Army Awards $17.3M for Alaska Conservation Facilities Construction to Kelly-Ryan Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $17,279,300 ($17.3M)

Contractor: Kelly Ryan Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-07-11

End Date: 2014-06-09

Contract Duration: 3,255 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200512!501318!2100!W911KB!USA ENGR DISTR ALASKA !W911KB05C0016 !A!N! !N! ! !20050711!20070411!097250823!097250823!097250823!N!KELLY-RYAN INC !2404 BOYER AVE E !SEATTLE !WA!98112!24660!013!02!FALSE PASS CITY !ALEUTIANS EAST !ALASKA !+000000100000!N!N!000019729300!Y219!OTHER CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!A! !D!N!C! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !Z! !A!A!000!A!B!Y!T!N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ANCHORAGE, ANCHORAGE County, ALASKA, 99508

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $17.3 million to KELLY RYAN INC for work described as: 200512!501318!2100!W911KB!USA ENGR DISTR ALASKA !W911KB05C0016 !A!N! !N! ! !20050711!20070411!097250823!097250823!097250823!N!KELLY-RYAN INC !2404 BOYER AVE E !SEATTLE !WA!98112!24660!013!02!FALSE PASS CITY !ALEU… Key points: 1. The contract value of $17.3 million for conservation facilities construction in Alaska. 2. Competition was full and open, indicating a competitive bidding process. 3. Potential risks include project delays or cost overruns given the remote location and construction type. 4. The sector is Construction, specifically heavy and civil engineering.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $17.3 million appears reasonable for a large-scale construction project of this nature, though specific benchmarks for 'Other Conservation & Development Facilities' are not readily available. Further analysis would require comparison to similar projects in similar geographic regions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. This method generally promotes price discovery and competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of the award is positive for taxpayers, as it likely resulted in a more favorable price than a sole-source or limited competition contract.

Public Impact

Construction of conservation facilities can lead to improved environmental protection and resource management in Alaska. The project supports local and potentially regional economic activity through job creation and material sourcing. Long-term benefits may include enhanced public access to natural resources and improved infrastructure for conservation efforts.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 100 / 10

Warning Flags

Remote location in Alaska may present logistical challenges and increase costs.
Construction projects can be subject to weather-related delays.
Firm Fixed Price contracts can shift risk to the contractor, but may also lead to higher initial bids.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process.
The project addresses conservation, a potentially beneficial public good.
The contract duration of over 8 years indicates a significant, long-term undertaking.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically 'Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction.' Spending in this area can fluctuate based on infrastructure needs and government priorities. Benchmarks for similar conservation facility projects in remote areas are difficult to ascertain without more specific data.

Small Business Impact

While the awardee is Kelly-Ryan Inc., a private company, the data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved as subcontractors. Further investigation would be needed to assess small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The award was made by the Department of the Army, indicating oversight by a federal agency. The contract's duration and value suggest it would be subject to standard federal procurement regulations and oversight processes.

Related Government Programs

Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to remote location.
Risk of project delays due to weather and logistical challenges.
Limited information on specific conservation outcomes and success metrics.
Firm Fixed Price may include higher contingency costs.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $17.3 million to KELLY RYAN INC. 200512!501318!2100!W911KB!USA ENGR DISTR ALASKA !W911KB05C0016 !A!N! !N! ! !20050711!20070411!097250823!097250823!097250823!N!KELLY-RYAN INC !2404 BOYER AVE E !SEATTLE !WA!98112!24660!013!02!FALSE PASS CITY !ALEUTIANS EAST !ALASKA !+000000100000!N!N!000019729300!Y219!OTHER CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT FACILITIES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KELLY RYAN 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 $17.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-07-11. End: 2014-06-09.

What specific conservation goals does this facility aim to achieve, and how will its success be measured?

The specific conservation goals are not detailed in the provided data. Typically, such facilities support environmental protection, wildlife management, or natural resource preservation. Success measurement would likely involve post-construction environmental impact assessments, operational efficiency metrics, and achievement of stated conservation targets, requiring further documentation review.

What are the primary risks associated with constructing facilities in remote Alaskan locations, and how were they mitigated in the contract?

Primary risks include extreme weather, logistical challenges for material and personnel transport, limited local resources, and potential environmental sensitivities. Mitigation strategies in the contract might include detailed site preparation plans, phased construction schedules accounting for seasonal limitations, and specific environmental protection clauses, though these are not explicitly detailed in the provided summary.

How does the firm fixed price structure impact the government's ability to control costs versus the contractor's incentive to manage expenses effectively?

A firm fixed price (FFP) contract shifts most cost overrun risk to the contractor, incentivizing them to manage expenses tightly to maximize profit. For the government, it provides cost certainty upfront. However, contractors may build in higher contingency costs to FFP bids to cover unforeseen issues, potentially leading to a higher initial price compared to cost-reimbursement contracts.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction › Other Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2404 BOYER AVE E, SEATTLE, WA, 07

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

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline