Department of the Army awards $31.6M design/build contract for brigade and battalion facilities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $31,616,581 ($31.6M)

Contractor: Hensel Phelps Construction CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-09-13

End Date: 2007-04-01

Contract Duration: 200 days

Daily Burn Rate: $158.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: DESIGN/BUILD BRIGADE AND BATTALION

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80913

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $31.6 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO for work described as: DESIGN/BUILD BRIGADE AND BATTALION Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in military infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive bidding environment. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 4. Short performance period indicates a focused project scope. 5. Awarded by the Department of the Army, highlighting defense infrastructure priorities. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237990 points to heavy civil engineering construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $31.6 million for a design/build project of this nature requires benchmarking against similar military construction projects. Without specific details on the scope of work, it's challenging to definitively assess value for money. However, the fixed-price nature of the contract provides some cost certainty. The number of bidders (9) suggests a degree of market interest, which can be a positive indicator for pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with nine bids received. This indicates a robust bidding process where multiple qualified contractors had the opportunity to compete. A higher number of bidders generally suggests a more competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and terms for the government. The agency's decision to use full and open competition implies confidence in the availability of multiple sources for this type of construction service.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers by fostering a competitive bidding environment. This approach ensures that the government receives proposals from a wide range of qualified contractors, driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel who will utilize the new brigade and battalion facilities. The contract delivers design and construction services for critical military infrastructure. The geographic impact is localized to the area where the facilities are constructed, likely a military installation. The project will likely involve a workforce of construction professionals, engineers, and project managers.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if design changes are extensive or unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the fixed-price contract.
Ensuring the design meets all operational requirements and future adaptability needs for the brigade and battalion.
Managing the short performance period to ensure timely completion without compromising quality.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract type helps mitigate cost escalation risks for the government.
Full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests a competitive pricing structure.
The project addresses a clear need for military infrastructure, indicating strategic alignment.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically related to military infrastructure development. The market for military construction is substantial, driven by ongoing modernization efforts and operational needs of the armed forces. This project represents a specific instance of federal investment in building and facility construction, a segment that often sees significant government spending, particularly for defense agencies. Benchmarking would involve comparing this contract's cost and scope to other similar military construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate a small business set-aside. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific set-aside goals or reporting requirements, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is unclear, though prime contractors may engage small businesses for specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or a designated contracting officer within the Department of the Army. Accountability measures are embedded in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified design and construction services. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress and specific oversight activities may not be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Program
Army Facilities Modernization
Design-Build Contracts
Heavy Civil Engineering Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep if initial design is not sufficiently detailed.
Risk of delays due to unforeseen site conditions.
Ensuring quality control throughout the accelerated construction timeline.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $31.6 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO. DESIGN/BUILD BRIGADE AND BATTALION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $31.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-09-13. End: 2007-04-01.

What specific design and construction requirements were included in this contract?

The contract, identified by award number DCA, was for the 'DESIGN/BUILD BRIGADE AND BATTALION' facilities. While the specific technical specifications are not detailed in the provided data, the 'design/build' nature implies that the contractor, Hensel Phelps Construction Co., was responsible for both the architectural and engineering design phase as well as the physical construction of the facilities. This typically includes site preparation, foundation work, structural erection, installation of utilities, and finishing. The project aimed to provide necessary infrastructure for a brigade and battalion, suggesting the construction of administrative buildings, barracks, training areas, or support facilities, depending on the specific military installation's needs.

How does the $31.6 million award compare to similar military construction projects?

Benchmarking this $31.6 million award requires comparing it to similar design-build projects for military brigade and battalion facilities. Projects of this scale can vary significantly based on location, specific facility types (e.g., barracks vs. specialized training centers), and prevailing construction costs in the region. For instance, a barracks complex might have a different per-square-foot cost than a vehicle maintenance facility. Without access to a database of comparable military construction contracts with detailed scope and cost breakdowns, a precise comparison is difficult. However, $31.6 million is a substantial sum, indicative of a significant construction undertaking, likely involving multiple buildings or complex infrastructure elements.

What are the potential risks associated with a fixed-price contract for a design-build project?

While fixed-price contracts are intended to control costs, they carry inherent risks for both the government and the contractor, especially in design-build scenarios. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability if unforeseen issues arise during design or construction, or if initial cost estimates were too low. Conversely, the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns due to design complexities, unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil issues, hazardous materials), or material price escalations. Effective risk mitigation relies on a well-defined scope of work, thorough pre-construction site investigations, robust quality assurance processes, and clear change order management procedures.

What is the significance of awarding this contract under 'full and open competition'?

Awarding this contract under 'full and open competition' signifies that the Department of the Army sought proposals from all responsible sources capable of meeting the requirements. This approach is generally preferred as it maximizes the potential for competition, theoretically leading to the best value for the government in terms of price, quality, and performance. Receiving nine bids, as indicated, suggests a healthy level of interest and capability within the construction market for this type of project. This competitive process helps ensure that the selected contractor, Hensel Phelps Construction Co., was chosen based on a thorough evaluation of their technical approach, past performance, and price, rather than through a restricted or sole-source process.

What does the short contract duration (200 days) imply for the project's scope and execution?

A contract duration of 200 days (approximately 6-7 months) for a design-build project of this magnitude suggests a highly focused and potentially streamlined scope of work. This compressed timeline implies that the design phase must be efficient, and the construction activities are likely concentrated on specific, well-defined facilities rather than an extensive base expansion. It could indicate a need for rapid deployment of capabilities or the replacement/upgrade of existing structures with minimal disruption. Successfully executing a design-build project within such a short timeframe requires meticulous planning, efficient project management, and potentially the use of pre-fabricated components or accelerated construction methods.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9128F06R0023

Offers Received: 9

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 420 6TH AVE, GREELEY, CO, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $31,616,581

Exercised Options: $31,616,581

Current Obligation: $31,616,581

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline