DoD's $30.7M PACAF HQ Repair Contract Awarded to Allied Pacific Builders Inc. for Phase 7

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $30,743,932 ($30.7M)

Contractor: Allied Pacific Builders Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2018-07-20

End Date: 2022-03-03

Contract Duration: 1,322 days

Daily Burn Rate: $23.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF WR372707 REPAIR HQ PACAF B1102, PHASE 7

Place of Performance

Location: PEARL HARBOR, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96860

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $30.7 million to ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS INC for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF WR372707 REPAIR HQ PACAF B1102, PHASE 7 Key points: 1. Contract value of $30.7 million for facility repair and maintenance. 2. Awarded to Allied Pacific Builders Inc. under full and open competition. 3. Performance period spans over three years, indicating a significant project scope. 4. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts risk to the contractor. 5. Geographic focus on Hawaii suggests a localized impact on construction services. 6. The project is part of a larger, multi-phase repair effort for PACAF HQ. 7. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to commercial and institutional building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $30.7 million for facility repair and maintenance appears substantial. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects within the Department of Defense or for similar institutional facilities would be necessary for a precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator if the price is competitive. However, without detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to independent cost estimates, it's difficult to definitively assess if the price represents excellent value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded for defined reasons. The presence of two bidders suggests a moderate level of competition. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and a wider range of innovative solutions. The limited number of bidders here might suggest specific qualifications were required, potentially narrowing the field and impacting price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, despite a limited number of bidders, aims to ensure fair pricing for taxpayers. However, with only two bids, there's a possibility that a more competitive environment could have yielded even lower prices.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) Command, receiving upgraded facilities. Services delivered include significant repair and maintenance work on headquarters infrastructure. The geographic impact is concentrated in Hawaii, supporting local economic activity and employment in the construction sector. Workforce implications include job creation for construction workers, project managers, and support staff in Hawaii. The project contributes to the operational readiness and infrastructure integrity of a key U.S. military command in the Pacific.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise during repairs, despite fixed-price contract.
Dependence on a single contractor for a multi-year, critical infrastructure project.
Risk of schedule delays impacting PACAF operations if contractor performance falters.
Limited competition (2 bidders) may have resulted in a higher-than-optimal price.
Scope creep could occur if additional repair needs are identified beyond the initial contract.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Awarded under full and open competition, promoting a degree of market fairness.
Long-term contract allows for sustained focus on facility improvement.
Contractor has a defined period to complete repairs, ensuring accountability.
Project addresses critical infrastructure needs for a major military command.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, specifically addressing the needs of a large government facility. The construction industry is a significant part of the U.S. economy, with government contracts forming a substantial segment. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military base construction or renovation projects, particularly those managed by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies, to gauge cost-effectiveness and pricing norms.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this contract, as indicated by 'sb': false and 'ss': false. There is no explicit small business set-aside. This suggests that the prime contract was likely awarded to a large business capable of handling the scale and complexity of the project. Subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may exist, but they are not detailed in this summary. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal unless significant subcontracting roles are filled by them.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Navy contracting activity. The firm fixed-price nature provides some accountability by placing cost risk on the contractor. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or alleged during the contract's performance or closeout.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facility Renovation Programs
Air Force Base Infrastructure Improvement Projects
Pacific Command Facility Maintenance Contracts
General Services Administration (GSA) Public Building Service Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited competition (2 bidders) may indicate potential for higher pricing.
Contract duration (over 3 years) increases exposure to market fluctuations and performance risks.
NAICS code 236220 covers a broad range of construction activities, requiring specific expertise.
Potential for unforeseen site conditions in facility repair projects.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $30.7 million to ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS INC. IGF::OT::IGF WR372707 REPAIR HQ PACAF B1102, PHASE 7

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ALLIED PACIFIC BUILDERS 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 $30.7 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2018-07-20. End: 2022-03-03.

What is the track record of Allied Pacific Builders Inc. on similar government contracts?

Assessing the track record of Allied Pacific Builders Inc. requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving large-scale construction and repair for military installations. Information from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) or Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) would be crucial. Key metrics to examine include on-time delivery, adherence to budget (especially on fixed-price contracts), quality of work, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. A history of successful project completion on similar projects would indicate a lower risk profile for this current contract. Conversely, a pattern of delays, cost overruns, or quality issues would raise concerns about their ability to execute this $30.7 million project effectively.

How does the awarded price compare to industry benchmarks for similar facility repair projects?

To benchmark the $30.7 million award price, one would need to compare it against the costs of similar facility repair and construction projects, both within the Department of Defense and for comparable institutional or commercial buildings. This involves analyzing data from projects with similar scope, size, location, and complexity. Factors such as the specific types of repairs (e.g., structural, HVAC, electrical), the age and condition of the facility, and prevailing labor and material costs in Hawaii are critical. Without access to detailed cost breakdowns or a database of comparable project costs, it is challenging to definitively state whether this price represents excellent, fair, or questionable value. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests the government sought to lock in costs.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they being mitigated?

The primary risks associated with this contract include potential schedule delays, cost overruns (though mitigated by the fixed-price structure), and contractor performance issues. Given the multi-year duration and the nature of facility repairs, unforeseen conditions or scope changes could arise. Mitigation strategies typically involve robust contract oversight, clear performance metrics, defined change order processes, and potentially liquidated damages clauses for delays. The firm fixed-price contract itself is a risk mitigation tool, placing the financial burden of cost increases on Allied Pacific Builders Inc. The limited competition (two bidders) also presents a risk, as it may indicate fewer qualified contractors or a less competitive bidding environment, potentially leading to a less optimal price.

What is the historical spending pattern for facility maintenance and repair at PACAF HQ?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for facility maintenance and repair at PACAF HQ is essential for understanding the context of this $30.7 million award. This would involve examining contract data over several preceding years to identify trends in spending levels, types of services procured, and the contractors historically awarded these types of contracts. Significant fluctuations or a consistent increase in spending could indicate aging infrastructure requiring more intensive repairs or a strategic investment in facility upgrades. Understanding this history helps in assessing whether the current contract represents a typical investment, a surge in necessary work, or potentially an area of concern regarding cost efficiency over time.

How does the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause impact the fairness and competitiveness of the award?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause signifies that while the solicitation was broadly advertised, certain potential offerors were intentionally excluded. The reasons for exclusion must be justified and documented, often relating to specific technical requirements, security clearances, or past performance issues. This approach aims to ensure that only qualified and suitable contractors participate, potentially leading to a higher quality outcome. However, it inherently limits the pool of competitors compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The fairness hinges on the validity and necessity of the exclusions. The competitiveness is reduced by the smaller number of eligible bidders, which could influence pricing and innovation.

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 AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N6247813R4010

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2045 LAUWILIWILI ST STE 1302, KAPOLEI, HI, 96707

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, HUBZone Firm, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $30,743,932

Exercised Options: $30,743,932

Current Obligation: $30,743,932

Actual Outlays: $11,602,639

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247816D4006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline