Eielson AFB generator replacement contract awarded to Bristol Building Constructors for $19.5M, utilizing 8(a) competitive best value trade-off

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $19,547,367 ($19.5M)

Contractor: Bristol Building Constructors LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-09-26

End Date: 2028-10-05

Contract Duration: 1,105 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: EIE488 - REPLACE GENERATORS AT CHPP, EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE, ALASKA NAICS: 236220 SIZE STANDARD $45M8(A) COMPETITIVE BEST VALUE TRADE OFF SOURCE SELECTION 8(A) SET ASIDE SBA REQUIREMENT # - LK1742938112Q

Place of Performance

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

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $19.5 million to BRISTOL BUILDING CONSTRUCTORS LLC for work described as: PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: EIE488 - REPLACE GENERATORS AT CHPP, EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE, ALASKA NAICS: 236220 SIZE STANDARD $45M8(A) COMPETITIVE BEST VALUE TRADE OFF SOURCE SELECTION 8(A) SET ASIDE SBA REQUIREMENT # - LK1742938112Q Key points: 1. The contract's value of $19.5 million represents a significant investment in critical infrastructure at Eielson Air Force Base. 2. The use of a 'competitive best value trade-off' suggests that while price was a factor, technical approach and other non-price factors were also heavily weighted in the selection. 3. The 8(a) set-aside aims to support small disadvantaged businesses, potentially limiting broader market competition but fulfilling a specific socioeconomic goal. 4. The contract duration of over three years indicates a complex project requiring sustained effort and management. 5. The firm-fixed-price structure shifts performance risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient project completion. 6. The project's focus on generator replacement highlights the need for reliable power infrastructure at military installations.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $19.5 million for generator replacement at Eielson AFB appears reasonable given the scale and duration of the project. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for critical infrastructure at military bases suggests this falls within expected cost ranges. The firm-fixed-price contract type generally provides good value by capping the government's financial exposure, provided the contractor manages costs effectively. Further analysis would require comparing specific project requirements and scope to publicly available data on similar generator replacement projects.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under a 'competitive best value trade-off' with an 8(a) set-aside. While competitive, the 8(a) designation means it was specifically competed among eligible small disadvantaged businesses, limiting the pool of potential bidders compared to full and open competition. The 'trade-off' aspect indicates that the government evaluated proposals based on both price and non-price factors, selecting the best overall value rather than the lowest price. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a reasonable level of competition within the 8(a) program for this specific requirement.

Taxpayer Impact: The 8(a) set-aside directs taxpayer funds towards supporting small disadvantaged businesses, aligning with socioeconomic goals. While competition was limited to this specific business category, the competitive process within the 8(a) pool helps ensure a fair price is paid for the services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the United States Air Force and personnel stationed at Eielson Air Force Base, who will receive reliable power. The project delivers essential infrastructure upgrades, ensuring operational readiness and continuity for the base. The geographic impact is localized to Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska, a critical strategic location. The contract supports jobs within the construction sector, particularly for the winning small disadvantaged business and its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the contractor underestimates the complexity of working in an Alaskan environment.
Risk of schedule delays due to weather or logistical challenges inherent in remote base operations.
The 'best value trade-off' process can sometimes lead to higher initial costs if non-price factors are heavily weighted.
Limited competition due to the 8(a) set-aside might mean less aggressive pricing than in a full and open competition.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
The 8(a) program aims to foster growth and success for small disadvantaged businesses.
The competitive nature of the award, even within the 8(a) pool, suggests a degree of price discipline.
The project addresses a critical need for infrastructure modernization, enhancing base resilience.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector (NAICS 236220). This sector encompasses a wide range of construction activities, including the building of new commercial and institutional structures, as well as alterations, repairs, and renovations. The market for military base construction is substantial, driven by the need for modernization, expansion, and maintenance of facilities. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale infrastructure projects on military bases can vary significantly based on location, scope, and specific requirements, but projects in the tens of millions of dollars are common for critical upgrades like power generation.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded under an 8(a) set-aside, specifically targeting small disadvantaged businesses. This means the competition was limited to firms that meet the Small Business Administration's criteria for the 8(a) program. While this directly supports the growth and development of a small disadvantaged business, it inherently limits the pool of competitors. The contract's value suggests it could involve significant subcontracting opportunities, potentially benefiting other small businesses if the prime contractor actively seeks them out. The success of this award for the small business ecosystem depends on the prime contractor's capacity and commitment to subcontracting.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Army contracting office responsible for Eielson Air Force Base. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract places a strong emphasis on contractor performance against the defined scope and schedule. Accountability measures will include regular progress reviews, site inspections, and adherence to contract milestones. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed project performance data may be less publicly accessible. The Inspector General's office for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction over any potential fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Infrastructure Modernization
Department of Defense Energy Projects
8(a) Small Business Contracting Program
Critical Infrastructure Replacement Contracts
Alaska Construction Projects

Risk Flags

Limited Competition (8(a) Set-Aside)
Best Value Trade-off Award
Remote Location Operations (Alaska)
Firm Fixed Price Contract Risk

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $19.5 million to BRISTOL BUILDING CONSTRUCTORS LLC. PROJECT TITLE/LOCATION: EIE488 - REPLACE GENERATORS AT CHPP, EIELSON AIR FORCE BASE, ALASKA NAICS: 236220 SIZE STANDARD $45M8(A) COMPETITIVE BEST VALUE TRADE OFF SOURCE SELECTION 8(A) SET ASIDE SBA REQUIREMENT # - LK1742938112Q

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is BRISTOL BUILDING CONSTRUCTORS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $19.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-09-26. End: 2028-10-05.

What is the track record of Bristol Building Constructors LLC in performing similar large-scale government construction projects?

Assessing the track record of Bristol Building Constructors LLC is crucial for understanding their capability to execute this $19.5 million generator replacement project. Publicly available data, such as contract award histories and performance ratings (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), would provide insights into their past performance on similar projects. Key indicators to examine include on-time completion rates, adherence to budget, quality of work, and any history of disputes or contract modifications. A strong performance history on comparable federal contracts, particularly those involving critical infrastructure or complex mechanical systems, would increase confidence in their ability to deliver successfully. Conversely, a history of significant delays, cost overruns, or performance issues would raise concerns about project risk.

How does the awarded price of $19.5 million compare to similar generator replacement projects at other military installations?

Benchmarking the $19.5 million award against similar generator replacement projects requires identifying comparable contracts in terms of scope, scale, location, and complexity. Factors such as the capacity of the generators being replaced, the age and condition of existing infrastructure, and the specific environmental conditions (e.g., extreme cold in Alaska) significantly influence costs. A detailed comparison would involve analyzing the price per megawatt of installed capacity, the extent of associated electrical and control system upgrades, and any site preparation or demolition work required. Without specific comparable data points, it's challenging to definitively state if $19.5 million represents excellent or questionable value. However, given the critical nature of power generation and the potential for unforeseen issues in remote locations, a comprehensive review of the project's detailed requirements against market rates for similar services is necessary for a precise value assessment.

What are the primary risks associated with executing a large construction project at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska?

Executing a large construction project at Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska presents several inherent risks. The extreme cold weather and limited daylight hours during winter months can significantly impact construction schedules and require specialized equipment and safety protocols, potentially increasing costs. Logistical challenges associated with transporting materials and personnel to a remote location like Eielson can lead to delays and higher expenses. Furthermore, the permafrost conditions in Alaska can complicate foundation work and require specialized engineering solutions. The 'best value trade-off' selection process, while aiming for optimal value, can introduce risk if the non-price factors heavily influence the award, potentially leading to a higher initial cost than the lowest-priced offer. Finally, the firm-fixed-price contract shifts performance risk to the contractor, meaning any unforeseen issues or cost overruns beyond their control could lead to financial strain for Bristol Building Constructors, potentially impacting project completion.

What is the expected impact of this contract on the operational readiness and energy resilience of Eielson Air Force Base?

This contract is expected to significantly enhance the operational readiness and energy resilience of Eielson Air Force Base by replacing aging generators with modern, reliable equipment. Reliable power is fundamental to the base's ability to conduct its mission, supporting everything from flight operations and command and control systems to housing and essential services. Upgrading generators reduces the risk of power outages, which can be disruptive and costly, potentially compromising critical functions. Modern generators are often more energy-efficient and may incorporate advanced monitoring and control systems, contributing to better energy management and potentially lower long-term operating costs. The successful and timely completion of this project will ensure a stable and robust power supply, directly supporting the base's overall effectiveness and its capacity to respond to various operational demands.

How does the 8(a) set-aside mechanism influence the competition and potential pricing for this generator replacement project?

The 8(a) set-aside mechanism specifically restricts this competition to small disadvantaged businesses certified by the Small Business Administration. This significantly narrows the field of potential bidders compared to a full and open competition, which could include large, established construction firms. While the intention is to foster opportunities for 8(a) firms, this limitation on competition can influence pricing. In some instances, a more limited pool might lead to less aggressive price competition than would occur in a broader market. However, the contract was awarded using a 'competitive best value trade-off' process, indicating that multiple 8(a) firms (three in this case) submitted proposals and were evaluated. The 'trade-off' aspect means the government weighed factors beyond just price, suggesting that the winning proposal offered the best overall value, not necessarily the lowest cost. Therefore, while competition was limited by the 8(a) designation, the competitive process within that pool, combined with the best-value evaluation, aimed to secure a fair price for the required services.

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: TWO STEP

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 111 W 16TH AVE, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99501

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,731,567

Exercised Options: $19,547,367

Current Obligation: $19,547,367

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline