With the funding for Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) pretty much dwindling away, Giants firms that perform work for the Pentagon and the military branches can expect fairly significant cuts in project spending in the next year or so.
The proposed military construction budget for FY2013 is $11.2 billion, down 24% from the previous fiscal year. Election-year politics could also have a chilling effect on spending, adding to the uncertainty.
Nonetheless, the military remains a huge consumer of design and construction services. DoD’s portfolio of 300,000 buildings totaling 2.2 billion sf is six times larger than the General Services Administration’s. With energy costs running at $4 billion a year, the Pentagon is taking aggressive steps to cut operating costs for its facilities.
These efforts include pilot programs for net-zero energy, water, and waste in military facilities, as well as improved living facilities for bachelor personnel and military families. Construction of VA hospitals and long-term care facilities likely will also be ramped up. +
TOP 25 MILITARY SECTOR ARCHITECTURE FIRMS
| Rank | Company | 2011 Military Revenue ($) |
| 1 | HDR Architecture | $99,700,000 |
| 2 | Heery International | $43,475,000 |
| 3 | RTKL Associates | $17,173,273 |
| 4 | Leo A Daly | $14,753,871 |
| 5 | RSP Architects | $11,000,000 |
| 6 | VOA Associates | $9,590,331 |
| 7 | LS3P Associates | $9,224,882 |
| 8 | Sherlock, Smith & Adams | $8,830,000 |
| 9 | HOK | $8,749,412 |
| 10 | Gensler | $7,500,000 |
| 11 | EwingCole | $7,000,000 |
| 12 | Reynolds, Smith and Hills | $6,300,000 |
| 13 | HNTB Architecture | $6,059,352 |
| 14 | Flad Architects | $6,000,000 |
| 15 | ZGF Architects | $5,137,746 |
| 16 | EYP Architecture & Engineering | $4,764,411 |
| 17 | Tetra Tech Architects & Engineers | $4,525,000 |
| 18 | KZF Design Inc. | $3,913,026 |
| 19 | PGAL | $3,607,900 |
| 20 | CTA Architects Engineers | $3,003,900 |
| 21 | Fentress Architects | $2,909,000 |
| 22 | RNL | $2,793,000 |
| 23 | Rosser International | $2,592,113 |
| 24 | Cooper Carry | $2,140,420 |
| 25 | Hammel, Green and Abrahamson | $2,031,000 |
TOP 25 MILITARY SECTOR ENGINEERING FIRMS
| Rank | Company | 2011 Military Revenue ($) |
| 1 | Fluor Corp. | 2,123,247,000 |
| 2 | URS Corp. | 431,776,114 |
| 3 | Science Applications International Corp. | 97,512,998 |
| 4 | Jacobs | 91,000,000 |
| 5 | Michael Baker Jr., Inc. | 69,450,000 |
| 6 | Burns & McDonnell | 54,856,212 |
| 7 | Atkins North America | 48,350,538 |
| 8 | Clark Nexsen | 41,000,000 |
| 9 | Allen & Shariff | 38,323,273 |
| 10 | STV | 15,475,000 |
| 11 | Eaton Energy Solutions | 12,169,598 |
| 12 | Dewberry | 11,401,250 |
| 13 | BRPH | 10,500,000 |
| 14 | Parsons Brinckerhoff | 8,592,246 |
| 15 | Barge Waggoner Sumner & Cannon | 8,000,000 |
| 16 | Guernsey | 6,467,256 |
| 17 | Smith Seckman Reid | 6,400,000 |
| 18 | KCI Technologies | 5,795,000 |
| 19 | Newcomb & Boyd | 4,696,144 |
| 20 | KPFF Consulting Engineers | 4,000,000 |
| 21 | H&A Architects & Engineers | 3,906,402 |
| 22 | Rolf Jensen & Associates | 3,000,000 |
| 23 | Coffman Engineers | 2,800,000 |
| 24 | TLC Engineering for Architecture | 2,748,782 |
| 25 | Simpson Gumpertz & Heger | 2,604,000 |
TOP 25 MILITARY SECTOR CONSTRUCTION FIRMS
| Rank | Company | 2011 Military Revenue ($) |
| 1 | Clark Group | 1,090,166,857 |
| 2 | Balfour Beatty US | 790,265,417 |
| 3 | Gilbane Building | 552,002,000 |
| 4 | BL Harbert International | 547,000,000 |
| 5 | Lend Lease | 515,594,471 |
| 6 | URS Corp. | 431,776,114 |
| 7 | Hensel Phelps Construction | 381,090,000 |
| 8 | Walsh Group, The | 371,979,780 |
| 9 | Whiting-Turner Contracting Co., The | 346,805,961 |
| 10 | Tutor Perini Corp. | 292,764,000 |
| 11 | Hunt Companies | 263,617,817 |
| 12 | Mortenson | 262,560,000 |
| 13 | JE Dunn Construction | 245,661,074 |
| 14 | Weitz Co., The | 227,710,000 |
| 15 | Turner Corporation, The | 227,184,376 |
| 16 | Manhattan Construction Group | 214,768,000 |
| 17 | Sundt Construction | 172,519,845 |
| 18 | Walbridge | 134,300,000 |
| 19 | Yates Co., Inc., The | 133,900,000 |
| 20 | CORE Construction | 117,844,700 |
| 21 | Coakley & Williams Construction, Inc. | 103,386,324 |
| 22 | Haskell | 94,752,188 |
| 23 | Jacobs | 91,000,000 |
| 24 | Suffolk Construction | 85,766,599 |
| 25 | McCarthy Holdings | 70,000,000 |
Related Stories
| May 7, 2012
2012 BUILDING TEAM AWARDS: Fort Belvoir Community Hospital
A new military hospital invokes evidence-based design to create a LEED-certified facility for the nation’s soldiers and their families.
| May 7, 2012
2012 BUILDING TEAM AWARDS: Audie L. Murphy VA Hospital
How a Building Team created a high-tech rehabilitation center for wounded veterans of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
| May 3, 2012
2012 BUILDING TEAM AWARDS: Rush University Medical Center
This fully integrated Building Team opted for a multi-prime contracting strategy to keep construction going on Chicago’s Rush University Medical Center, despite the economic meltdown.
| May 3, 2012
U of Michigan team looking to create highly efficient building envelope designs
The system combines the use of sensors, novel construction materials, and utility control software in an effort to create technology capable of reducing a building’s carbon footprint.
| May 3, 2012
Best commercial modular buildings and marketing programs recognized
Judges scored entries on architectural excellence, technical innovation, cost effectiveness, energy efficiency, and calendar days to complete.
| May 3, 2012
Zero Energy Research Lab opens at North Texas
The living lab—the only one of its kind in Texas—is designed to test various technologies and systems in order to achieve a net-zero consumption of energy.
| May 3, 2012
NSF publishes ANSI standard evaluating the sustainability of single ply roofing membranes
New NSF Standard provides manufacturers, specifiers and building industry with verifiable, objective criteria to identify sustainable roofing products.
| May 3, 2012
Gilbane to provide CM services for North Reading’s integrated middle/high school
The project scope includes a wastewater treatment plant, demolition of the existing high school and extensive athletic fieldwork.
