Fort Stewart chilled water system repair contract awarded to Gilbane Federal for over $20.8 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,837,199 ($20.8M)

Contractor: Gilbane Federal

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-08-19

End Date: 2011-05-06

Contract Duration: 625 days

Daily Burn Rate: $33.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::21 2022::TAS ARRA- FACILITIES REPAIR/RENEWAL FOR CONSTRUCTION EFFORT OF THE CHILLED WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, PHASE II, AT FORT STEWART, GA

Place of Performance

Location: FORT STEWART, LIBERTY County, GEORGIA, 31314

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.8 million to GILBANE FEDERAL for work described as: TAS::21 2022::TAS ARRA- FACILITIES REPAIR/RENEWAL FOR CONSTRUCTION EFFORT OF THE CHILLED WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, PHASE II, AT FORT STEWART, GA Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a large-scale facilities repair project. 2. Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process. 3. Project duration of 625 days indicates a significant construction undertaking. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor. 5. Project located in Georgia, impacting local construction workforce and economy. 6. This contract falls within the broader category of institutional building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of approximately $20.8 million for the chilled water distribution system repair at Fort Stewart is within a typical range for large-scale construction projects of this nature. Without specific benchmarks for similar military facility upgrades, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the fixed-price contract type generally indicates a well-defined scope and encourages cost efficiency from the contractor. The project duration of 625 days suggests a substantial effort, and the award amount seems proportionate to the expected work.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The data shows 3 bidders participated in this process. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive pricing. The presence of multiple bidders suggests a healthy market for this type of construction service.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically leads to better pricing for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment among contractors, driving down costs through bids.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army personnel and operations at Fort Stewart, Georgia, through improved infrastructure. The project delivers essential repairs and upgrades to the chilled water distribution system, ensuring operational continuity. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Stewart, Georgia, potentially creating temporary jobs for the local construction workforce. The project supports the maintenance and modernization of critical military infrastructure.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during construction, despite fixed-price contract.
Delays in project completion could impact base operations.
Quality of work may vary between contractors, requiring robust oversight.

Positive Signals

Fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process, likely resulting in a fair price.
Project addresses critical infrastructure needs, ensuring long-term operational capability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically focusing on infrastructure repair and upgrades for a government facility. The market for military construction and facility maintenance is substantial, with significant annual federal spending. Comparable projects often involve upgrades to utility systems, building renovations, and new construction on military bases. Benchmarks for similar projects would typically consider factors like square footage, complexity of systems being repaired, and geographic location.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not specify any small business set-aside provisions. Therefore, it is unlikely that small businesses were specifically targeted for this prime contract. However, the prime contractor, Gilbane Federal, may engage small businesses as subcontractors to fulfill portions of the work, contributing to the small business ecosystem indirectly.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant project management office within the Department of the Army. Quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs) would likely be in place to monitor the contractor's performance and ensure compliance with contract requirements. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting mechanisms, though detailed daily oversight activities are not publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Infrastructure Modernization
Federal Facilities Repair and Maintenance
Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Utility System Upgrades

Risk Flags

Potential for schedule delays
Risk of unforeseen site conditions
Contractor performance variability

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.8 million to GILBANE FEDERAL. TAS::21 2022::TAS ARRA- FACILITIES REPAIR/RENEWAL FOR CONSTRUCTION EFFORT OF THE CHILLED WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, PHASE II, AT FORT STEWART, GA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GILBANE FEDERAL.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-08-19. End: 2011-05-06.

What is the track record of Gilbane Federal on similar federal construction contracts?

Gilbane Federal, as a subsidiary of Gilbane Building Company, has a significant history of performing large-scale construction and renovation projects for the federal government, including numerous Department of Defense facilities. Their experience often spans military housing, operational facilities, and infrastructure upgrades. While specific performance metrics for this particular contract are not detailed here, their general track record suggests a capacity to handle complex projects. Reviewing past performance evaluations and contract close-out reports for Gilbane Federal on similar projects would provide a more granular understanding of their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedule and budget on federal endeavors.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar chilled water system repair projects at other military installations?

Direct comparison of the $20.8 million award for Fort Stewart's chilled water system repair to similar projects at other military installations is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of comparable contracts with detailed scope and specifications. Factors such as the age and condition of the existing system, the complexity of the distribution network, the specific repair methodologies required, and regional labor and material costs can significantly influence project pricing. However, given the scale implied by a 'Phase II' designation and the duration, the amount appears to be within a reasonable range for major infrastructure work. A more precise benchmark would require analyzing contracts with similar square footage, system complexity, and geographic cost indices.

What are the primary risks associated with this type of construction contract for the government?

The primary risks for the government in this fixed-price construction contract include potential delays in project completion, which could disrupt base operations or require extensions. While the fixed-price nature shifts cost risk to the contractor, there's still a risk of contractor default or poor performance, necessitating government oversight and potential remedies. Unforeseen site conditions or subsurface issues discovered during construction could lead to change orders, increasing the overall cost and schedule, even under a fixed-price agreement. Ensuring the quality of the final work and its long-term durability also presents an ongoing risk that requires diligent inspection and acceptance processes.

How effective has the Army been in managing similar large-scale infrastructure repair projects?

The effectiveness of the Army in managing large-scale infrastructure repair projects can vary significantly depending on the specific installation, the complexity of the project, and the resources allocated for oversight and management. Historically, the Department of Defense has faced challenges with cost overruns and schedule delays on major construction initiatives due to factors like evolving requirements, unforeseen site conditions, and contractor performance issues. However, the Army also has established processes and experienced personnel dedicated to project management and quality assurance. The success of this specific project would depend on robust contract administration, diligent oversight, and effective communication between the government and the contractor.

What has been the historical spending trend for facilities repair and renewal at Fort Stewart?

Analyzing historical spending trends for facilities repair and renewal specifically at Fort Stewart would require access to detailed historical contract data for that installation. This data would typically be found in federal procurement databases and agency budget reports. Without that specific data, it's difficult to provide a precise trend. However, it is generally understood that military installations require continuous investment in maintenance and repair to sustain operational readiness and infrastructure integrity. Spending on such projects can fluctuate based on deferred maintenance backlogs, modernization initiatives, and overall defense budget allocations.

What is the significance of the 'Phase II' designation for this contract?

The 'Phase II' designation for this contract strongly suggests that it is a continuation or a subsequent stage of a larger, previously initiated project related to the chilled water distribution system at Fort Stewart. Phase I likely addressed an initial portion of the repairs or upgrades, and Phase II addresses remaining or related work. This implies a multi-year, multi-contract effort to comprehensively address the system's needs. The significance for taxpayers is that this is part of a larger, potentially more expensive, overall investment in the facility's infrastructure, and the success of Phase I would have informed the scope and approach for Phase II.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT/MINE/EXCAVATE/HIGHWY EQPT

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: W912DY06R0029

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Gilbane, Inc. (UEI: 022726165)

Address: 2730 SHADELANDS DR # 100, WALNUT CREEK, CA, 94598

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $20,837,199

Exercised Options: $20,837,199

Current Obligation: $20,837,199

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912DY08D0032

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline