Tidewater Contractors awarded $15M for South Fork Smith River Road project in California

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,970,372 ($15.0M)

Contractor: Tidewater Contractors, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2009-01-30

End Date: 2013-02-19

Contract Duration: 1,481 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PROJECT CA PFH 112-1(1), SOUTH FORK SMITH RIVER ROAD, CONSIST OF GRADING, DRAINAGE, AGGREGATE BASE, ASPHALT PAVEMENT, MSE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALLS AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION ON 1.305 MILES OF ROADWAY.

Place of Performance

Location: EUREKA, HUMBOLDT County, CALIFORNIA, 95501, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $15.0 million to TIDEWATER CONTRACTORS, INC for work described as: PROJECT CA PFH 112-1(1), SOUTH FORK SMITH RIVER ROAD, CONSIST OF GRADING, DRAINAGE, AGGREGATE BASE, ASPHALT PAVEMENT, MSE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALLS AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION ON 1.305 MILES OF ROADWAY. Key points: 1. The contract value of $14.97 million for 1.305 miles of roadway construction appears reasonable given the scope. 2. The project involved significant infrastructure work including grading, drainage, paving, and bridge construction. 3. The duration of the contract (over 4 years) suggests a complex and extensive undertaking. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type indicates that the contractor assumed most of the cost risk. 5. The project's location in California may influence material and labor costs compared to other regions. 6. The absence of small business set-asides suggests the primary contractor is likely a larger entity.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The $14.97 million contract for 1.305 miles of road construction, including bridge elements, seems to be within a reasonable range for such infrastructure projects. Benchmarking against similar Federal Highway Administration projects of comparable complexity and length would provide a more precise value assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests a defined cost expectation, but without detailed cost breakdowns, a granular value-for-money assessment is limited. The scope of work, encompassing grading, drainage, paving, and bridge construction, indicates a substantial investment in public infrastructure.

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. With 4 bids received, there was a moderate level of competition for this project. This suggests that the bidding process allowed for price discovery, but the relatively low number of bidders might imply certain market conditions or specialized requirements that limited the pool of potential contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing. The presence of multiple bids suggests that the government likely received a fair market price for the services rendered, avoiding potential overpayment associated with less competitive solicitations.

Public Impact

The project directly benefits users of the South Fork Smith River Road by improving its condition and safety. Improved roadway infrastructure facilitates transportation of goods and services, supporting regional economic activity. The construction activities likely created temporary employment opportunities for skilled and unskilled labor in the region. The project enhances the connectivity and accessibility of the area served by the South Fork Smith River Road.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the firm-fixed-price contract.
Risk of project delays due to weather, environmental factors, or supply chain issues common in large construction projects.
Ensuring the long-term durability and maintenance of the newly constructed roadway and bridge elements.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor, providing budget certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process that likely yielded competitive pricing.
The project addresses a clear need for infrastructure improvement, indicating a well-defined government objective.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction sector, a significant segment of the construction industry focused on public infrastructure. The market for such projects is often characterized by large, specialized firms capable of handling complex civil engineering tasks. Federal spending in this area is crucial for maintaining and upgrading the nation's transportation network, with projects often awarded through competitive bidding processes managed by agencies like the Federal Highway Administration.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary contract was likely awarded to a larger firm, and the extent of small business participation would depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting strategy, which is not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this project would typically be managed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) through contract officers and technical representatives. They would monitor progress, ensure compliance with specifications, and manage payments. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract places a significant portion of the cost oversight responsibility on the contractor to manage their expenses effectively. Transparency is generally maintained through public contract databases, though detailed internal oversight reports are not always publicly accessible.

Related Government Programs

Federal Highway Administration Capital Investment Grants
National Highway System Program
State and Local Government Transportation Infrastructure Projects

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise.
Risk of project delays due to weather or environmental factors.
Ensuring long-term durability and maintenance of infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $15.0 million to TIDEWATER CONTRACTORS, INC. PROJECT CA PFH 112-1(1), SOUTH FORK SMITH RIVER ROAD, CONSIST OF GRADING, DRAINAGE, AGGREGATE BASE, ASPHALT PAVEMENT, MSE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALLS AND BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION ON 1.305 MILES OF ROADWAY.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TIDEWATER CONTRACTORS, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-01-30. End: 2013-02-19.

What was the track record of Tidewater Contractors, Inc. on similar federal projects prior to this award?

Information regarding Tidewater Contractors, Inc.'s specific track record on similar federal projects prior to the South Fork Smith River Road award is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their past performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), any history of contract disputes or claims, and the successful completion of comparable infrastructure projects for federal agencies. Understanding their experience with grading, drainage, paving, and bridge construction, particularly in challenging environments, would be crucial for evaluating their capability and reliability on this $14.97 million contract.

How does the per-mile cost of this project compare to other federal highway construction projects of similar scope?

The provided data indicates a contract value of approximately $14.97 million for 1.305 miles of roadway construction, equating to roughly $11.47 million per mile. To benchmark this value, one would need to compare it against similar Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) projects that involve comparable scope, such as grading, drainage, paving, and bridge construction, in similar geographic and geological conditions. Factors like material costs, labor rates, and the complexity of the terrain significantly influence per-mile costs. Without access to a database of comparable projects and their associated costs, a precise comparison is difficult, but this figure provides a starting point for further analysis.

What were the primary risk indicators identified during the bidding process for this contract?

The provided data does not explicitly detail the risk indicators identified during the bidding process. However, common risk factors in large-scale road and bridge construction projects include potential for unforeseen subsurface conditions (geotechnical risks), environmental compliance challenges, weather-related delays, and the availability of specialized labor and materials. The firm-fixed-price contract structure suggests that the government aimed to mitigate financial risk by transferring it to the contractor. The number of bidders (4) could also be an indicator; a very low number might suggest higher perceived risks or specialized requirements that deterred potential bidders.

How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring a competitive price for taxpayers?

The award of this contract under full and open competition with 4 bids suggests a reasonably competitive environment. This process allows any responsible contractor to participate, fostering price discovery and encouraging bidders to offer their best pricing to secure the contract. While 4 bidders indicate some level of competition, a higher number typically correlates with more aggressive pricing. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract further ensures that the government's cost is defined upfront, protecting taxpayers from cost overruns, provided the initial bid was competitive. The ultimate effectiveness hinges on the government's ability to accurately define the scope and the bidders' realistic cost estimations.

What is the historical spending pattern for similar highway construction projects managed by the Federal Highway Administration in California?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar FHWA projects in California would require access to extensive contract databases. Generally, highway construction costs in California are influenced by high labor rates, stringent environmental regulations, and seismic considerations, often leading to higher per-mile costs compared to national averages. Projects involving bridge construction, like this one, add significant complexity and cost. Understanding the average contract size, duration, and number of bidders for similar projects in the state over the past decade would provide context for the $14.97 million awarded to Tidewater Contractors, Inc.

Were there any specific technical challenges or unique requirements associated with the South Fork Smith River Road project that might have influenced the contract value?

The description of the project mentions "MSE Walls, Soil Nail Walls and Bridge Construction," which indicates significant geotechnical and structural engineering challenges. Constructing retaining walls (MSE and soil nail) often addresses difficult terrain or slope stability issues. Bridge construction is inherently complex and costly. These elements, combined with the 1.305-mile length, suggest a project requiring specialized expertise and materials, which would naturally contribute to a higher contract value compared to a simple paving project. The specific location along the South Fork Smith River might also imply environmental considerations or access challenges.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Solicitation ID: DTFH68-09-B-00002

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 16156 HIGHWAY 101 S, BROOKINGS, OR, 97415

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, HUBZone Firm, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,970,372

Exercised Options: $14,970,372

Current Obligation: $14,970,372

Timeline