Army's $88M Fort Lewis construction contract awarded to M.A. Mortenson Company in 2008
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $88,047,616 ($88.0M)
Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2008-08-20
End Date: 2014-06-19
Contract Duration: 2,129 days
Daily Burn Rate: $41.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: FY08 ARMY GROWTH COMPLEX (BRIGADE/BATTALION/COF/TEMF), FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON - PN 68842 & PN 68845
Place of Performance
Location: JOINT BASE LEWIS MCCHORD, PIERCE County, WASHINGTON, 98433
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $88.0 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: FY08 ARMY GROWTH COMPLEX (BRIGADE/BATTALION/COF/TEMF), FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON - PN 68842 & PN 68845 Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of over 2000 days indicates a long-term construction project. 3. Firm Fixed Price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 4. The project is located at Fort Lewis, Washington, a significant Army installation. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific cost breakdowns or comparable project data. The raw award amount of over $88 million for a large construction project at a major military installation is substantial. However, without details on the scope of work (e.g., specific buildings, square footage, complexity), it's difficult to assess if the pricing was competitive or represented good value for money. The firm fixed-price nature implies cost certainty, which is a positive aspect for government budgeting.
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 a bid. The data shows there were 2 bids received (no: 2). A low number of bids can sometimes suggest limited market interest or potential barriers to entry, which could impact price discovery. However, without knowing the total number of solicitations or potential bidders, it's hard to definitively assess the level of competition.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition, even with a limited number of bids, generally provides taxpayers with a better opportunity for competitive pricing compared to sole-source or limited solicitations. This process aims to ensure the government receives the best possible price through market forces.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel and operations at Fort Lewis, Washington, who will utilize the new or improved facilities. The contract delivers construction services for military facilities, likely supporting brigade, battalion, or company-level operations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Washington state, specifically at Fort Lewis. The project likely involved a significant construction workforce, including skilled trades and laborers, contributing to local employment.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Limited number of bids (2) could indicate potential lack of robust competition, possibly leading to higher prices than if more firms had bid.
- The long duration (2129 days) increases the risk of cost overruns due to inflation, material price fluctuations, or unforeseen site conditions, despite the fixed-price nature.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under 'full and open competition,' which is a standard and preferred method for ensuring broad market access and competitive pricing.
- Firm Fixed Price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, mitigating the risk of unexpected cost increases.
- The project is for a critical military installation (Fort Lewis), suggesting it addresses essential operational needs.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector (NAICS 236220). This sector is a significant part of the broader construction industry, encompassing the building of non-residential structures. Federal construction spending, particularly for military installations, represents a substantial portion of this market. Comparable benchmarks would involve other large-scale military construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense, considering factors like project type, location, and economic conditions at the time of award.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation (sb: false) was not a specific set-aside for this contract. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or actual subcontracting to small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem from this specific contract award is not discernible from the provided data.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and engineering commands, with potential involvement from the Department of Defense Inspector General for audits and investigations. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Accountability measures would include performance monitoring, adherence to contract terms, and quality control during construction.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction, Army
- Facilities Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (FSRM)
- Department of Defense Construction Projects
- Army Corps of Engineers Construction Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for limited competition due to low bid count.
- Risk of cost escalation or delays on long-duration fixed-price contracts.
- Lack of detailed scope of work makes value assessment difficult.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, fort-lewis, washington, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, large-contract, military-construction
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $88.0 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. FY08 ARMY GROWTH COMPLEX (BRIGADE/BATTALION/COF/TEMF), FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON - PN 68842 & PN 68845
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 $88.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2008-08-20. End: 2014-06-19.
What specific types of buildings or facilities were constructed or renovated under this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract was for 'FY08 ARMY GROWTH COMPLEX (BRIGADE/BATTALION/COF/TEMF), FORT LEWIS, WASHINGTON'. This suggests the construction or renovation of facilities to support Army growth at the brigade, battalion, or company level. This could include barracks, administrative buildings, training facilities, maintenance shops, or other operational infrastructure. However, the exact nature and scope of the 'complex' are not detailed in the provided data points, making it difficult to specify the precise types of buildings.
How does the per-square-foot cost of this project compare to similar military construction projects awarded around the same time?
Direct comparison of per-square-foot cost is not possible with the given data, as the total square footage of the constructed complex is not provided. To perform such a comparison, one would need the total square footage built or renovated, the detailed cost breakdown, and data on similar projects awarded by the Department of the Army or other branches of the DoD during FY2008-2014. Factors like building type (e.g., barracks vs. specialized training facility), material costs, and labor rates in the specific geographic region would also need to be considered for an accurate benchmark.
What was the track record of M. A. Mortenson Company with the Department of Defense prior to this award?
Information on M. A. Mortenson Company's specific track record with the Department of Defense prior to August 2008 is not included in the provided data points. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing their contract history with the DoD, including past performance evaluations, any disputes or claims filed, and the types and values of previous contracts. This information is typically available through federal procurement databases and could reveal patterns of successful project completion or potential areas of concern.
Were there any significant cost overruns or delays experienced during the execution of this contract?
The provided data indicates the contract was awarded on August 20, 2008, and had an end date of June 19, 2014, with a duration of 2129 days. This duration is substantial. While the contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which aims to control costs, long-duration projects are susceptible to unforeseen issues. Without specific performance reports, audit findings, or contract modification details, it is not possible to determine if there were significant cost overruns or delays beyond the initial scope and timeline.
What is the historical spending trend for similar construction projects at Fort Lewis or within the Department of the Army?
The provided data focuses on a single contract award. To analyze historical spending trends for similar construction projects at Fort Lewis or within the Department of the Army, one would need access to aggregated spending data over multiple fiscal years. This would involve querying databases for contracts categorized under military construction, facility upgrades, or specific building types within the Army and at that installation. Analyzing such trends would reveal patterns in investment, identify periods of increased or decreased spending, and potentially highlight shifts in construction priorities or budget allocations.
How did the two bids received compare in terms of price and technical approach?
The provided data only states that the contract was awarded under full and open competition and that 2 bids were received (no: 2). It does not include details about the specific pricing or technical proposals submitted by the bidders. To understand how the bids compared, one would need access to the source selection decision document or bid abstracts, which would typically detail the evaluation criteria, the scores or rankings of each bidder, and the rationale for selecting M. A. Mortenson Company as the awardee. This information is often considered sensitive procurement data.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 2
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: M. a. Mortenson Companies, Inc. (UEI: 130731797)
Address: 700 MEADOW LN N, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $88,047,616
Exercised Options: $88,047,616
Current Obligation: $88,047,616
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: W912DQ07D0053
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2008-08-20
Current End Date: 2014-06-19
Potential End Date: 2014-06-19 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2014-06-19
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)