Navy awards $9.8M for port operations, with 4 bids received under full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $9,813,020 ($9.8M)

Contractor: Maritime Berthing Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-04-12

End Date: 2011-05-02

Contract Duration: 1,846 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Place of Performance

Location: WEBSTER, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77598

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $9.8 million to MARITIME BERTHING INC for work described as: Key points: 1. Contract awarded at a competitive price point, suggesting good value for taxpayer funds. 2. The full and open competition indicates a healthy market for port operations services. 3. No immediate risk indicators identified, but performance history will be key. 4. This contract supports essential maritime infrastructure maintenance and operations. 5. Positioned within the Defense sector, specifically supporting naval readiness. 6. The firm-fixed-price structure transfers some risk to the contractor.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $9.8 million over approximately five years appears reasonable given the scope of port and harbor operations. Benchmarking against similar contracts for naval base support would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the government has a clear understanding of the costs involved, and the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which is generally favorable for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, with four bids received. This level of competition is generally positive, suggesting that multiple capable vendors were aware of and interested in the opportunity. The presence of four bidders indicates a reasonably competitive market for these services, which should contribute to price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process ensures that taxpayers receive the best possible price for the services rendered, as multiple companies vie for the contract.

Public Impact

The Department of the Navy benefits from the continued operation and maintenance of its port facilities. Services include essential port and harbor operations, ensuring readiness and logistical support. The geographic impact is concentrated in Texas, where the contractor is based. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for personnel skilled in maritime operations and logistics.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if not managed tightly, given the duration.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical port operations could pose a risk if performance falters.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract aligns incentives for cost control.
Competitive award suggests a robust market and potentially good pricing.
Contract duration provides stability for essential services.

Sector Analysis

Port and harbor operations are a critical component of the defense industrial base, ensuring the logistical capabilities of naval forces. This sector involves specialized services for maintaining and operating port facilities, including dredging, mooring, and vessel traffic management. The market size for such services is substantial, driven by both military and commercial shipping needs. This contract fits within the broader category of base operations support for the Department of Defense.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. The award to a larger entity suggests that the scale or specialized nature of the services may have favored larger, established firms. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses could have realistically competed or participated in subcontracting roles.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is subject to standard Department of the Navy oversight for performance and financial management. As a firm-fixed-price contract, oversight will focus on ensuring the contractor meets the defined scope of work and service levels. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, and any significant issues would likely fall under the purview of the Naval Inspector General.

Related Government Programs

Naval Base Operations Support
Port Infrastructure Maintenance
Maritime Logistics Services
Harbor Dredging and Management

Risk Flags

Potential for performance degradation over long contract duration.
Dependence on contractor for critical infrastructure operations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $9.8 million to MARITIME BERTHING INC. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MARITIME BERTHING INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $9.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-04-12. End: 2011-05-02.

What is the track record of MARITIME BERTHING INC in performing similar port and harbor operations contracts for the Department of Defense?

A review of federal procurement data indicates that MARITIME BERTHING INC has a history of performing contracts related to port and harbor operations. While specific details on past performance quality require deeper investigation into contract performance reports (CPARS), the company's continued awards suggest a baseline level of capability. It is important to analyze past performance ratings, any instances of contract disputes or terminations, and the overall scope and value of previous contracts to fully assess their track record. Without access to detailed performance reviews, it's difficult to definitively state their historical success, but the award itself implies they met the minimum requirements for this contract.

How does the awarded price compare to the estimated cost or independent government cost estimate for this port operations contract?

The provided data does not include the government's estimate or the specific bid prices of the other three competitors, only the total award amount of $9.8 million. To assess value for money, this award amount would need to be compared against an independent government cost estimate (IGCE) or the bids submitted by other firms. If the award was significantly below the IGCE or if other bids were substantially higher, it would indicate strong price competition and good value. Conversely, if the award was at or above the IGCE, further scrutiny of the pricing structure and the necessity of the services would be warranted. The firm-fixed-price nature suggests the government aimed for cost certainty.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for port and harbor operations?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, while generally favorable to the government for cost control, lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or service to maintain profitability if their initial cost estimates were too low or if unforeseen issues arise. For port and harbor operations, this could manifest as reduced maintenance schedules, less frequent dredging than optimal, or inadequate safety protocols. Another risk is contractor default or poor performance, which could disrupt critical naval operations. The government's risk is mitigated by robust oversight, clear performance metrics, and the ability to exercise contract remedies, but the impact of a disruption can still be significant.

What is the historical spending trend for Port and Harbor Operations (NAICS 488310) by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending data for NAICS code 488310 by the Department of the Navy would reveal the overall investment in port and harbor operations over time. Analyzing this trend can indicate whether spending is increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable, potentially reflecting changes in naval strategy, infrastructure needs, or budget allocations. A consistent or increasing trend might suggest a growing reliance on these services or ongoing infrastructure modernization. A decreasing trend could signal consolidation, outsourcing shifts, or reduced operational tempo. Understanding this context helps evaluate the significance of the current $9.8 million award within the Navy's broader spending patterns for this service category.

How does the duration of this contract (1846 days) impact the assessment of its value and risk?

The contract duration of approximately five years (1846 days) provides stability for essential port and harbor operations, ensuring continuity of service for the Department of the Navy. From a value perspective, a longer duration can allow for economies of scale and potentially better pricing through a longer-term commitment. However, it also increases the risk associated with contractor performance over time; issues that might be minor in a shorter contract could become significant problems over five years. The firm-fixed-price nature helps mitigate cost escalation risk for the government over this period, but performance risk remains. Regular performance reviews and clear communication channels are crucial for managing this extended engagement.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Transportation and Warehousing › Support Activities for Water Transportation › Port and Harbor Operations

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1219 WOODLAND DR, SEABROOK, TX, 36

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline