DoD awards $17.6M for hydraulic turbine fabrication, raising questions on value and competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,595,897 ($17.6M)

Contractor: Andritz Hydro Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-12-27

End Date: 2015-12-23

Contract Duration: 1,822 days

Daily Burn Rate: $9.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: FUNDING IS FOR HYDRAULIC TURBINE MODEL FABRICATION. AWARD IS FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO TURBINE RUNNERS INCLUDING TWO UNIT REWINDS AT HILLS CREEK DAM IN OREGON.

Place of Performance

Location: OAKRIDGE, LANE County, OREGON, 97463

State: Oregon Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.6 million to ANDRITZ HYDRO CORP for work described as: FUNDING IS FOR HYDRAULIC TURBINE MODEL FABRICATION. AWARD IS FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO TURBINE RUNNERS INCLUDING TWO UNIT REWINDS AT HILLS CREEK DAM IN OREGON. Key points: 1. The contract's value appears high relative to the scope of work, suggesting potential overpricing. 2. Limited competition may have inflated costs, as only three bids were received. 3. The firm-fixed-price structure offers some cost certainty but doesn't guarantee optimal value. 4. The long duration of the contract (over 5 years) warrants scrutiny for potential cost overruns or scope creep. 5. The award is concentrated in a niche manufacturing sector, limiting broader market comparisons. 6. The absence of small business set-asides means potential benefits for smaller firms are missed.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The award of $17.6 million for two turbine runners and two unit rewinds at Hills Creek Dam seems high when benchmarked against similar projects. While specific cost breakdowns are unavailable, the price per unit, considering the complexity and scope, warrants further investigation. The firm-fixed-price nature provides some cost control, but the overall expenditure requires a deeper dive into the contractor's pricing structure and justification to ensure fair market value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with three bids received. While this indicates an attempt to solicit broad interest, the low number of bidders suggests potential barriers to entry or limited market availability for such specialized services. The competition level, while technically open, may not have been robust enough to drive down prices to the lowest feasible point.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited number of bidders in this specialized field means taxpayers may not have benefited from the most competitive pricing achievable in a broader market.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and potentially the reliability of power generation at Hills Creek Dam. The contract delivers essential components for hydroelectric power infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to Oregon, where the dam is located. The workforce implications are likely within the specialized manufacturing and engineering sectors related to turbine production.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing sector, a specialized area of industrial equipment production. The market for such large-scale hydroelectric components is relatively concentrated, with a few key players. The $17.6 million award represents a significant investment in maintaining or upgrading critical energy infrastructure, fitting within the broader context of federal investments in energy security and resource management.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small businesses to participate in this significant federal contract were likely limited, potentially excluding them from a substantial portion of the supply chain for this project.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is a definitive contract awarded by the Department of the Army, part of the Department of Defense. Oversight would typically involve contract management by the procuring agency, ensuring adherence to the firm-fixed-price terms and delivery schedules. Transparency is moderate, with basic award details available, but deeper insights into performance and cost justification would require further inquiry.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, large-contract, manufacturing, oregon, turbine-manufacturing, infrastructure, energy

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.6 million to ANDRITZ HYDRO CORP. FUNDING IS FOR HYDRAULIC TURBINE MODEL FABRICATION. AWARD IS FOR THE PURCHASE OF TWO TURBINE RUNNERS INCLUDING TWO UNIT REWINDS AT HILLS CREEK DAM IN OREGON.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ANDRITZ HYDRO CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $17.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-12-27. End: 2015-12-23.

What is the track record of ANDRITZ HYDRO CORP with federal contracts, particularly in turbine manufacturing?

ANDRITZ HYDRO CORP has a history of securing federal contracts, often in the energy and infrastructure sectors. Their experience typically includes the manufacturing and servicing of turbines and related equipment for power generation facilities. While specific performance metrics for past federal contracts are not detailed here, their continued success in winning bids suggests a level of competence and reliability in delivering complex engineering solutions. Further analysis would involve reviewing past contract performance reports, any documented disputes or awards, and their overall financial stability to fully assess their track record.

How does the $17.6 million cost compare to similar turbine replacement or fabrication contracts?

Benchmarking the $17.6 million cost requires detailed comparison with contracts for similar scope, scale, and complexity. Factors such as turbine size, power output, specific site conditions, and the extent of services (fabrication vs. installation vs. maintenance) significantly influence pricing. Without access to a database of comparable federal or large-scale private sector turbine contracts, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for two turbine runners and rewinds, this figure appears substantial, suggesting that either the turbines are exceptionally large and complex, or the pricing may be on the higher end, warranting a closer look at the cost justification provided by the contractor.

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

The primary risks include potential cost overruns due to the long duration (over 5 years), technical challenges in fabrication or integration, and the possibility of the contractor not meeting performance specifications. Mitigation strategies likely involve the firm-fixed-price structure, which shifts some cost risk to the contractor, and the government's oversight of contract milestones and quality control. However, the limited competition might reduce the incentive for the contractor to aggressively manage costs. The long timeline also increases the risk of unforeseen site conditions or changes in regulatory requirements impacting the project.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for money in this context?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in providing cost certainty to the government, as the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. This can incentivize efficiency and cost control on the part of the contractor. However, in highly specialized manufacturing like turbine fabrication, where technical complexity and potential unforeseen issues are significant, an FFP contract might lead the contractor to build in substantial contingency into their price, potentially inflating the initial cost. The effectiveness in ensuring value for money also depends heavily on the accuracy of the initial cost estimates and the robustness of the competition that informed the pricing.

What are the historical spending patterns for hydraulic turbine fabrication by the Department of Defense?

Historical spending data for hydraulic turbine fabrication by the Department of Defense is not readily available in a summarized format. However, the DoD, through entities like the Army Corps of Engineers, does engage in projects related to water infrastructure and power generation at military installations or related facilities. Such spending would likely be project-specific and infrequent, given the specialized nature of the requirement. Analyzing past contracts for similar equipment or services, if available, would provide context on the typical scale and frequency of such procurements within the DoD.

What is the significance of the 'Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing' NAICS code (333611) in terms of market size and competition?

The NAICS code 333611, 'Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing,' represents a specialized segment of the industrial machinery manufacturing sector. The market size for this specific code can be substantial, driven by demand for power generation equipment across various sectors (energy, defense, infrastructure). However, the number of firms operating within this niche is typically limited due to high capital requirements, specialized expertise, and complex manufacturing processes. This often leads to concentrated markets with fewer competitors, potentially impacting the level of price competition for large-scale procurements like this one.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingEngine, Turbine, and Power Transmission Equipment ManufacturingTurbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: ENGINES AND TURBINES AND COMPONENT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9127N09R0063

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Andritz AG (UEI: 300197993)

Address: 10735 DAVID TAYLOR DR STE 500, CHARLOTTE, NC, 28262

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,482,408

Exercised Options: $17,595,897

Current Obligation: $17,595,897

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2010-12-27

Current End Date: 2015-12-23

Potential End Date: 2015-12-23 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2021-11-22

More Contracts from Andritz Hydro Corp

View all Andritz Hydro Corp federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending