Naval Facilities Engineering Command awarded $10.9M for construction services, with a 6-year performance period

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,925,310 ($10.9M)

Contractor: Parsons RCI Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2002-02-20

End Date: 2009-09-30

Contract Duration: 2,779 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200205!088449!1700!C2742 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COM!N6274200C1329 !A!N! !N! !20020220!20030814!028414394!028414394!021318571!N!ROBISON CONSTRUCTION, INC !3049 UALENA STREET, SUITE !HONOLULU !HI!96819!63050!003!15!PEARL HARBOR !HONOLULU !HAWAII !+000010055409!N!N!000000000000!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234910!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!006!B! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !C!C!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! ! !0001!

Place of Performance

Location: PEARL HARBOR, HONOLULU County, HAWAII, 96860

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.9 million to PARSONS RCI INC. for work described as: 200205!088449!1700!C2742 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COM!N6274200C1329 !A!N! !N! !20020220!20030814!028414394!028414394!021318571!N!ROBISON CONSTRUCTION, INC !3049 UALENA STREET, SUITE !HONOLULU !HI!96819!63050!003!15!PEARL HARBOR !HONOL… Key points: 1. Contract value of $10.9M for construction services. 2. Performance period spans over 6 years, indicating a long-term need. 3. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, a major defense spender. 4. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, shifting risk to the contractor. 5. Competition was full and open, suggesting a robust bidding process. 6. The contract was awarded to Robison Construction, Inc.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $10.9 million for construction services over six years appears reasonable given the duration and scope. Without specific details on the services rendered or comparable projects, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction contracts within the Navy or DoD would provide a clearer picture of its cost-effectiveness.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The data shows 6 bids were received, suggesting a healthy level of interest and competition for this requirement. A competitive bidding process generally leads to better price discovery and can result in more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition for this contract likely resulted in a more competitive pricing structure, potentially saving taxpayer dollars compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

Benefits military personnel and their families by ensuring the upkeep and construction of facilities at Pearl Harbor. Delivers essential construction and maintenance services for naval infrastructure. Geographic impact is concentrated in Hawaii, supporting regional military operations. Supports the construction workforce in Hawaii through employment opportunities.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen construction challenges.
Long performance period could lead to contractor complacency or reduced responsiveness over time.
Dependence on a single contractor for an extended period may limit flexibility in adopting new technologies or methods.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure transfers cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive market for these services.
Long duration provides stability and predictability for facility maintenance and development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically related to non-building facilities. The Department of Defense, and the Navy in particular, are significant investors in construction and infrastructure projects to support their global operations. The market for large-scale military construction is often characterized by a mix of large prime contractors and specialized subcontractors, with significant regulatory and security requirements.

Small Business Impact

While this contract was awarded under full and open competition, there is no explicit indication of a small business set-aside. It is possible that small businesses could participate as subcontractors to the prime contractor, Robison Construction, Inc. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business subcontracting and its impact on the local small business ecosystem in Hawaii.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC), which is responsible for planning, designing, and constructing facilities for the Navy and Marine Corps. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though specific project details might be limited due to security considerations.

Related Government Programs

Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Department of Defense Construction Projects
Military Base Infrastructure Maintenance
Hawaii Construction Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may require active performance management.
Firm Fixed Price shifts risk but requires careful scope definition.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.9 million to PARSONS RCI INC.. 200205!088449!1700!C2742 !NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COM!N6274200C1329 !A!N! !N! !20020220!20030814!028414394!028414394!021318571!N!ROBISON CONSTRUCTION, INC !3049 UALENA STREET, SUITE !HONOLULU !HI!96819!63050!003!15!PEARL HARBOR !HONOLULU !HAWAII !+000010055409!N!N!000000000000!Y299!ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !2000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !234910!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PARSONS RCI 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 $10.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2002-02-20. End: 2009-09-30.

What specific types of non-building facilities were covered under this contract?

The contract data indicates the services were for 'ALL OTHER NON-BUILDING FACILITIES' (PSC code Y299) and the primary classification is 'CONSTRUCTION' (NAICS code 234910). This broad categorization suggests the contract likely encompassed a range of infrastructure projects beyond traditional buildings. Examples could include roads, airfields, utilities, piers, grounds maintenance, and other site improvements essential for naval operations. Without more granular data, the exact scope remains general, but it points to a comprehensive approach to maintaining and developing the physical plant of naval installations.

How does the $10.9 million contract value compare to similar construction contracts awarded by the Navy in Hawaii during that period?

Comparing the $10.9 million contract value to similar Navy construction contracts in Hawaii during the early 2000s requires access to historical procurement data. However, for a multi-year construction project with a firm fixed-price structure, this amount is not unusually large for a significant infrastructure undertaking. The Navy has a substantial presence in Hawaii, necessitating ongoing investment in facilities. To provide a precise benchmark, one would need to analyze contracts with similar scope (e.g., infrastructure, non-building facilities) and duration awarded by NAVFAC or other Navy commands in the region during the contract's performance period (2002-2009).

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or deliverables expected from Robison Construction, Inc. under this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) or detailed deliverables for this contract. However, for a construction contract of this nature and duration, typical KPIs would likely include adherence to project schedules, quality of workmanship, compliance with safety regulations, and completion of work within the agreed-upon scope and budget. Deliverables would encompass the finished construction or renovation of the specified non-building facilities, along with associated documentation such as as-built drawings, warranties, and inspection reports. The firm fixed-price nature implies that meeting these deliverables within cost is the contractor's primary responsibility.

What is the track record of Robison Construction, Inc. with federal contracts prior to and after this award?

Information on Robison Construction, Inc.'s specific track record with federal contracts prior to and after this $10.9 million award is not detailed in the provided data snippet. To assess their performance, one would need to consult federal procurement databases like SAM.gov or FPDS-NG to review their contract history, including past performance evaluations, any disputes or claims, and the types and values of contracts they have held. This would provide insight into their reliability and experience in executing government projects, particularly within the construction domain.

Were there any significant challenges or disputes associated with the performance of this contract?

The provided data does not contain information regarding any significant challenges, disputes, or claims associated with the performance of this contract awarded to Robison Construction, Inc. Typically, such information would be available through contract performance reports, legal filings, or agency audit findings. Without these details, it is assumed the contract was performed without major issues, but a comprehensive review of contract administration records would be necessary for a definitive assessment.

How did the number of bidders (6) influence the final contract price compared to a sole-source scenario?

Having six bidders, as indicated for this contract, generally exerts downward pressure on the price. In a sole-source scenario, where only one contractor is solicited, the government has significantly less leverage to negotiate favorable pricing, potentially leading to higher costs. With multiple competitors vying for the contract, each bidder is incentivized to offer a competitive price to win the award. This competitive dynamic allows the government to secure services at a price closer to the market rate, thus maximizing value for taxpayer dollars. The presence of multiple bids suggests that the market for these construction services was sufficiently robust to attract several interested parties.

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Parsons Corporation (UEI: 030866545)

Address: 3049 UALENA STREET, SUITE, HONOLULU, HI, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline