Transportation contract for California port facilities awarded to California SeaLift Terminals, Inc. for over $24.8 million

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $24,834,984 ($24.8M)

Contractor: California Sealift Terminals, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2014-04-17

End Date: 2024-10-15

Contract Duration: 3,834 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Transportation

Official Description: PROVIDE FUNDING FOR BASE YEAR CONTRACT FOR CAPE HORN, HUDSON, AND PETERSBURG AT PIER 50 AND PIER 96 IN SAN FRANCISCO. OBLIGATED AMOUNTS INCLUDE $140,000 FOR UTILITIES. IGF::OT::IGF

Place of Performance

Location: SAN FRANCISCO, SAN FRANCISCO County, CALIFORNIA, 94107

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $24.8 million to CALIFORNIA SEALIFT TERMINALS, INC for work described as: PROVIDE FUNDING FOR BASE YEAR CONTRACT FOR CAPE HORN, HUDSON, AND PETERSBURG AT PIER 50 AND PIER 96 IN SAN FRANCISCO. OBLIGATED AMOUNTS INCLUDE $140,000 FOR UTILITIES. IGF::OT::IGF Key points: 1. Contract provides essential support for maritime operations at key San Francisco piers. 2. Pricing appears competitive given the long-term nature and scope of services. 3. Risk indicators are low due to established contractor and clear service requirements. 4. Performance context suggests a stable, long-term relationship for critical infrastructure. 5. Sector positioning is within water transportation support, a vital component of logistics.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract's total value of over $24.8 million over its duration suggests a significant investment in port infrastructure. While direct comparisons to similar contracts are difficult without more granular data on specific services and locations, the firm-fixed-price structure generally indicates a predictable cost for the government. The inclusion of $140,000 for utilities is a specific cost component that can be benchmarked against regional utility rates. The overall value seems reasonable for maintaining and operating critical port facilities over a decade.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. This competitive process is expected to drive favorable pricing and ensure the government receives the best value. The number of bidders is not specified, but the full and open nature suggests a robust selection process.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to lower prices and higher quality services, ensuring federal funds are used efficiently.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of Transportation and the Maritime Administration by ensuring operational continuity at vital port facilities. Delivers essential support activities for water transportation, facilitating cargo movement and maritime commerce. Geographic impact is concentrated in San Francisco, California, supporting key infrastructure at Pier 50 and Pier 96. Workforce implications include potential employment opportunities for personnel involved in port operations and maintenance.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a fair and transparent procurement process.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Long contract duration (over 10 years) indicates a stable and reliable service provision.
Contractor has a long-standing presence, suggesting experience and capability in this sector.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader 'Other Support Activities for Water Transportation' sector, which is crucial for the efficient functioning of the U.S. maritime industry. This sector includes a range of services necessary for port operations, cargo handling, and vessel support. The market size for such services is substantial, driven by the volume of domestic and international trade. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other long-term port service contracts awarded by federal, state, or local agencies.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by small business set-asides. The primary contractor, California SeaLift Terminals, Inc., is likely a larger entity, and its role in the small business ecosystem would depend on its own subcontracting practices, which are not detailed here.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector General (OIG), which is responsible for auditing and investigating programs and operations. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability by establishing a set cost. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements, though specific performance metrics and oversight activities are not detailed in this summary.

Related Government Programs

Port Infrastructure Development Program
Maritime Security Program
National Defense Reserve Fleet
Water Transportation Services

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may expose government to risks of changing market conditions or technological obsolescence.
Lack of specific performance metrics in summary data makes ongoing evaluation difficult to assess.
Potential for cost overruns if utility costs significantly exceed the allocated $140,000, though this is a fixed component.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $24.8 million to CALIFORNIA SEALIFT TERMINALS, INC. PROVIDE FUNDING FOR BASE YEAR CONTRACT FOR CAPE HORN, HUDSON, AND PETERSBURG AT PIER 50 AND PIER 96 IN SAN FRANCISCO. OBLIGATED AMOUNTS INCLUDE $140,000 FOR UTILITIES. IGF::OT::IGF

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CALIFORNIA SEALIFT TERMINALS, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Maritime Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $24.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2014-04-17. End: 2024-10-15.

What is the historical spending pattern for California SeaLift Terminals, Inc. with the Department of Transportation?

Analyzing the historical spending patterns for California SeaLift Terminals, Inc. with the Department of Transportation requires access to comprehensive contract databases. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to provide a precise pattern. However, the current contract's significant value and long duration suggest a potentially established relationship. Typically, a history of successful contract performance, timely delivery, and adherence to terms would lead to subsequent awards. A review of past contracts, including their value, duration, and performance reviews, would be necessary to fully understand their spending history and the nature of their relationship with the agency.

How does the per-unit cost of services compare to industry benchmarks for similar port support activities?

Determining a precise per-unit cost comparison is challenging without detailed breakdowns of the services provided under this contract and corresponding industry benchmarks. The contract covers a broad range of 'Other Support Activities for Water Transportation.' To perform a valid comparison, one would need to identify specific services (e.g., terminal operations, utility provision, maintenance) and their associated costs, then benchmark these against market rates for similar activities in the San Francisco Bay Area or comparable port regions. The firm-fixed-price nature means the government pays a set amount, making direct per-unit cost analysis dependent on the contractor's internal cost structure and efficiency.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the contractor's performance?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate California SeaLift Terminals, Inc.'s performance. In contracts of this nature, typical KPIs often include metrics related to operational efficiency, safety compliance, environmental standards adherence, timely vessel turnaround, equipment maintenance, and responsiveness to agency needs. Performance evaluations are crucial for ensuring the government receives the contracted services effectively and for informing future contract decisions. A thorough review of the contract's statement of work and performance clauses would be necessary to identify the specific KPIs and evaluation criteria.

What is the potential impact of this contract on regional economic development and employment in San Francisco?

This contract is likely to have a positive impact on regional economic development and employment in San Francisco. By ensuring the continued operation and support of critical port facilities at Pier 50 and Pier 96, the contract supports the broader maritime and logistics industries, which are significant economic drivers for the region. The direct employment generated by the contractor and its potential subcontractors for managing and operating these facilities contributes to local job creation. Furthermore, the reliable functioning of these ports facilitates trade and commerce, indirectly supporting businesses and jobs throughout the supply chain.

Are there any specific risks associated with the long duration of this contract?

The long duration of this contract (over 10 years) presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of technological obsolescence if port operations or support technologies evolve significantly over the contract period, potentially making current methods less efficient. Secondly, economic fluctuations or changes in federal funding priorities could impact the long-term viability or necessity of the services. Thirdly, contractor performance could degrade over time, or the contractor might face financial instability, although the firm-fixed-price structure and established nature of the contractor may mitigate some of these. Finally, there's the risk that the government might be locked into a contract that becomes less advantageous compared to future market conditions or alternative solutions.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Water Transportation › Other Support Activities for Water Transportation

Product/Service Code: TRANSPORT, TRAVEL, RELOCATION › TRANSPORTATION OF THINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3971 DOCTORS LAKE DR, ORANGE PARK, FL, 32065

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $24,834,984

Exercised Options: $24,834,984

Current Obligation: $24,834,984

Actual Outlays: $14,353,906

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTMA91D140002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline