Army awards $159M dredging contract to King Fisher Marine Service for Port Arthur, Texas

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,903,338 ($15.9M)

Contractor: King Fisher Marine Service, L.P.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-10-18

End Date: 2010-10-29

Contract Duration: 1,837 days

Daily Burn Rate: $8.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200604!600020!96CE!W912HY!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT GALVESTON !W912HY06C0003 !A!N! !N! ! !20051018!20060930!008133084!008133084!827665688!N!KING FISHER, MARINE SERVICE, L!159 HWY 316 !PORT LAVACA !TX!77979!58820!245!48!PORT ARTHUR !JEFFERSON !TEXAS !+000005000000!N!N!000015670200!Z216!DREDGING, EXCL. DUSTPAN AND SEA-GOING HOPPERS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !A!U!J!2!004!A! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!C!A!A!000!A!C!Y! !N! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON County, TEXAS, 77640

State: Texas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.9 million to KING FISHER MARINE SERVICE, L.P. for work described as: 200604!600020!96CE!W912HY!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT GALVESTON !W912HY06C0003 !A!N! !N! ! !20051018!20060930!008133084!008133084!827665688!N!KING FISHER, MARINE SERVICE, L!159 HWY 316 !PORT LAVACA !TX!77979!58820!245!48!PORT ARTHUR !JEFF… Key points: 1. Contract value of $159M represents a significant investment in port infrastructure. 2. The contract was awarded using full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The duration of the contract (over 4 years) indicates a long-term need for dredging services. 4. The specific NAICS code (237990) points to specialized heavy construction services. 5. The award to a single contractor, King Fisher Marine Service, highlights their capability in this niche. 6. Geographic focus on Texas suggests regional economic and logistical importance.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $159 million for dredging services appears reasonable given the multi-year duration and the specialized nature of the work. Benchmarking against similar large-scale dredging contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests that the government has a clear understanding of the costs involved, and the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns. Without specific per-unit cost data or comparisons to other bids, a definitive assessment of pricing efficiency is challenging, but the competitive award process implies a degree of market validation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 4 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this specialized dredging service. A competitive environment generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government, as contractors vie to win the award. The number of bidders is a positive sign for market engagement.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are likely being used efficiently, as multiple companies competed to offer the best price and service. This process helps prevent inflated pricing and encourages cost-effective solutions.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Defense, ensuring navigable waterways for military and commercial purposes. The services delivered include essential dredging operations to maintain and improve port access and depth. The geographic impact is concentrated in Port Arthur, Texas, and surrounding areas, supporting regional maritime commerce. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled labor in the marine construction and dredging industry within Texas.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Long contract duration could lead to potential cost escalations if not managed tightly.
Reliance on a single contractor for a critical infrastructure service warrants close performance monitoring.
The specialized nature of dredging may limit the pool of qualified subcontractors, potentially impacting small business participation.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
The contractor, King Fisher Marine Service, has secured a significant contract, suggesting established capabilities.
The contract addresses a critical infrastructure need for port maintenance and navigation.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the heavy and civil engineering construction sector, specifically focusing on dredging. The market for dredging services is specialized, often dominated by a few key players capable of undertaking large-scale projects. Federal spending in this area is crucial for maintaining navigable waterways, supporting commerce, and enabling national security logistics. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other Army Corps of Engineers contracts for similar dredging operations in different ports or regions.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that small business participation was not a primary set-aside criterion for this award, as the prime contractor is King Fisher Marine Service, L.P. Further analysis would be needed to determine if subcontracting opportunities were specifically targeted towards small businesses. The scale of this contract might lend itself to larger subcontractors, but it's essential to review the subcontracting plan to assess the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Army, likely through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers district that awarded it. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases, though detailed performance reports may not always be publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of suspected fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Programs
Port Infrastructure Development Grants
Maritime Administration (MARAD) Programs
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Funding for Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Potential for environmental impact due to dredging activities.
Long-term contract duration may introduce cost escalation risks.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical infrastructure maintenance.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.9 million to KING FISHER MARINE SERVICE, L.P.. 200604!600020!96CE!W912HY!USA ENGINEER DISTRICT GALVESTON !W912HY06C0003 !A!N! !N! ! !20051018!20060930!008133084!008133084!827665688!N!KING FISHER, MARINE SERVICE, L!159 HWY 316 !PORT LAVACA !TX!77979!58820!245!48!PORT ARTHUR !JEFFERSON !TEXAS !+000005000000!N!N!000015670200!Z216!DREDGING, EXCL. DUSTPAN AND SEA-GOING HOPPERS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !NOT DISCERNABLE !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is KING FISHER MARINE SERVICE, L.P..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-10-18. End: 2010-10-29.

What is the historical spending pattern for dredging services by the Department of the Army in Texas?

Analyzing historical spending for dredging by the Department of the Army in Texas would involve reviewing contract awards over several fiscal years. This would likely reveal a pattern of significant investment in maintaining and improving the state's numerous ports and waterways, such as those in Houston, Galveston, and Corpus Christi, in addition to Port Arthur. Spending levels can fluctuate based on infrastructure needs, federal budget allocations, and specific project requirements. A detailed analysis would likely show multiple contracts awarded for various dredging activities, including maintenance, deepening, and new construction, with values ranging from millions to hundreds of millions of dollars depending on the scope and complexity of the projects. This specific contract for Port Arthur represents a substantial, but not necessarily anomalous, investment within this broader context.

How does the awarded price compare to the estimated cost or independent government cost estimate for this dredging project?

Without access to the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE) or the specific bid prices from the other three competitors, a direct comparison of the awarded price ($159M) to the estimated cost is not possible from the provided data. However, the fact that the contract was awarded under 'full and open competition' with four bidders suggests that the awarded price was deemed acceptable by the government and likely competitive among the bidders. If the awarded price significantly exceeded the IGCE, it might indicate an issue with the estimate or market conditions. Conversely, if it came in well below the estimate, it could signal a highly competitive market or a contractor eager to secure the work. Further investigation into the bid tabulation and cost-effectiveness analysis would be required for a definitive assessment.

What is King Fisher Marine Service's track record with similar federal dredging contracts?

King Fisher Marine Service, L.P. has a history of performing dredging and marine construction services. A review of federal contract databases would likely reveal prior awards to this company from various government agencies, including potentially the Army Corps of Engineers. Their track record would be assessed based on factors such as past performance evaluations, any history of contract disputes or terminations, and the successful completion of projects of similar scope and complexity. Securing a $159 million contract suggests they have demonstrated the necessary capacity, experience, and reliability to handle large-scale federal projects. A deeper dive into their performance history would provide more specific insights into their capabilities and reliability.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this dredging contract?

Key performance indicators (KPIs) for a dredging contract like this typically focus on operational efficiency, environmental compliance, and project completion within schedule and budget. Specific KPIs might include the volume of material dredged per unit of time (e.g., cubic yards per hour), adherence to specified dredging depths and tolerances, compliance with environmental permits and mitigation measures (e.g., turbidity levels, protection of marine life), and timely completion of contract milestones. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract also implies that cost control and avoidance of overruns are critical performance aspects. The government contracting officer and technical representatives would monitor these KPIs throughout the contract duration.

Are there any specific environmental risks or mitigation strategies associated with this dredging project?

Dredging projects inherently carry environmental risks, primarily related to the disturbance of sediments and aquatic habitats. Potential risks include the release of contaminants from disturbed sediments, increased turbidity affecting water quality and marine life, and impacts on sensitive ecosystems or endangered species. Mitigation strategies are typically mandated by environmental permits and the contract itself. These can include specific dredging methods to minimize sediment suspension, real-time monitoring of water quality, the use of silt curtains, designated placement sites for dredged material (e.g., confined disposal facilities, beneficial use sites), and protocols for protecting marine mammals or other wildlife. The contract would detail these requirements and the contractor's responsibilities for compliance.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

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

Parent Company: Orion Marine Group, Inc. (UEI: 807676908)

Address: 159 HWY 316, PORT LAVACA, TX, 77979

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