DOE awarded $35.6M to S & B Infrastructure for engineering services, with 7 bidders in a competitive process
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $35,577,055 ($35.6M)
Contractor: S & B Infrastructure Ltd
Awarding Agency: Department of Energy
Start Date: 2009-06-01
End Date: 2014-09-30
Contract Duration: 1,947 days
Daily Burn Rate: $18.3K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Other
Official Description: ARCHITECT ENGINEER SERVICES
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77056
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Energy obligated $35.6 million to S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD for work described as: ARCHITECT ENGINEER SERVICES Key points: 1. The contract value represents a significant investment in engineering services for the Department of Energy. 2. Competition was robust with seven bidders, suggesting a healthy market for these services. 3. The cost-plus award fee structure incentivizes performance but requires careful oversight to manage costs. 4. The contract duration of nearly five years indicates a long-term need for these specialized engineering capabilities. 5. The geographic focus on Texas suggests specific project requirements or regional operational needs. 6. The absence of small business set-asides means opportunities for smaller firms may be limited unless through subcontracting.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
Benchmarking the exact value is challenging without specific service details, but the $35.6 million over nearly five years for definitive engineering services suggests a substantial, long-term engagement. The cost-plus award fee (CPAF) structure is common for complex projects where scope may evolve, allowing for flexibility. However, CPAF contracts can sometimes lead to higher costs if not managed diligently, as the contractor is reimbursed for costs plus a fee that can be adjusted based on performance. Without comparable contract data for similar scope and duration within the Department of Energy, a precise value-for-money assessment is difficult, but the competitive nature of the award provides some assurance of fair pricing.
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 seven bidders suggests a competitive marketplace for these engineering services. A higher number of bidders generally leads to better price discovery and can drive down costs for the government. The agency's decision to use full and open competition implies confidence that a sufficient number of qualified contractors exist to meet the requirement.
Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in more competitive pricing and a wider range of technical solutions being considered, ultimately leading to better value for the government's investment.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Energy and its various projects requiring specialized engineering expertise. Services delivered include architectural and engineering support, crucial for infrastructure development and maintenance. The contract's geographic focus on Texas indicates a direct impact on projects within that state. The contract supports a workforce of engineers and technical professionals, contributing to employment in the sector.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Cost-plus award fee contracts can lead to cost overruns if not closely monitored.
- The long duration of the contract may present challenges in adapting to evolving technological needs.
- Lack of specific small business participation could limit opportunities for smaller, specialized firms.
Positive Signals
- Full and open competition ensures a broad base of potential contractors and competitive pricing.
- The award fee mechanism incentivizes contractor performance and successful project outcomes.
- The definitive contract award suggests a clear understanding of the requirements and a stable project.
Sector Analysis
The engineering services sector is a critical component of federal contracting, supporting a wide array of government functions from infrastructure development to research and development. This contract falls under the broader category of professional, scientific, and technical services, specifically engineering. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 (Engineering Services) encompasses firms that provide engineering consulting and design services. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services, with spending often concentrated in areas like defense, transportation, energy, and environmental remediation. Benchmarking this contract's value against overall federal spending in engineering services would require analyzing aggregated data for similar projects and agencies.
Small Business Impact
This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates no explicit small business participation. This means that opportunities for small businesses were likely limited to potential subcontracting roles, if any were offered by the prime contractor, S & B Infrastructure Ltd. The absence of a small business focus in the prime contract award suggests that the agency sought large-scale capabilities or that the competitive environment did not prioritize small business participation for this specific requirement. This could impact the broader small business ecosystem if such contracts represent a significant portion of federal engineering needs.
Oversight & Accountability
The contract is a definitive contract, suggesting a clear scope and terms. Oversight would typically be managed by the contracting officer and technical representatives within the Department of Energy. Performance monitoring under the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure would involve regular reviews of cost, schedule, and technical performance against defined criteria to determine award fees. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, which provide basic award information. Specific Inspector General jurisdiction would depend on the nature of any potential issues or investigations arising from the contract's execution.
Related Government Programs
- Department of Energy - Major Construction Projects
- Engineering and Architectural Services
- Infrastructure Modernization Programs
- Federal Facilities Maintenance and Repair
Risk Flags
- Cost-plus award fee contracts require diligent oversight to ensure cost control.
- Long contract duration may lead to obsolescence or changing requirements.
- Potential for contractor performance degradation over extended periods.
Tags
engineering-services, department-of-energy, cost-plus-award-fee, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, texas, professional-scientific-and-technical-services, infrastructure, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Energy awarded $35.6 million to S & B INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. ARCHITECT ENGINEER SERVICES
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 $35.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-06-01. End: 2014-09-30.
What is the historical spending pattern of the Department of Energy on engineering services, and how does this contract compare?
The Department of Energy (DOE) consistently spends significant amounts on engineering services to support its diverse mission, which includes managing complex research facilities, nuclear sites, and energy infrastructure. Historical data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal annual spending trends for NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services) and related categories. For instance, in fiscal years preceding this award (2009-2014), the DOE's obligations for engineering services likely fluctuated based on major project cycles and budget allocations. A $35.6 million contract over five years, averaging roughly $7 million annually, would represent a substantial but not necessarily outlier-level award within the DOE's overall engineering services portfolio. To provide a precise comparison, one would need to analyze the DOE's total engineering services spending for the contract period and identify comparable large-scale, long-duration engineering support contracts awarded during that time.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure typically impact contractor performance and cost control in engineering services contracts?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure is designed to incentivize contractor performance by reimbursing allowable costs plus a base fee, with the potential for an additional award fee based on meeting or exceeding performance objectives. For engineering services, this can be effective in complex projects where scope may evolve or where innovation is desired. Contractors are motivated to achieve high performance ratings to maximize their fee. However, CPAF contracts require robust government oversight to ensure that performance metrics are objective, measurable, and aligned with program goals. Without stringent oversight, there's a risk that contractors might focus on achieving easily measurable, but less critical, objectives, or that costs could escalate if the base fee and potential award fee are overly generous relative to the work performed. Effective management of CPAF contracts involves clear communication, regular performance evaluations, and a well-defined baseline for cost and schedule.
What are the potential risks associated with a long-duration contract (1947 days) for engineering services?
Long-duration contracts for engineering services, such as this 1947-day award, carry several potential risks. Firstly, the technological landscape can change significantly over nearly five years, potentially rendering initial designs or specifications outdated or suboptimal. This necessitates flexibility and change management within the contract. Secondly, maintaining consistent contractor performance and engagement over an extended period can be challenging; key personnel may leave, or institutional knowledge might erode. Thirdly, cost estimation becomes more difficult over longer periods due to inflation, market fluctuations in labor and materials, and unforeseen project complexities. Finally, the government's requirements might evolve, requiring significant contract modifications that could impact the original pricing and scope. Mitigating these risks involves incorporating mechanisms for adaptation, regular performance reviews, and potentially periodic re-evaluations of scope and pricing.
Given the 'full and open competition' and seven bidders, what does this imply about the market for engineering services relevant to the Department of Energy?
The fact that this contract was awarded under full and open competition with seven bidders suggests a healthy and competitive market for the specific type of engineering services required by the Department of Energy (DOE). A robust competition indicates that there are multiple qualified firms capable of meeting the agency's needs, which generally leads to better pricing and a wider array of technical solutions. It implies that the barriers to entry for firms wishing to compete for such contracts are not prohibitively high, at least for those with the requisite expertise and capacity. Furthermore, it suggests that the DOE's requirements were well-defined enough to attract a significant number of bids, allowing for effective price discovery and selection of the best value offer. This level of competition is generally favorable for the government and taxpayers.
What is the significance of the 'definitive contract' award type in this context?
A 'definitive contract' is a type of contract that is fixed in price and scope, unlike an 'undefinitized contract' (UDC) or letter contract, which is used when the government needs a contractor to start work before all terms, conditions, and prices have been finalized. In this case, the award of a definitive contract for engineering services valued at $35.6 million signifies that the Department of Energy and S & B Infrastructure Ltd. had reached a full agreement on all contract terms, including scope of work, delivery schedules, and pricing, prior to the commencement of work or the finalization of the award. This provides greater certainty and predictability for both parties, reduces the risk of future disputes over contract terms, and allows for more straightforward financial planning and oversight from the outset.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102
Solicitation ID: DE-SOL-0000022
Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: S & B Engineers and Constructors, Inc (UEI: 021501325)
Address: 3535 SAGE RD, HOUSTON, TX, 77056
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $35,577,055
Exercised Options: $35,577,055
Current Obligation: $35,577,055
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-06-01
Current End Date: 2014-09-30
Potential End Date: 2014-09-30 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2017-11-28
More Contracts from S & B Infrastructure Ltd
- Federal Contract — $24.8M (Department of Energy)
- API 653 Repairs and Maintenance Items on 7 Tanks AT Arnold AFB, TN — $12.9M (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Energy Contracts
- Federal Contract — $48.1B (Lockheed Martin Corp)
- ,Ct::igf Contract Award De-Na0003525 to the National Technology&engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (ntess) for the Management and Operation of the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration's Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) — $41.7B (National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC)
- Management and Operation of the OAK Ridge National Laboratory — $40.8B (Ut-Battelle LLC)
- TAS::89 0240::TAS This Performance-Based Management Contract (pbmc) IS for the Management and Operation of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (llnl). the Contractor Shall, in Accordance With the Provisions of This Contract, Accomplish the Missions and Programs Assigned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Manage and Operate the Laboratory. the Laboratory IS ONE of Does Office of Defense Program Multi-Program Laboratories. the Laboratory IS a Federally Funded Research and Development Institution (established in Accordance With the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 35 and Operated Under This Management and Operating (M&O) Contract, AS Defined in FAR 17.6 and Dear 917.6 — $40.8B (Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC)
- M&O of Lanl BR of U of CA — $35.3B (Regents of the University of California, the)