Goodfellow Bros. Inc. awarded $56.3M for Hawaii roadway construction, highlighting infrastructure needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $56,340,716 ($56.3M)

Contractor: Goodfellow Bros Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2006-05-02

End Date: 2011-09-01

Contract Duration: 1,948 days

Daily Burn Rate: $28.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: GRADING, DRAINAGE, HOT ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT, AND SUPERPAVE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT ON 15.63 MILES OF ROADWAY ON POHAKULOA TRAINING CENTER, HILO, HAWAII

Place of Performance

Location: KIHEI, MAUI County, HAWAII, 96753

State: Hawaii Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $56.3 million to GOODFELLOW BROS INCORPORATED for work described as: GRADING, DRAINAGE, HOT ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT, AND SUPERPAVE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT ON 15.63 MILES OF ROADWAY ON POHAKULOA TRAINING CENTER, HILO, HAWAII Key points: 1. Contract value of $56.3M for roadway construction indicates significant investment in critical infrastructure. 2. Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process, potentially leading to competitive pricing. 3. The contract duration of nearly 2000 days points to a large-scale, complex project. 4. Awarded by the Department of Transportation, this contract aligns with federal goals for improving national transportation networks. 5. The project's focus on Pōhakuloa Training Center suggests a need for enhanced logistical support and access. 6. The absence of small business set-aside flags indicates the primary contractor is likely a larger entity.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $56.3 million for 15.63 miles of roadway construction appears reasonable given the scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale highway construction projects, the per-mile cost falls within expected ranges for complex terrain and specialized work. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the contractor assumed the majority of the cost risk, which can be favorable for the government if managed effectively.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a healthy level of competition for this significant infrastructure project. This competitive environment is generally expected to drive down costs and encourage innovation from the participating firms.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition likely resulted in a more favorable price for taxpayers by leveraging market forces to select the most cost-effective and capable bidder.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army and personnel utilizing the Pōhakuloa Training Center, gaining improved access and logistical capabilities. Services delivered include grading, drainage, and the application of hot asphaltic concrete and SUPERPAVE asphalt concrete pavement. The geographic impact is localized to 15.63 miles of roadway within the Pōhakuloa Training Center in Hilo, Hawaii. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, and support staff in Hawaii.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen site conditions arise, despite the firm-fixed-price contract.
Long project duration increases the risk of material price fluctuations and potential delays.
Dependence on a single large contractor could limit flexibility if issues arise.
Environmental impact during construction requires careful monitoring and mitigation.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive award process.
Project addresses critical infrastructure needs for a military training facility.
Experienced contractor likely selected through a competitive process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. The market for federal highway construction is substantial, driven by the need to maintain and upgrade national infrastructure. This project's focus on a military installation highlights the intersection of defense needs and civilian infrastructure development. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale road construction projects vary widely based on location, complexity, and materials, but a $56.3 million award for over 15 miles suggests a substantial undertaking.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and the data indicates no explicit subcontracting requirements for small businesses were mandated in this award. This suggests the primary contract was likely awarded to a large business entity. The absence of specific set-asides means that opportunities for small businesses would primarily arise through direct subcontracting by the prime contractor, the extent of which is not detailed here. This could limit direct opportunities for small businesses to participate in this specific federal contract.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) from the awarding agency (Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration). The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract implies that the government's primary oversight focuses on ensuring the contractor meets the specified deliverables and quality standards within the agreed-upon price. Accountability measures are embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules tied to milestones. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress reports may not be publicly available.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction Projects
Federal Highway System Improvement Programs
Department of Defense Infrastructure Contracts
Transportation Infrastructure Investment Programs

Risk Flags

Long contract duration increases risk of price escalation and potential delays.
Firm-fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to contractor, but potential for quality compromise exists.
Project located on a military training center may involve unique logistical challenges and security considerations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $56.3 million to GOODFELLOW BROS INCORPORATED. GRADING, DRAINAGE, HOT ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT, AND SUPERPAVE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT ON 15.63 MILES OF ROADWAY ON POHAKULOA TRAINING CENTER, HILO, HAWAII

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GOODFELLOW BROS INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Highway Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $56.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-05-02. End: 2011-09-01.

What is the track record of Goodfellow Bros. Incorporated with federal contracts, particularly in Hawaii?

Goodfellow Bros. Incorporated has a significant history of federal contracting, particularly within Hawaii. Their portfolio includes numerous awards for construction projects, many of which are related to transportation infrastructure, road construction, and civil engineering. Data indicates they have been awarded multiple contracts by various federal agencies, including the Department of Transportation and the Army Corps of Engineers. Their experience in the Hawaiian environment, which presents unique logistical and geological challenges, suggests a strong understanding of local conditions and requirements. This specific contract, valued at $56.3 million over nearly five years, aligns with their demonstrated capabilities in large-scale infrastructure development for federal entities in the region.

How does the per-mile cost of this contract compare to similar federal highway construction projects?

The per-mile cost for this contract is approximately $3.6 million ($56.3 million / 15.63 miles). This figure falls within a reasonable range for federal highway construction projects, especially those involving complex grading, drainage, and paving in potentially challenging terrain like that found in Hawaii. Factors such as the specific pavement type (SUPERPAVE asphalt concrete), the need for extensive grading, and the logistical costs associated with working on a military training center can elevate per-mile costs compared to simpler road projects in more accessible areas. Benchmarking against national averages for highway construction, which can range from $2 million to over $10 million per mile depending on these variables, suggests this contract's pricing is competitive for its scope.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this magnitude ($56.3 million) and long duration (1948 days) primarily lie with the contractor, but can impact the government. For the contractor, risks include underestimating costs, encountering unforeseen site conditions (e.g., geological issues, environmental hazards), and material price escalation over the project's lifespan. If the contractor cannot absorb these costs, it could lead to financial distress, delays, or potential disputes. For the government, the risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality to maintain profitability, or that the fixed price may ultimately prove higher than market rates if conditions change significantly. However, the firm-fixed-price structure is intended to provide cost certainty for the government.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring value for money for large infrastructure projects like this?

Full and open competition is generally considered a highly effective mechanism for ensuring value for money in large infrastructure projects. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it fosters a competitive environment where multiple companies vie for the contract. This competition incentivizes bidders to offer their most competitive pricing and innovative solutions to win the award. The presence of three bidders in this case suggests sufficient market interest. The government can then select the offer that provides the best combination of technical capability, past performance, and price. While not a guarantee against all cost issues, it significantly increases the likelihood of achieving a fair market price and selecting a capable contractor compared to less competitive procurement methods.

What is the historical spending pattern for highway construction at the Pōhakuloa Training Center or similar military facilities?

Historical spending patterns for highway construction at the Pōhakuloa Training Center (PTC) and similar military facilities often reflect the unique demands of these operational environments. Military installations require robust infrastructure to support training, logistics, and personnel movement, often necessitating specialized road construction that can withstand heavy vehicle traffic and diverse environmental conditions. Spending can be cyclical, influenced by military readiness requirements, base modernization initiatives, and federal infrastructure funding allocations. Projects at PTC, like this one, are typically driven by the need to maintain or upgrade access roads critical for training exercises and base operations. While specific historical data for PTC road construction spending isn't provided here, such projects are generally substantial investments, often awarded through competitive bidding processes similar to this $56.3 million contract.

What are the potential long-term implications of this roadway construction for the Pōhakuloa Training Center's operational efficiency?

The long-term implications of this roadway construction for the Pōhakuloa Training Center (PTC) are likely to be significant improvements in operational efficiency. Upgraded roads with proper grading and drainage reduce wear and tear on military vehicles, potentially lowering maintenance costs and improving readiness. Enhanced pavement quality, such as SUPERPAVE asphalt concrete, provides a more durable surface capable of handling heavy military equipment, reducing the frequency of repairs and disruptions. Improved access roads facilitate smoother and faster movement of troops, equipment, and supplies within the training area, which is critical for effective training exercises and logistical support. Ultimately, this investment in infrastructure supports the core mission of the PTC by ensuring reliable and efficient internal transportation networks.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT NONBUILDING FACILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 381 HUKU LI'I PLACE, STE 202, KIHEI, HI, 02

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $56,340,725

Exercised Options: $56,340,725

Current Obligation: $56,340,716

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Timeline