DoD's $14.8M Industrial Building Construction contract awarded to Strand Hunt Construction, Inc. in 2004

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,838,566 ($14.8M)

Contractor: Strand Hunt Construction, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-03-31

End Date: 2013-08-19

Contract Duration: 3,428 days

Daily Burn Rate: $4.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: TAS::21 2020::TAS EIE183

Place of Performance

Location: EIELSON AFB, FAIRBANKS NORTH STAR County, ALASKA, 99702

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.8 million to STRAND HUNT CONSTRUCTION, INC. for work described as: TAS::21 2020::TAS EIE183 Key points: 1. Contract awarded in 2004 for industrial building construction, indicating a long-term project. 2. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process. 3. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests predictable costs for the government. 4. The contract duration of 3428 days (over 9 years) points to a significant, extended project. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the DoD. 6. The project is located in Alaska (AK), a region with unique logistical and environmental considerations.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $14.8 million for industrial building construction over a 9-year period appears reasonable given the duration and potential scope. However, without specific details on the project's deliverables, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar large-scale industrial construction projects in remote or challenging environments like Alaska would be necessary for a more definitive comparison. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract helps mitigate cost overrun risks for the government.

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 suggests a competitive environment where multiple contractors likely vied for the award. The number of bids received (5) is a moderate level of competition, which generally aids in price discovery and can lead to more favorable pricing for the government compared to limited or sole-source procurements.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive award process like this generally benefits taxpayers by promoting market-driven pricing and encouraging efficiency among bidders, potentially leading to cost savings.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and its personnel who will utilize the constructed industrial facilities. The contract delivers essential industrial building infrastructure, likely supporting military operations, logistics, or maintenance. The geographic impact is concentrated in Alaska (AK), potentially stimulating local economic activity through construction jobs and material sourcing. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, project managers, and support staff in Alaska.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration (over 9 years) increases the risk of scope creep or unforeseen challenges impacting final costs.
Construction in Alaska presents unique logistical and environmental challenges that could lead to delays or increased expenses.
Limited competition (5 bidders) might not represent the absolute best value achievable in a more saturated market.
Lack of specific project details makes it difficult to assess the true value and performance against initial expectations.

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.
The contractor, Strand Hunt Construction, Inc., has experience in construction projects.
The project addresses a clear need for industrial facilities within the Department of Defense.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Industrial Building Construction sector, a critical component of the broader Construction industry. This sector involves the erection of specialized facilities for manufacturing, processing, storage, and other industrial activities. The market size for such specialized construction can vary significantly based on economic conditions and government investment priorities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale industrial or military facility construction contracts awarded by federal agencies, particularly in challenging geographic locations.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a specific set-aside requirement (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary impact on small businesses would be through potential subcontracting opportunities if Strand Hunt Construction, Inc. chooses to engage them. The absence of a set-aside suggests the primary focus was on securing the best overall bid from any responsible source, rather than specifically promoting small business involvement in the prime contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting office. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, delivery schedules, and payment milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Department of Defense Facilities Management
Industrial Infrastructure Development
Government Contracting

Risk Flags

Long contract duration
Construction in remote/challenging environment (Alaska)
Potential for unforeseen site conditions
Limited number of bidders

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.8 million to STRAND HUNT CONSTRUCTION, INC.. TAS::21 2020::TAS EIE183

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is STRAND HUNT CONSTRUCTION, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-03-31. End: 2013-08-19.

What specific industrial facilities were constructed under this contract, and what is their current operational status?

The provided data identifies the contract as 'Industrial Building Construction' (NAICS 236210) but lacks specific details about the type of facilities built. These could range from warehouses and maintenance shops to manufacturing plants or specialized processing centers. To determine their current operational status, one would need to consult the contract's final delivery reports, post-occupancy evaluations, or current asset inventories managed by the Department of the Army. Without this granular information, it's impossible to assess if the constructed facilities are still in use, have been repurposed, or are obsolete. Further investigation into the contract's performance and close-out documentation would be required.

How did the final cost compare to the initial estimated cost, and were there any significant change orders?

The data indicates a 'Firm Fixed Price' (pt) contract type with a total award amount (a) of $14,838,565.52. Firm fixed-price contracts are designed to provide cost certainty, meaning the final cost should ideally align closely with the awarded price, barring exceptional circumstances. However, the long duration (dur: 3428 days) increases the possibility of change orders due to unforeseen conditions, design modifications, or scope adjustments. To assess how the final cost compared to the initial estimate and identify any significant change orders, one would need to review the contract's modification history and financial reconciliation records. This information is typically available through agency procurement data systems or by direct request to the contracting activity.

What was the performance history of Strand Hunt Construction, Inc. on this specific contract and other government contracts?

The provided data confirms Strand Hunt Construction, Inc. (co) as the awardee. Assessing their performance history on this specific contract would require accessing performance evaluation reports (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) associated with this award. These reports detail the contractor's adherence to schedule, quality of work, cost control, and overall management. To understand their broader track record, a search of federal procurement databases for other contracts awarded to Strand Hunt Construction, Inc. and their associated performance ratings would be necessary. A pattern of high ratings would indicate reliability, while consistent low ratings could signal potential risks for future procurements.

Were there any significant risks or challenges encountered during the contract's execution, and how were they mitigated?

Given the contract's duration (over 9 years) and location in Alaska (st: AK), potential risks likely included logistical complexities, harsh weather conditions, environmental compliance, and potential labor shortages. The firm fixed-price nature suggests the contractor bore much of the cost risk. Mitigation strategies would have been dependent on the specific challenges faced but could have included detailed logistical planning, phased construction schedules to account for weather, robust environmental impact assessments, and proactive workforce recruitment. Formal risk mitigation plans are often part of the contract documentation, and any significant issues encountered and resolved would likely be documented in contract modification files or performance reports.

How does the per-square-foot construction cost compare to similar industrial building projects in Alaska or other remote regions?

The provided data does not include the square footage of the constructed facilities, making a direct per-square-foot cost comparison impossible. The total award amount is $14.8 million. To perform this analysis, the total square footage of the completed buildings would be required. Additionally, data on comparable industrial construction projects in Alaska or similar remote/challenging environments, including their cost per square foot, would be needed. Such data might be found in industry cost estimating databases, construction market reports, or through analysis of other government contracts for similar facilities in comparable locations.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Industrial Building Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 12900 NE 180TH STREET, SUI, BOTHELL, WA, 98011

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

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline