DOD's $44.9M Parking Garage Contract Awarded to Hensel Phelps Construction Co. via Full and Open Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $44,925,814 ($44.9M)

Contractor: Hensel Phelps Construction CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2013-07-22

End Date: 2016-06-30

Contract Duration: 1,074 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF INSCOM - NOLAN BUILDING PARKING GARAGE

Place of Performance

Location: FORT GEORGE G MEADE, ANNE ARUNDEL County, MARYLAND, 20755

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $44.9 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF INSCOM - NOLAN BUILDING PARKING GARAGE Key points: 1. The contract was awarded using a firm-fixed-price structure, indicating a clear understanding of project scope and cost. 2. The duration of the contract (1074 days) suggests a significant construction project with a defined timeline. 3. The award was made under full and open competition, implying a competitive bidding process. 4. The project falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code, placing it within a specific industry segment. 5. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Army, a major component of the Department of Defense. 6. The project is located in Maryland, providing a geographic context for the construction activity.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without comparable parking garage construction projects from the same period and region. However, the firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor assumed the risk for cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the final price reflects competitive market conditions. The total award amount of $44.9 million for a parking garage needs to be assessed against the size, complexity, and specific features of the facility to determine if it represents good value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded through full and open competition, meaning that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 8 bidders indicates a healthy level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders generally leads to more competitive pricing and a greater likelihood of the government securing the best value.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process for this contract likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries of this contract are the Department of Defense and its personnel, who will gain access to improved parking facilities. The service delivered is the construction of a parking garage, a critical infrastructure component for military installations. The geographic impact is localized to Maryland, where the construction project is situated. The workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, architects, and related trades during the project's duration.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract did not adequately account for all construction variables.
Risk of delays in project completion impacting the availability of parking facilities.
Quality control concerns inherent in large-scale construction projects.
Dependency on the financial stability and performance of Hensel Phelps Construction Co.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract structure shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive pricing environment.
Defined project duration indicates a structured approach to completion.
Award to an established construction company like Hensel Phelps may indicate a lower risk of performance issues.

Sector Analysis

The construction of institutional buildings, including parking garages, is a significant segment within the broader construction industry. This contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, which encompasses a wide range of projects for government, education, healthcare, and other organizations. The market for such construction is influenced by government infrastructure spending, economic conditions, and the specific needs of federal agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing the cost per square foot or cost per parking space for similar government or private sector projects in the same geographic area and time frame.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. The award to Hensel Phelps Construction Co., a large firm, suggests that the primary contract was likely beyond the scope or capacity of many small businesses. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were made available to small businesses by the prime contractor.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army officials responsible for facility construction. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards, payment schedules tied to milestones, and potential penalties for non-compliance. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS-NG, which provide public access to contract details. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Construction Projects
Federal Building and Infrastructure Contracts
Military Base Development
General Services Administration (GSA) Construction

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if initial estimates were inaccurate.
Risk of project delays impacting operational needs.
Quality control during construction.
Contractor performance and financial stability.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $44.9 million to HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO. IGF::OT::IGF INSCOM - NOLAN BUILDING PARKING GARAGE

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HENSEL PHELPS CONSTRUCTION CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $44.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2013-07-22. End: 2016-06-30.

What is the track record of Hensel Phelps Construction Co. with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Hensel Phelps Construction Co. has a significant history of working with the federal government, including numerous contracts with the Department of Defense and other agencies. Their portfolio often includes large-scale infrastructure and building projects. A review of their past performance on similar federal projects would be necessary to assess their reliability, quality of work, and adherence to schedules and budgets. Analyzing their contract history for any past disputes, performance issues, or successful project completions would provide valuable context for evaluating their suitability for this parking garage project.

How does the awarded price of $44.9 million compare to industry benchmarks for similar parking garage construction projects?

To benchmark the $44.9 million award, one would need to compare it against the cost per square foot or cost per parking space for recently completed, comparable parking garages in Maryland or similar regions. Factors such as the number of levels, type of construction materials, inclusion of advanced security features, and site-specific challenges (e.g., soil conditions, accessibility) significantly influence costs. Without detailed project specifications and market data from the 2013-2016 period, a precise comparison is difficult. However, the firm-fixed-price nature and competitive bidding suggest an effort to align the price with market realities at the time of award.

What were the key risk indicators assessed during the procurement process for this contract?

Key risk indicators for a construction project of this magnitude typically include the contractor's financial stability, past performance on similar projects, technical approach, management plan, and schedule feasibility. For this specific contract, the firm-fixed-price structure inherently transfers significant cost risk to the contractor. The presence of 8 bidders suggests that the project scope was well-defined, reducing the risk of ambiguity. However, risks related to unforeseen site conditions, labor availability, material price fluctuations, and weather delays would still be present and would need to be managed by the contractor.

How effective was the full and open competition in ensuring value for taxpayers on this contract?

The full and open competition, with 8 bidders, is a strong indicator that the process was designed to maximize value for taxpayers. A competitive environment typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. The firm-fixed-price contract further solidifies value by locking in costs, provided the initial bid was competitive. To fully assess effectiveness, one would examine if the final cost was within the expected range for such a project and if the quality of the delivered facility meets the government's needs without significant change orders or disputes that could inflate costs.

What is the historical spending pattern for parking garage construction by the Department of the Army or Department of Defense?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for parking garage construction by the Department of the Army and the broader Department of Defense would involve reviewing contract databases over several fiscal years. This would reveal the frequency of such awards, the average contract values, the typical contracting methods used (e.g., full and open, sole source), and the primary contractors involved. Understanding these patterns can help identify trends in infrastructure investment, potential budget cycles for construction, and whether spending on facilities like parking garages is consistent or cyclical.

Were there any significant change orders or contract modifications issued during the performance period of this contract?

Information regarding change orders or contract modifications is not present in the provided data. However, for a construction project of this duration (1074 days) and value, it is common for some modifications to occur due to unforeseen site conditions, design clarifications, or minor scope adjustments. A thorough review of the contract's official modification history would be required to determine if any significant changes were made, their reasons, and their impact on the total contract cost and schedule. Significant modifications could indicate initial under-scoping or evolving requirements.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W912DR13R0027

Offers Received: 8

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 4437 BROOKFIELD CORPORATE DR STE 207, CHANTILLY, VA, 20151

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $44,967,941

Exercised Options: $44,967,941

Current Obligation: $44,925,814

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline