight and cost controls by the government to prevent cost overruns. Other contract types, like Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP), offer greater price certainty for the government but are less suitable for uncertain scopes. Best value is achieved when the contract type aligns with the project's risk and definition.

What is the typical duration for similar Department of Energy infrastructure contracts?

The typical duration for Department of Energy infrastructure contracts can vary significantly based on the project's complexity, scale, and funding. Contracts for major construction or long-term facility operations can extend for several years, similar to the 1819-day (approximately 5-year) duration of this contract. Shorter-term contracts might be used for specific maintenance tasks, studies, or smaller upgrades. The DOE often enters into multi-year agreements to ensure continuity of essential services and to leverage economies of scale. A 5-year term for a substantial infrastructure-related award is not uncommon within federal agencies managing large physical assets.

What does the number of bidders (6) indicate about the competitiveness of this award?

Having six bidders for this contract suggests a reasonably competitive procurement process. A higher number of bidders generally indicates broader market interest and increases the likelihood that the government received competitive pricing and a strong technical proposal. While 'full and open competition' aims to attract as many qualified bidders as possible, six is a solid number that typically allows for meaningful comparison of offers. It implies that the contract requirements were clear enough to attract multiple capable firms and that the market for these services is sufficiently robust.

What are the potential risks associated with a CPFF contract awarded for infrastructure services?

The primary risk with a CPFF contract for infrastructure services is the potential for cost escalation. Since the contractor is reimbursed for all allowable costs, there's less direct financial incentive to control expenses compared to fixed-price contracts. This necessitates robust government oversight to scrutinize costs, ensure efficiency, and prevent unnecessary expenditures. Scope creep is another risk; if the project's requirements expand significantly without adjustments to the fixed fee or contract terms, the government might end up paying more than initially anticipated. Additionally, defining 'allowable costs' and ensuring compliance requires diligent contract administration.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: S & B Engineers and Constructors, Inc (UEI: 021501325)

Address: 3535 SAGE RD, HOUSTON, TX, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,822,170

Exercised Options: $24,822,170

Current Obligation: $24,822,170

Timeline

Start Date: 2000-03-15

Current End Date: 2005-03-08

Potential End Date: 2005-03-08 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2008-01-24

More Contracts from S & B Infrastructure Ltd

View all S & B Infrastructure Ltd federal contracts →

Other Department of Energy Contracts

View all Department of Energy contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending