Harper Construction awarded $92.6M for Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton building project

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $92,625,218 ($92.6M)

Contractor: Harper Construction Company, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-09-25

End Date: 2011-08-19

Contract Duration: 693 days

Daily Burn Rate: $133.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 23

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: USMC BEQ PACKAGE 6, P046, P357 AND P1114, MCB CAMP PENDLETON

Place of Performance

Location: CAMP PENDLETON, SAN DIEGO County, CALIFORNIA, 92055

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $92.6 million to HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. for work described as: USMC BEQ PACKAGE 6, P046, P357 AND P1114, MCB CAMP PENDLETON Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in base infrastructure. 2. Project scope includes multiple building packages, indicating a complex construction effort. 3. Fixed-price contract type suggests a defined scope and cost control by the government. 4. Awarded in 2009, the project spanned nearly two years, reflecting typical construction timelines. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy, a major DoD component. 6. The project was competed under full and open competition, suggesting broad market engagement.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $92.6 million for construction services at Camp Pendleton appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale military construction projects would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure generally offers good cost certainty for the government, assuming the initial scope was well-defined and change orders were managed effectively. Without specific details on the buildings constructed, a direct per-unit cost comparison is difficult, but the overall award amount aligns with the scale of major infrastructure development on a large military installation.

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 bids. This approach typically fosters a competitive environment, encouraging multiple bidders to offer their best pricing and technical solutions. The presence of 23 bids suggests robust competition, which is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving a fair market price for the government. A higher number of bidders often correlates with more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition with 23 bidders is a positive indicator for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a more competitive price than a sole-source or limited competition award. This broad engagement maximizes the opportunity to secure the best value for public funds.

Public Impact

Military personnel and their families stationed at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton will benefit from improved facilities. The project delivers essential construction services, enhancing the operational readiness and living conditions on the base. The geographic impact is concentrated at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton in California. The construction activities likely supported a significant number of jobs in the construction sector within the local and regional economy.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the initial scope was not fully defined or if significant change orders were required.
Construction projects of this magnitude can face delays due to unforeseen site conditions or material availability.
Ensuring compliance with environmental regulations and building codes throughout the construction process is critical.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition with a substantial number of bidders suggests a competitive pricing environment.
The project addresses critical infrastructure needs for a major military installation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. The U.S. construction market is vast, with government contracts forming a substantial portion. This specific award contributes to the Department of Defense's ongoing efforts to modernize and maintain its facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects awarded by the Navy or other branches, considering factors like project type, location, and economic conditions at the time of award.

Small Business Impact

While the contract was awarded to Harper Construction Company, Inc., and the data indicates no specific small business set-aside (ss: false) or subcontracting goals (sb: false) were explicitly noted in this summary, large prime contracts often involve subcontracting opportunities. It is common for prime contractors on projects of this scale to engage small businesses for specialized services or materials. Further investigation into the subcontracting plan would be needed to fully assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting and engineering departments. Accountability measures are typically embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, payment schedules tied to milestones, and potential penalties for non-compliance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arose during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction (MILCON)
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) projects
Department of Defense Facilities Modernization
Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep leading to cost increases.
Risk of construction delays due to unforeseen site conditions or external factors.
Ensuring quality control and adherence to specifications throughout the project lifecycle.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $92.6 million to HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC.. USMC BEQ PACKAGE 6, P046, P357 AND P1114, MCB CAMP PENDLETON

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HARPER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, 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 $92.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-09-25. End: 2011-08-19.

What was the specific nature of the 'BEQ PACKAGE' construction work at Camp Pendleton?

The 'BEQ PACKAGE' likely refers to Bachelor Enlisted Quarters, which are housing facilities for unmarried enlisted military personnel. The contract designation 'USMC BEQ PACKAGE 6, P046, P357 AND P1114' suggests this award encompassed multiple distinct projects or phases related to BEQ construction or renovation at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. These packages could include new building construction, upgrades to existing structures, or related site work necessary to provide adequate and modern living accommodations for enlisted Marines. The scope would typically involve site preparation, foundation work, structural framing, installation of utilities, interior finishing, and potentially landscaping and parking facilities.

How does the $92.6 million award compare to other similar construction projects for military barracks or BEQs?

Comparing the $92.6 million award requires context regarding the number of units, square footage, and specific amenities included in the BEQ packages. Large-scale military housing projects can vary significantly in cost. For instance, a single large BEQ building might cost tens of millions, while multiple packages could easily push the total into the high tens or hundreds of millions. Without specific unit counts or detailed scope comparisons, it's challenging to definitively benchmark this award. However, for a project involving multiple packages at a major base like Camp Pendleton, the value appears within a plausible range for significant infrastructure development aimed at improving enlisted personnel housing.

What were the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price construction contract?

For a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, the primary risk for the government is that the contractor may face unforeseen cost increases (e.g., material price spikes, labor shortages) and absorb those losses, potentially leading to quality compromises or contractor default if the price is too low. Conversely, the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. For the government, risks include inadequate definition of the scope, leading to change orders that increase the total price, or the contractor cutting corners on quality to maintain profitability. Delays due to site conditions, permitting, or labor disputes are also inherent risks in large construction projects, regardless of contract type.

What is the typical performance period for a construction contract of this magnitude?

Construction contracts of this magnitude, involving multiple building packages and a total value of $92.6 million, typically have performance periods ranging from one to several years. The data indicates an award date of September 25, 2009, and an estimated completion date of August 19, 2011, giving a duration of approximately 693 days (around 23 months or just under two years). This timeframe is consistent with large-scale construction projects that require extensive planning, site work, phased construction, and final inspections. The duration reflects the complexity and scale of building multiple structures or significant portions of infrastructure.

How does the number of bids (23) influence the final contract price and value for the government?

A higher number of bids, such as the 23 received for this contract, generally indicates robust competition. Robust competition typically drives down prices as contractors strive to offer the most competitive bids to win the contract. This increased number of bidders allows the government to select from a wider pool of offers, increasing the likelihood of obtaining a price that reflects fair market value. For taxpayers, this means the government is more likely to secure the construction services at a cost-effective rate, maximizing the value derived from public funds. It also reduces the risk of price gouging often associated with sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: TWO STEP

Solicitation ID: N6247309R1214

Offers Received: 23

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2241 KETTNER BLVD STE 300, SAN DIEGO, CA, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $92,625,218

Exercised Options: $92,625,218

Current Obligation: $92,625,218

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline