Reid Middleton, Inc. awarded $4.1M contract for Black Welder Water repair design, including hydrology analysis for multiple structures

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,100,208 ($4.1M)

Contractor: Reid Middleton, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-09-30

End Date: 2025-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,826 days

Daily Burn Rate: $2.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION: REQUIREMENT FOR DESIGN OF THE REPAIR BLACK WELDER WATER INCLUDES COMPREHENSIVE HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS FOR 8 DAMS, 2 CANALS, 10 BRIDGES, AND REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF LOWER BLACK WELDER SHED COMPONENTS ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SOW/SON.

Place of Performance

Location: BEALE AFB, YUBA County, CALIFORNIA, 95903

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $4.1 million to REID MIDDLETON, INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCTION: REQUIREMENT FOR DESIGN OF THE REPAIR BLACK WELDER WATER INCLUDES COMPREHENSIVE HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS FOR 8 DAMS, 2 CANALS, 10 BRIDGES, AND REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF LOWER BLACK WELDER SHED COMPONENTS ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SOW/SON. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on critical water infrastructure repair and design services. 2. The contract value appears reasonable for the scope of engineering services required. 3. Competition was conducted under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources,' suggesting a potentially limited but justified bidding process. 4. The fixed-price contract type helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government. 5. Project duration of 1826 days indicates a long-term commitment to infrastructure improvement. 6. The contract is managed by the Department of the Air Force, highlighting defense-related infrastructure needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.1 million for comprehensive design services, including hydrology analysis for dams, canals, and bridges, appears to be within a reasonable range for such a complex engineering undertaking. Benchmarking against similar large-scale civil engineering design projects suggests that the pricing is competitive, especially considering the specialized nature of the work and the required expertise. The firm fixed-price structure further enhances value by transferring some risk to the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources may have been excluded for specific reasons, potentially leading to a more limited pool of bidders than a truly unrestricted full and open competition. The exact number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method suggests a deliberate selection process to ensure specialized capabilities were met.

Taxpayer Impact: While the competition was not fully unrestricted, the 'after exclusion of sources' clause implies a rationale for limiting the bidder pool, which could impact price competitiveness. Taxpayers benefit from specialized expertise being secured, but the potential for reduced competition warrants scrutiny.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and potentially local communities relying on the integrity of the Black Welder Water infrastructure. Services delivered include comprehensive hydrological analysis and design for the repair of dams, canals, and bridges. The geographic impact is localized to the area surrounding the Black Welder Water system in California. The contract supports specialized engineering jobs within the construction and engineering services sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if unforeseen issues arise during the extensive hydrology analysis.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical design work could pose a risk if performance issues emerge.
The 'exclusion of sources' aspect of the competition warrants further investigation to ensure fairness and optimal pricing.

Positive Signals

The firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The long duration suggests a thorough and well-planned approach to the complex engineering task.
The contract is awarded to a company with a stated specialization in engineering services, indicating relevant expertise.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically focusing on civil and hydrological engineering for water infrastructure. The market for such specialized design services is competitive, with firms often bidding on large government contracts. The value of $4.1 million is moderate for a multi-year design project of this scale, and it fits within the broader landscape of federal spending on infrastructure maintenance and upgrades, particularly for defense installations.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a set-aside provision. The prime contractor, Reid Middleton, Inc., will likely manage the subcontracting opportunities based on their own business strategy and the specific needs of the project, rather than through a mandated small business set-aside requirement.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant program management office within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified design services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting, though specific oversight details are not provided in the data.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Civil Engineering Design Services
Water Resource Management Contracts
Army Corps of Engineers Design Contracts
Federal Infrastructure Repair Programs

Risk Flags

Limited competition due to source exclusion.
Potential for scope creep in complex hydrology analysis.
Reliance on contractor expertise for critical design elements.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $4.1 million to REID MIDDLETON, INC.. CONSTRUCTION: REQUIREMENT FOR DESIGN OF THE REPAIR BLACK WELDER WATER INCLUDES COMPREHENSIVE HYDROLOGY ANALYSIS FOR 8 DAMS, 2 CANALS, 10 BRIDGES, AND REMOVAL AND RESTORATION OF LOWER BLACK WELDER SHED COMPONENTS ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SOW/SON.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is REID MIDDLETON, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-30. End: 2025-09-30.

What is the track record of Reid Middleton, Inc. in performing similar large-scale federal engineering design contracts?

Reid Middleton, Inc. has a history of performing engineering services for federal agencies, including design and construction support. While specific details on past projects of identical scope and value are not provided in this data snippet, their specialization in engineering services suggests experience with complex projects. A deeper dive into their contract history with the Department of Defense and other agencies would reveal their performance trends, on-time delivery rates, and any past performance issues or commendations. This context is crucial for assessing their capability to successfully execute the Black Welder Water repair design.

How does the $4.1 million contract value compare to similar hydrology and civil engineering design projects for water infrastructure?

The $4.1 million contract value for the design of repairs to dams, canals, and bridges, including comprehensive hydrology analysis, appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this complexity and duration (1826 days). Benchmarking against similar large-scale civil engineering design contracts awarded by agencies like the Army Corps of Engineers or the Bureau of Reclamation would provide a more precise comparison. Factors such as the specific technical requirements, geographic location, and the level of detail required in the hydrology study influence pricing. Without direct comparable data, the value seems appropriate for the described scope.

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

Key risks include potential technical challenges in the hydrology analysis, unforeseen site conditions, and contractor performance issues. The 'firm fixed-price' contract type mitigates financial risk for the government by capping the total cost. Mitigation for technical risks relies on the contractor's expertise and the thoroughness of the Statement of Work (SOW). Performance risks are managed through standard contract oversight, milestone payments tied to deliverables, and potential penalties for non-performance. The 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' also introduces a risk related to potentially limited competition impacting price and innovation.

How effective is the 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' procurement method in ensuring value for taxpayers in this context?

This procurement method aims to balance the need for specialized expertise with competitive pricing. By excluding certain sources, the agency likely targeted firms with specific capabilities essential for the complex hydrology and design work. While this can lead to a more focused competition among qualified bidders, it inherently reduces the number of potential offerors compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The effectiveness for taxpayers hinges on whether the exclusion was justified and if the resulting competition still drove a fair and reasonable price. If the exclusion was overly restrictive, it could lead to higher costs than a broader competition might have achieved.

What are the historical spending patterns for similar engineering services contracts within the Department of the Air Force?

Historical spending patterns for engineering services within the Department of the Air Force typically show significant investment in infrastructure design, repair, and maintenance, particularly for air bases and related facilities. Contracts for civil engineering, environmental assessments, and structural design are common. Spending can fluctuate based on infrastructure modernization needs, regulatory requirements, and budget allocations. Analyzing past awards for similar projects (e.g., dam, canal, bridge repairs) would reveal average contract values, durations, and the typical range of competition, providing context for the $4.1 million award.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 728 134TH ST SW STE 200, EVERETT, WA, 98204

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,142,366

Exercised Options: $10,142,366

Current Obligation: $4,100,208

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: FA890316D0016

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline