DoD awards $412M highway construction contract to Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. in Arizona

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $412,052,173 ($412.1M)

Contractor: Fisher Sand & Gravel CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2019-12-10

End Date: 2021-04-27

Contract Duration: 504 days

Daily Burn Rate: $817.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: CONSTRUCTION 29 MI PRIMARY BARRIER

Place of Performance

Location: AJO, PIMA County, ARIZONA, 85321

State: Arizona Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $412.1 million to FISHER SAND & GRAVEL CO for work described as: CONSTRUCTION 29 MI PRIMARY BARRIER Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract type is a definitive contract with a firm fixed price, which helps control costs. 3. The duration of 504 days indicates a significant construction project. 4. The award amount of over $412 million places this contract among larger infrastructure projects. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 237310 points to highway, street, and bridge construction. 6. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a component of the Department of Defense. 7. The project is located in Arizona, with the specific state code 'AZ'.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this $412 million contract requires detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar large-scale highway construction projects. Without specific cost drivers or unit prices, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty for the government, which is a positive indicator. The bid-ask spread, if available, would offer further insight into pricing competitiveness.

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 3 bids (no) suggests a moderate level of competition for this significant project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing, but the complexity and scale of the project may limit the pool of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down prices and encourage innovation. The fact that multiple firms submitted bids suggests that taxpayers received a reasonable price for the services rendered, assuming the bidding process was robust.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiary is the Department of Defense, specifically the Department of the Army, which requires infrastructure improvements. The contract delivers highway, street, and bridge construction services. The geographic impact is concentrated in Arizona, contributing to local infrastructure development. The project will likely have implications for the construction workforce in Arizona, creating jobs and demand for skilled labor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the firm fixed-price structure.
Dependence on a single contractor for a large-scale project introduces execution risk.
Limited transparency into the specific cost components of the $412 million award without further data.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty and limits the government's exposure to cost increases.
Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive process that likely yielded a fair price.
The contractor, Fisher Sand & Gravel Co., has experience in large-scale construction projects.

Sector Analysis

The highway, street, and bridge construction sector is a critical component of the broader construction industry, focused on public infrastructure. This contract falls within a segment that often sees significant government investment, particularly from defense agencies for base access and logistical support. Market size for such projects can be substantial, with large contracts awarded annually. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other large federal or state-level highway and bridge construction awards.

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 specifically mandated for small businesses through a set-aside. However, the prime contractor, Fisher Sand & Gravel Co., may still engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on their own procurement practices and the availability of specialized services. The absence of a small business set-aside means the primary competition was likely among larger, established construction firms.

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 Army. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which holds the contractor responsible for delivering the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed cost breakdowns may not always be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Highway Administration Construction Projects
Department of Defense Military Construction
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act Funding

Risk Flags

Large contract value may increase risk of cost overruns if not managed tightly.
Project duration increases exposure to market volatility (materials, labor).
Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $412.1 million to FISHER SAND & GRAVEL CO. CONSTRUCTION 29 MI PRIMARY BARRIER

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FISHER SAND & GRAVEL 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 $412.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2019-12-10. End: 2021-04-27.

What is the historical spending pattern for Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. with the Department of Defense?

Analyzing Fisher Sand & Gravel Co.'s historical spending with the Department of Defense (DoD) would involve reviewing past contract awards. This would help establish a track record of performance, contract values, and types of services rendered. A review of federal procurement data (e.g., FPDS) would reveal if this $412 million contract represents a significant increase or a typical award size for the company within the DoD. Understanding their past performance, including any issues or successes on previous DoD contracts, provides context for assessing the risk and potential value of this current award. Without specific historical data, it's presumed this award is based on their qualifications and competitive bid.

How does the per-unit cost of this contract compare to similar highway construction projects?

Determining the per-unit cost comparison for this $412 million contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns, such as cost per mile of highway, per square foot of bridge, or per cubic yard of material. Federal procurement data often lacks this granular detail in public summaries. To perform a robust comparison, one would need access to the contract's detailed schedule of items and quantities, and then benchmark these against similar projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies (like the Federal Highway Administration) in comparable geographic regions and geological conditions. The firm fixed-price nature suggests the contractor has factored in all anticipated costs, but the 'value for money' is best assessed by comparing these unit costs to market rates or historical averages for similar construction elements.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with this large-scale construction contract?

The primary risk indicators for this $412 million construction contract include the sheer scale and duration (504 days), which inherently increase the potential for unforeseen issues such as material cost fluctuations, labor shortages, or adverse weather impacting the schedule. Despite the firm fixed-price structure, scope creep or change orders could still lead to cost increases if not managed meticulously. The reliance on a single contractor for such a substantial project also presents execution risk; any performance issues or financial instability on the part of Fisher Sand & Gravel Co. could significantly delay or jeopardize the project. Furthermore, the complexity of large infrastructure projects often involves environmental, geological, and permitting risks that must be proactively managed.

What is the expected program effectiveness and impact of this highway construction?

The expected program effectiveness of this highway construction contract hinges on its successful completion within the specified timeline and budget, and its ability to meet the intended infrastructure improvements for the Department of Defense in Arizona. Effective delivery would mean enhanced transportation infrastructure, potentially improving logistical capabilities, base accessibility, or operational readiness for military personnel and equipment. The impact extends to the local economy through job creation in the construction sector and potential long-term benefits from improved transportation networks. The ultimate measure of effectiveness will be the durability, functionality, and utility of the completed infrastructure over its intended lifespan.

How does the competition level (3 bidders) for this contract influence taxpayer value?

A competition level of 3 bidders for a contract of this magnitude ($412 million) suggests a moderate degree of competition. While more bidders generally lead to more aggressive pricing, the specialized nature and significant scale of major highway construction projects can limit the number of qualified firms capable of undertaking such work. Three bidders indicate that the government received multiple proposals, allowing for a comparison of technical approaches and pricing. This level of competition is likely sufficient to prevent monopolistic pricing and encourage a reasonably competitive bid, thereby providing fair value to taxpayers. However, a deeper analysis would require knowing if these were the only qualified bidders or if others were deterred.

Are there any specific performance metrics or milestones tied to this contract's payment schedule?

While the provided data does not detail specific performance metrics or milestones tied to the payment schedule, firm fixed-price contracts typically link payments to the achievement of defined milestones or the completion of specific work phases. For a large construction project like this, common milestones might include site preparation completion, foundation work, structural assembly, paving, and final landscaping or finishing. The Department of the Army would have established a payment schedule within the contract documents, requiring verification of work completion by government representatives before releasing funds. These metrics are crucial for ensuring progress and managing the contractor's cash flow effectively.

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: TWO STEP

Solicitation ID: W912PL20R0006

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3020 ENERGY DR, DICKINSON, ND, 58601

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $412,052,173

Exercised Options: $412,052,173

Current Obligation: $412,052,173

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline