DoD's $12.2M fuel support contract for KBR Services, LLC awarded in 2006, ending in 2009
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $12,232,148 ($12.2M)
Contractor: KBR Services, LLC
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2006-11-15
End Date: 2009-02-28
Contract Duration: 836 days
Daily Burn Rate: $14.6K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: FUEL SUPPORT OPERATIONS - SITE 5R AND 5J
Place of Performance
Location: HOUSTON, HARRIS County, TEXAS, 77020
State: Texas Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $12.2 million to KBR SERVICES, LLC for work described as: FUEL SUPPORT OPERATIONS - SITE 5R AND 5J Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for the duration and scope of fuel support operations. 2. Full and open competition suggests a healthy market for these services. 3. Contract duration of over two years indicates a need for sustained support. 4. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor, potentially benefiting the government. 5. Awarded to KBR Services, LLC, a known entity in government contracting. 6. Geographic focus on Texas (Sites 5R and 5J) limits broad applicability but ensures localized support.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract's total value of approximately $12.2 million over roughly 2.75 years suggests an average annual spend of around $4.4 million. This figure seems within a reasonable range for specialized fuel support operations at specific military sites. Without direct comparable contracts for the exact same services and locations, a precise benchmark is difficult, but the pricing appears competitive given the fixed-price nature which typically includes contractor profit and overhead.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors had the opportunity to bid. The presence of 6 bidders suggests a competitive environment for this type of service. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and can lead to more cost-effective solutions for the government.
Taxpayer Impact: The robust competition for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition scenario.
Public Impact
Military personnel at Department of the Army sites 5R and 5J in Texas benefit from reliable fuel support operations. Ensures the continuous availability of fuel for military vehicles and equipment, critical for operational readiness. Supports the logistical backbone of military operations within the specified Texas locations. Indirectly supports the local economy through contractor employment and resource utilization in Texas.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen operational challenges arise, despite fixed-price structure.
- Dependence on contractor performance for critical fuel supply chain integrity.
- Limited flexibility to adapt to rapidly changing mission requirements due to contract terms.
Positive Signals
- Fixed-price contract incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
- Full and open competition suggests a market capable of meeting demand.
- Contractor's established presence implies experience in government fuel logistics.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the broader 'Support Services' sector, specifically focusing on logistical support for defense operations. The market for specialized fuel support services is often characterized by a mix of large, established defense contractors and smaller, niche providers. The size of this contract, while significant, is moderate within the overall defense spending landscape. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically be found in contracts for base operations support, logistics, and facility maintenance at military installations.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This suggests that the primary award went to a large business, KBR Services, LLC. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on whether KBR utilizes small businesses for subcontracting opportunities, which is not detailed in the provided data.
Oversight & Accountability
As a definitive contract awarded under full and open competition, oversight would typically involve contract administration by the Department of the Army, performance monitoring, and potentially reviews by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) or an Inspector General if specific concerns or audits were initiated. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS. The fixed-price nature provides a degree of accountability for cost adherence.
Related Government Programs
- Base Operations Support Services
- Logistics and Supply Chain Management
- Fueling Infrastructure Maintenance
- Defense Logistics Agency Contracts
- Army Materiel Command Support
Risk Flags
- Contract Duration
- Fixed-Price Contract Type
- Full and Open Competition
- Single Contractor Award
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, fuel-support, logistics, texas, kbr-services-llc, support-services, site-5r
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $12.2 million to KBR SERVICES, LLC. FUEL SUPPORT OPERATIONS - SITE 5R AND 5J
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is KBR SERVICES, 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 $12.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2006-11-15. End: 2009-02-28.
What is KBR Services, LLC's track record with similar Department of Defense fuel support contracts?
KBR Services, LLC has a substantial history of performing fuel support and logistics services for the Department of Defense and other government agencies. They have been involved in numerous large-scale contracts related to base operations, including fuel management, storage, and distribution, often in challenging environments. Their experience typically encompasses a wide range of fuel types and operational requirements. While this specific contract was awarded in 2006, KBR has continued to secure and execute similar contracts, indicating a consistent performance record in this domain. Analyzing their portfolio of past and present contracts would reveal the scale, duration, and geographic diversity of their fuel support operations, providing context for their capabilities and reliability.
How does the $12.2 million value compare to other fuel support contracts of similar scope and duration?
The $12.2 million total value for approximately 2.75 years of service translates to an average annual expenditure of roughly $4.4 million. This figure needs to be contextualized by the specific services rendered, the volume of fuel handled, the complexity of the sites (5R and 5J), and the prevailing market rates at the time of award (2006). For specialized fuel support operations at military installations, this annual spend is within a moderate range. Contracts for similar services at larger bases or with more extensive operational demands could easily exceed this amount annually. Conversely, smaller, less complex operations might be secured at lower costs. The fixed-price nature also implies that the quoted price was deemed competitive by the government at the time of award, factoring in contractor risk and profit.
What were the primary risks associated with this fuel support contract, and how were they mitigated?
Key risks for a fuel support contract include supply chain disruptions, environmental hazards (spills, leaks), equipment failure, and fluctuating fuel prices (though mitigated by fixed-price). For this contract, awarded under full and open competition, the primary mitigation strategy was the fixed-price contract type, which shifted the financial risk of cost overruns to KBR Services, LLC. The competition itself served as a risk mitigator by selecting a vendor deemed capable and cost-effective. Environmental risks would be managed through strict adherence to safety protocols, regular inspections, and spill prevention/response plans, likely stipulated in the contract's performance work statement. Contractor performance monitoring by the Army would address operational risks, ensuring fuel availability and service quality.
How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring value for money for this contract?
The full and open competition, with six bidders, is a strong indicator that the government likely achieved good value for money. This competitive environment typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. The government could compare proposals based on technical merit and price, selecting the best overall value. The fixed-price contract further enhances value by capping the government's financial exposure. While the specific details of the bidding process and the final negotiated price are not provided, the mechanism of full and open competition is inherently designed to foster price discovery and ensure that taxpayer funds are used efficiently for such essential services.
What is the historical spending pattern for fuel support operations at Department of the Army sites like 5R and 5J?
Historical spending on fuel support operations at Department of the Army sites varies significantly based on the size and operational tempo of the installation. Contracts for these services often span multiple years and can range from a few million dollars annually for smaller sites to tens or even hundreds of millions for major installations with extensive logistical requirements. Factors influencing spending include the type and quantity of fuel required, the complexity of storage and distribution infrastructure, security requirements, and the level of contractor support needed for maintenance and operations. This $12.2 million contract, awarded in 2006 for a duration of over two years, represents a moderate level of spending for specialized support at specific locations, suggesting that larger or more operationally intensive bases would command higher expenditures.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Other Support Services › All Other Support Services
Product/Service Code: FUELS, LUBRICANTS, OILS, WAXES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: W912D106R0032
Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: KBR, Inc. (UEI: 784072626)
Address: 4100 CLINTON DRIVE, HOUSTON, TX, 77020
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $18,703,549
Exercised Options: $12,354,745
Current Obligation: $12,232,148
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2006-11-15
Current End Date: 2009-02-28
Potential End Date: 2009-02-28 12:02:00
Last Modified: 2021-08-18
More Contracts from KBR Services, LLC
- Follow on Task Order to 139 IS NOW Task Order 159 — $8.9B (Department of Defense)
- 200612!001884!2100!w52p1j!u.s. Army Industrial Operations !daaa0902d0007 !A!N! !Y!0139 ! !20060822!20120131!133469119!133469119!964409007!n!kellogg Brown&root Services,!4100 Clinton DRY !houston !TX!77020!00000! !IZ! ! !iraq !+000400000000!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !S1 !services !000 !NOT Discernable !561210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!u!r!2!003!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! — $7.9B (Department of Defense)
- Federal Contract — $6.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200509!001151!2100!w52p1j!u.s. Army Industrial Operations !daaa0902d0007 !A!N! !Y!0089 ! !20050613!20120131!133469119!133469119!964409007!n!kellogg Brown&root Services,!4100 Clinton DR !houston !TX!77020!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000135000000!n!n!000000000000!r706!logistics Support Services !S1 !services !000 !* !561210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!r!2!003!b! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y! ! ! !0001! ! — $4.6B (Department of Defense)
- Logistic Civil Augmentation Program (logcap) V Award for Eucom Performance Task Order — $2.2B (Department of Defense)
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)