Fort Ord electrical replacement contract awarded to Pacific Gas and Electric Company for $19.5M

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,532,157 ($19.5M)

Contractor: Pacific GAS and Electric Company

Awarding Agency: Department of the Interior

Start Date: 2024-09-26

End Date: 2026-12-29

Contract Duration: 824 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: GOGA 149650 - REPLACE ELECTRICAL AT FORT

Place of Performance

Location: SAN FRANCISCO, SAN FRANCISCO County, CALIFORNIA, 94123

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of the Interior obligated $19.5 million to PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY for work described as: GOGA 149650 - REPLACE ELECTRICAL AT FORT Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable given the scope of replacing electrical infrastructure. 2. Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential for competitive savings. 3. Long contract duration (over 2 years) may introduce risks related to cost escalation or technological obsolescence. 4. Project is critical for maintaining essential services at a major federal facility. 5. Focus on infrastructure upgrades positions the contract within a broader trend of federal facility modernization. 6. Fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without detailed scope of work and specific infrastructure needs. However, the $19.5 million price tag for a comprehensive electrical system replacement at a large facility like Fort Ord is not inherently excessive. The firm fixed-price structure aims to control costs, but the lack of competition means there's no direct market comparison to assess if this represents the best possible value. Further analysis would require understanding the specific components being replaced and the associated labor and material costs.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning only one vendor, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, was solicited. This approach is typically used when a unique capability or circumstance exists, such as the utility provider being the only entity capable of performing the work due to infrastructure ownership or regulatory requirements. The lack of competition means that taxpayers did not benefit from a competitive bidding process, which could have potentially driven down the price or led to innovative solutions from multiple offerors.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition means taxpayers may have paid a premium compared to what could have been achieved through a fully competed contract. Price discovery through market forces was bypassed.

Public Impact

Federal employees and military personnel at Fort Ord will benefit from reliable and safe electrical power. The National Park Service will ensure continued operational capacity for its facilities at the site. The project's geographic impact is localized to Fort Ord, California. Local construction and electrical trades may see some indirect employment benefits through subcontracting, though this is not explicitly detailed.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pressure, potentially impacting cost-effectiveness.
Long contract duration increases exposure to potential cost overruns or scope creep if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single utility provider for critical infrastructure could pose risks if that provider faces operational issues.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Project addresses essential infrastructure needs, ensuring operational continuity.
Award to an established utility provider suggests a degree of reliability for execution.

Sector Analysis

Electrical power distribution and infrastructure maintenance are critical components of the broader utilities and construction sectors. Federal spending in this area often involves large, complex projects requiring specialized expertise and significant capital investment. This contract fits within the government's ongoing efforts to maintain and upgrade aging federal facilities, ensuring reliable service delivery. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale utility upgrades at federal installations or municipal projects of similar scope.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to include a small business set-aside. Given the sole-source nature and the likely requirement for specialized utility infrastructure work, it is improbable that significant subcontracting opportunities for small businesses will be mandated or readily available, unless Pacific Gas and Electric Company voluntarily engages them for specific tasks outside their core utility operations.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely fall under the National Park Service's contracting and facilities management divisions. As a firm fixed-price contract, the primary oversight will focus on ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope, schedule, and quality standards. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, but detailed project progress reports may not be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Buildings and Facilities
Utility Infrastructure Modernization
Department of the Interior Capital Investments

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Long contract duration
Critical infrastructure replacement

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of the Interior awarded $19.5 million to PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY. GOGA 149650 - REPLACE ELECTRICAL AT FORT

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of the Interior (National Park Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-09-26. End: 2026-12-29.

What is the specific scope of work for the electrical system replacement at Fort Ord?

The provided data indicates the contract is for 'REPLACE ELECTRICAL AT FORT' and falls under the Product Service Code (PSC) for Electric Power Distribution. However, the precise scope of work, including the specific components to be replaced (e.g., substations, underground lines, distribution panels, lighting systems), the extent of the upgrade (e.g., capacity increase, modernization of technology), and the detailed specifications, is not available in the provided summary. A comprehensive understanding of the scope is crucial for a thorough value assessment and to determine if the sole-source justification is fully warranted.

How does the $19.5 million cost compare to similar federal electrical infrastructure projects?

Direct comparison of the $19.5 million cost is difficult without detailed project scope and location specifics. However, large-scale electrical infrastructure replacements at federal facilities can range from several million to tens of millions of dollars, depending on the size of the installation, the age and condition of the existing system, and the complexity of the upgrade. For instance, similar projects involving substation upgrades or extensive underground line replacements at military bases or large federal campuses have incurred costs in a similar order of magnitude. The firm fixed-price nature of this contract aims to cap the government's expenditure, but the lack of competition prevents a direct benchmark against other bids for this specific project.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical infrastructure?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for critical infrastructure like electrical systems include a lack of competitive pricing, potentially leading to higher costs for taxpayers. Without competing bids, there is less incentive for the contractor to offer the most cost-effective solution. Additionally, the government foregoes the opportunity to explore innovative approaches or technologies that might have been proposed by multiple vendors. This can also limit the government's leverage in negotiating terms and conditions. While sole-source awards are justified in specific circumstances (e.g., unique capabilities), they inherently reduce market pressure for efficiency and value.

What is Pacific Gas and Electric Company's track record with federal contracts?

Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) is a major utility provider in California, primarily serving residential, commercial, and industrial customers. While their core business is utility operations, large utility companies often engage with government entities for infrastructure projects, maintenance, and energy services. Specific details on PG&E's historical performance on federal contracts, including their success rate, past performance ratings, and any significant issues or disputes, would require a deeper dive into federal procurement databases (like SAM.gov or FPDS) and potentially agency-specific contract award histories. Their extensive experience in managing large-scale electrical infrastructure within their service territory suggests a capacity to handle such projects.

What are the potential long-term implications of this contract for Fort Ord's operational capabilities?

This contract is crucial for ensuring the long-term operational capabilities of Fort Ord. By replacing aging electrical infrastructure, the project aims to enhance reliability, reduce the risk of power outages, improve safety, and potentially increase the capacity to support modern equipment and energy demands. A robust and modern electrical system is fundamental for all operations on the installation, from administrative functions to any ongoing missions or facility maintenance. The successful completion of this project should bolster the facility's resilience and support its continued use for federal purposes.

How does the duration of the contract (over 2 years) impact risk and value?

A contract duration of over two years (824 days) for electrical system replacement introduces several considerations. On the positive side, it allows for a phased approach to complex work, potentially minimizing disruption to ongoing operations. However, a longer duration also increases the risk of cost escalation due to inflation, material price fluctuations, or unforeseen site conditions that may emerge over time. For a firm fixed-price contract, the contractor assumes much of this risk, but it could be factored into the initial pricing. Additionally, longer timelines can sometimes lead to a decrease in contractor focus or potential delays if not managed proactively. The government's oversight needs to be diligent throughout the entire period.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Electric Power Distribution

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 300 LAKESIDE DR, OAKLAND, CA, 94612

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $21,308,778

Exercised Options: $19,532,157

Current Obligation: $19,532,157

Actual Outlays: $4,073,416

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: GS00P14BSD1137

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline