Heavy road reconstruction contract awarded to American Civil Constructors LLC for over $20 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,130,948 ($20.1M)

Contractor: American Civil Constructors LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2014-03-19

End Date: 2015-10-31

Contract Duration: 591 days

Daily Burn Rate: $34.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::CT::IGF CO FLAP CR 62(2) GUANELLA PASS DTFH68-14-B-00003 HEAVY 4R RECONSTRUCTION OF 9.3 MILES OF ROADWAY, INCLUDING: EARTHWORK, CONCRETE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALL, DRAINGE, AGGREGATE BASE, AND HOT-MIX ASPHALT. CHIP SEAL (OPTION X) FOR 13.7 MILES.

Place of Performance

Location: GRANT, PARK County, COLORADO, 80448, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $20.1 million to AMERICAN CIVIL CONSTRUCTORS LLC for work described as: IGF::CT::IGF CO FLAP CR 62(2) GUANELLA PASS DTFH68-14-B-00003 HEAVY 4R RECONSTRUCTION OF 9.3 MILES OF ROADWAY, INCLUDING: EARTHWORK, CONCRETE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALL, DRAINGE, AGGREGATE BASE, AND HOT-MIX ASPHALT. CHIP SEAL (OPTION X) FOR 13.7 MILES. Key points: 1. The contract value of $20.13 million for 9.3 miles of roadway reconstruction appears substantial, requiring careful benchmarking. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding environment, which could lead to better pricing. 3. The contract duration of 591 days indicates a significant project timeline, with potential for delays and cost overruns. 4. The project scope includes earthwork, concrete walls, drainage, and asphalt paving, covering a comprehensive range of construction activities. 5. The absence of small business set-aside flags warrants investigation into subcontracting opportunities for smaller firms. 6. The contract's fixed-price nature shifts risk to the contractor, but change orders could impact final costs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $20.13 million for 9.3 miles of roadway reconstruction is a significant investment. Without specific benchmarks for similar projects in Colorado, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the scope of work, including earthwork, walls, drainage, and paving, suggests a complex undertaking. The fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but the potential for change orders needs monitoring. Further analysis would require comparing cost per mile and per unit of work against regional and national averages for similar highway construction projects.

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 a bid. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this project. A competitive bidding process generally helps in price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition awards. The number of bidders provides some assurance that the selected contractor's price was vetted against alternatives.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition for this substantial infrastructure project is beneficial for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a more competitive bid and potentially saved taxpayer dollars compared to a less competitive procurement.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are users of the Guanealla Pass roadway, who will experience improved infrastructure and safety. The project delivers essential road reconstruction services, including earthwork, wall construction, drainage improvements, and paving. The geographic impact is concentrated in Colorado, specifically along a 9.3-mile stretch of roadway. The project will likely involve a significant construction workforce, including engineers, laborers, and equipment operators, providing employment opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to the fixed-price contract type if significant change orders arise.
The long project duration (591 days) increases the risk of weather-related delays and impacts on local traffic.
Ensuring adequate oversight to manage the complexity of earthwork, wall construction, and drainage systems.
Monitoring the contractor's performance to ensure quality and adherence to specifications throughout the project lifecycle.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.
The fixed-price contract shifts some financial risk to the contractor.
The project addresses critical infrastructure needs for the region.
The contractor, American Civil Constructors LLC, has experience in heavy civil construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction sector, a critical component of the broader construction industry. The market for federal highway construction is substantial, driven by federal funding programs like those administered by the Federal Highway Administration. Projects of this scale often involve significant earthwork, structural elements, and paving. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be analyzed on a cost-per-mile or cost-per-square-yard basis for specific construction elements, considering regional labor and material costs.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). This suggests that the procurement was open to all eligible contractors, regardless of size. While there's no explicit mention of subcontracting goals, large infrastructure projects often include provisions for small business participation. Further review of the contract details would be needed to determine if specific subcontracting targets were established and how their fulfillment will be monitored, impacting the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and potentially the Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector General (OIG). The FHWA is responsible for ensuring the project adheres to federal standards, specifications, and timelines. The OIG provides an independent layer of oversight, investigating fraud, waste, and abuse. Transparency would be facilitated through contract award notices, progress reports, and public availability of certain project documentation, though specific oversight mechanisms and their effectiveness require deeper investigation.

Related Government Programs

Federal Highway Administration Construction Projects
Department of Transportation Infrastructure Spending
Highway Reconstruction Programs
Colorado Department of Transportation Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to fixed-price contract and change orders.
Risk of project delays due to long duration and weather dependency.
Need for robust oversight to ensure quality and adherence to specifications.
Uncertainty regarding small business subcontracting opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $20.1 million to AMERICAN CIVIL CONSTRUCTORS LLC. IGF::CT::IGF CO FLAP CR 62(2) GUANELLA PASS DTFH68-14-B-00003 HEAVY 4R RECONSTRUCTION OF 9.3 MILES OF ROADWAY, INCLUDING: EARTHWORK, CONCRETE WALLS, SOIL NAIL WALL, DRAINGE, AGGREGATE BASE, AND HOT-MIX ASPHALT. CHIP SEAL (OPTION X) FOR 13.7 MILES.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AMERICAN CIVIL CONSTRUCTORS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-03-19. End: 2015-10-31.

What is the track record of American Civil Constructors LLC on similar federal contracts?

A review of federal contract databases indicates that American Civil Constructors LLC has been awarded multiple contracts, primarily within the heavy civil construction domain. Their past performance on projects involving roadway construction, earthwork, and infrastructure development would be a key factor in assessing their capability for this specific project. Analyzing their history for on-time completion, adherence to budget, and quality of work on comparable federal contracts would provide valuable insights. Specific data points such as contract values, project durations, and any documented performance issues or commendations would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment of their track record.

How does the cost per mile of this project compare to similar federal highway reconstruction projects?

The cost per mile for this project is approximately $2.16 million ($20.13 million / 9.3 miles). To benchmark this effectively, comparisons should be made with federal highway reconstruction projects of similar scope (earthwork, walls, drainage, paving) in the same geographic region (Colorado) and with similar contract types (firm fixed price). Factors such as terrain, soil conditions, material costs, and labor rates significantly influence per-mile costs. Without access to a detailed cost breakdown and comparable project data, a definitive value assessment is challenging. However, this figure serves as a starting point for further detailed cost analysis against industry standards and historical data.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being managed?

The primary risks include potential cost overruns due to the fixed-price nature, especially if unforeseen site conditions or scope changes arise through change orders. The extended duration of 591 days increases vulnerability to weather delays, material price fluctuations, and potential impacts on contractor resources. Managing these risks involves robust project management by the contractor, diligent oversight by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and clear communication channels. The contract's firm fixed-price structure inherently places cost risk on the contractor, but the government must ensure adequate oversight to prevent scope creep and manage change orders judiciously. Risk mitigation strategies should be detailed in the project management plan.

What is the historical spending pattern for highway construction by the Federal Highway Administration in Colorado?

Historical spending patterns for highway construction by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in Colorado would reveal the typical scale and frequency of such projects. Analyzing past contract awards, including their values, durations, and types of work, can establish a baseline for current spending. This context helps determine if the $20.13 million award for the Guanealla Pass project is within the expected range for major reconstruction efforts in the state. Significant deviations from historical norms might warrant further investigation into the project's scope, complexity, or market conditions. Understanding these patterns is crucial for budget forecasting and assessing the overall investment in Colorado's transportation infrastructure.

How does the number of bidders (6) influence the potential for cost savings for the government?

A competition with six bidders generally indicates a healthy market for this type of construction service in the region. More bidders typically lead to more competitive pricing as companies vie for the contract. This increased competition can drive down the offered prices, potentially resulting in cost savings for the government compared to a scenario with fewer bidders. The government can leverage this competition to negotiate favorable terms and ensure they are receiving a fair market price. The presence of multiple bidders also provides a stronger basis for evaluating the reasonableness of the winning bid.

What are the implications of the 'Chip Seal (Option X)' for 13.7 miles on the contract's overall cost and risk?

The inclusion of 'Chip Seal (Option X)' for an additional 13.7 miles introduces an element of flexibility and potential cost adjustment. Chip sealing is generally a less expensive surface treatment than full asphalt paving. If this option is exercised, it will increase the total contract value and extend the work scope. The government's decision to exercise this option will depend on budget availability, road conditions, and strategic priorities. From a risk perspective, it adds complexity to scheduling and resource allocation. The contractor's pricing for this option should be evaluated to ensure it reflects fair market value for the additional work.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4901 S WINDERMERE ST, LITTLETON, CO, 80120

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,130,948

Exercised Options: $20,130,948

Current Obligation: $20,130,948

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline