Navy awards $14.3M construction contract for industrial building, highlighting fixed-price terms and full competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $14,299,518 ($14.3M)
Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2005-02-14
End Date: 2008-08-15
Contract Duration: 1,278 days
Daily Burn Rate: $11.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: 200509!129548!1700!N62472!NAVFAC ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVIT!N6247201D0077 !A!N! !N!0005 ! !20050214!20070214!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!34180!011!09!GROTON !NEW LONDON !CONN !+000013167000!N!N!000000000000!Y159!OTHER INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !236210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !A!N!J!2!005!A! !D!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!B!Y! !N! !Y!1700!N62472!0001! !
Place of Performance
Location: GROTON, NEW LONDON County, CONNECTICUT, 06349
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $14.3 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: 200509!129548!1700!N62472!NAVFAC ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVIT!N6247201D0077 !A!N! !N!0005 ! !20050214!20070214!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!34180!011!09!GROTON !NEW … Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. Fixed-price contract type indicates predictable costs for the government. 3. The contract duration of approximately 4.2 years suggests a significant construction project. 4. Awarded by the Department of the Navy, indicating a focus on defense infrastructure. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236210 points to general industrial building construction. 6. The contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, has a track record with federal contracts.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of $14.3 million for industrial building construction appears reasonable given the project scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar construction projects by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The fixed-price nature of the contract helps manage cost uncertainty for the government.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The data indicates there were 5 bids received, suggesting a healthy level of competition for this construction project. This competitive environment is generally favorable for achieving competitive pricing.
Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers compared to a sole-source or limited competition award.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiary is the Department of the Navy, which will receive the constructed industrial building. The contract supports the delivery of essential industrial building construction services. The geographic impact is localized to Groton, Connecticut, where the construction will take place. The contract implies a need for skilled labor in the construction sector, potentially creating jobs in the local area.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen issues arise in construction, despite fixed-price terms.
- Dependence on the contractor's ability to meet project timelines and quality standards.
- Risk associated with the specific site conditions in Groton, Connecticut, which could impact construction.
Positive Signals
- Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive market.
- Fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
- Contractor has prior federal contracting experience.
- Project located in a region with established construction infrastructure.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically general industrial building construction (NAICS 236210). The federal government is a significant consumer of construction services for military bases, research facilities, and administrative buildings. Spending in this area is influenced by defense budgets, infrastructure modernization needs, and national security priorities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale industrial construction contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not specifically set aside for small businesses, nor does it explicitly mention subcontracting goals for small businesses. The award to M. A. Mortenson Company, a larger entity, suggests that small businesses may have participated as subcontractors. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business involvement.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Department of the Navy's contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver the specified building within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may not be publicly available.
Related Government Programs
- Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts
- Department of Defense Construction Projects
- Industrial Facility Construction
- Fixed-Price Construction Contracts
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions.
- Contractor performance risk regarding schedule and quality.
- Reliance on accurate cost estimation in the fixed-price bid.
Tags
construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, industrial-building, connecticut, large-contract, defense-infrastructure, m-a-mortenson-company
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $14.3 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. 200509!129548!1700!N62472!NAVFAC ENGINEERING FIELD ACTIVIT!N6247201D0077 !A!N! !N!0005 ! !20050214!20070214!008904385!008904385!130731797!N!M A MORTENSON COMPANY !700 MEADOW LN N !MINNEAPOLIS !MN!55422!34180!011!09!GROTON !NEW LONDON !CONN !+000013167000!N!N!000000000000!Y159!OTHER INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !236210!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !202
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $14.3 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2005-02-14. End: 2008-08-15.
What is the track record of M. A. Mortenson Company with federal contracts, particularly in construction?
M. A. Mortenson Company has a significant history of federal contracting. While specific details for this contract are limited to the award information, their involvement in projects like this suggests experience with government procurement processes and construction requirements. A deeper dive into their contract history would reveal the types of projects, their performance ratings on past federal work, and any notable issues or successes. This information is crucial for assessing their reliability and capability to execute the current contract effectively and on time.
How does the awarded amount of $14.3 million compare to similar industrial building construction contracts?
The $14.3 million award for industrial building construction by the Navy is a substantial sum, indicative of a significant project. To benchmark its value, one would compare it to similar contracts awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies for facilities of comparable size, complexity, and location. Factors such as prevailing construction costs in Connecticut, the specific type of industrial building, and the project's duration (approximately 4.2 years) are critical for a fair comparison. Without access to a database of comparable projects, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent, good, or fair value, but the fixed-price nature and competitive award suggest an effort to secure a reasonable price.
What are the primary risks associated with this fixed-price construction contract?
Despite the cost certainty offered by a fixed-price contract, several risks remain. The primary risk is potential cost overruns for the contractor if unforeseen site conditions, material price escalations, or labor shortages occur, which could lead to delays or quality compromises if the contractor seeks to mitigate their losses. For the government, risks include the contractor's financial stability and their ability to deliver the project on schedule and to the required specifications. Poor contractor performance or disputes over contract scope can also pose risks. Effective project oversight and clear contract terms are essential to mitigate these risks.
How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for money for this type of construction contract?
Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring value for money in federal contracting, including construction. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it fosters a competitive environment that drives down prices and encourages innovation. The fact that 5 bids were received for this $14.3 million contract suggests that competition was indeed present. This competitive pressure incentivizes contractors to offer their best pricing and performance. However, the ultimate value for money also depends on the clarity of the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, and the government's ability to effectively manage the contract post-award.
What are the historical spending patterns for industrial building construction by the Department of the Navy?
Historical spending patterns for industrial building construction by the Department of the Navy would reveal trends in contract values, award volumes, and types of construction over time. Analyzing this data could show whether spending has increased or decreased, if there's a concentration of awards in specific geographic regions, or if certain contractors have consistently secured a large share of the work. Understanding these patterns can help identify potential budget fluctuations, assess the overall demand for such services, and inform future procurement strategies. This specific contract award of $14.3 million contributes to the overall historical spending data for the Navy in this category.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Industrial Building Construction
Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 5
Pricing Type: FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: M. a. Mortenson Companies, Inc.
Address: 700 MEADOW LANE NORTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55422
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N6247201D0077
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2005-02-14
Current End Date: 2008-08-15
Potential End Date: 2008-08-15 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-10-24
More Contracts from M. a. Mortenson Company
- TAS::47 4543::TAS Modernization of the Byron G. Rogers Federal Office Building and the Byron G. Rogers Federal Courthouse Window Replacement in Denver, CO — $160.4M (General Services Administration)
- Construction Contract 2 for the Dept. of State, Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (fastc) in Blackstone, VA. Includes an Indoor Firing Range, Indoor/Outdoor Tactical Range, Tactical Training Building, Office and Classroom Building, Driving Tracks, Mock Urban Driving Track and Mock Embassy — $154.6M (General Services Administration)
- Clin 0001 Base BID Repair EHW 1 Phase 2 NSB Kings BAY GA — $154.6M (Department of Defense)
- Design-Build-Bridging Construction Services for the Modernization of the U.S. National Poultry Research Center (usnprc), Seprl Campus in Athens, GA This IS a Two-Phase Design-Build Acquisition. ONE Solicitation Covers Both Phases. Phase I IS the Pre-Selection Phase in Which the Government Will "shortlist" Maximum of (4) of the Most Highly Qualified Offerors. Only Those Firms Selected in Phase I Will BE Allowed to Continue to the Phase II. Detailed Design Criteria Will Then BE Added by Amendment to the Solicitation to Start the Phase II Stage of the Request for Proposals. Each Firm Selected for Participation in Phase II Will Then Submit a Design-Build Technical Proposal, the Remainder of the Performance Capability Proposal and Price Proposal. Igf::ot::igf — $149.6M (Department of Agriculture)
- Ibct — $141.3M (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)