DoD's $76M Guam Aviation Apron Project: A Costly but Necessary Infrastructure Upgrade for Marine Corps Relocation
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $75,913,721 ($75.9M)
Contractor: Tutor Perini Corporation
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2011-04-06
End Date: 2014-07-21
Contract Duration: 1,202 days
Daily Burn Rate: $63.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: THE FY 10 MILCON PROJECT P101&P101A, NORTH RAMP PARKING, IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONAL AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON COMPLETE WITH A WASHRACK, RINSE FACILITIES, AND DIRECT FUELING STATIONS TO SUPPORT THE RELOCATION OF UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS AVIATION UNITS FROM OKINAWA JAPAN TO ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM.
Place of Performance
Location: YIGO, GUAM County, GUAM, 96929
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $75.9 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION for work described as: THE FY 10 MILCON PROJECT P101&P101A, NORTH RAMP PARKING, IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONAL AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON COMPLETE WITH A WASHRACK, RINSE FACILITIES, AND DIRECT FUELING STATIONS TO SUPPORT THE RELOCATION OF UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS AVIATION UNITS FROM OKINAWA JA… Key points: 1. The project's substantial cost reflects the complexity and strategic importance of establishing new aviation infrastructure in Guam. 2. Competition dynamics for this large-scale construction project are crucial for ensuring taxpayer value. 3. Potential risks include construction delays, cost overruns, and environmental compliance in a sensitive island ecosystem. 4. Performance context is tied to the broader strategic relocation of US Marine Corps aviation units. 5. This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically large-scale civil engineering and construction. 6. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but requires careful oversight of scope and execution.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The $75.9 million cost for the aircraft parking apron, wash rack, and fueling stations appears significant, even for a remote island location like Guam. Benchmarking against similar military construction projects for aviation support facilities is necessary to determine if the price is competitive. The scale of the project, including specialized fueling and wash-down capabilities, contributes to the overall cost. Without detailed cost breakdowns and comparisons to similar projects, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money, but the price point warrants scrutiny.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. The presence of 7 bidders suggests a reasonably competitive environment for this type of specialized construction. However, the specific details of the bidding process, including the number of responsive bids and the range of proposed prices, are not provided. A competitive process is generally favorable for price discovery and achieving better value.
Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to bid, potentially driving down prices and ensuring the government receives competitive offers for its investments.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the United States Marine Corps aviation units relocating to Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, gaining essential operational infrastructure. The project delivers a fully functional aircraft parking apron with critical support facilities like wash racks and direct fueling stations. The geographic impact is concentrated in Guam, supporting the strategic military presence in the Indo-Pacific region. Workforce implications include job creation for construction personnel in Guam, potentially utilizing local labor and resources.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns given the complexity and remote location.
- Risk of construction delays impacting the Marine Corps relocation timeline.
- Environmental considerations in Guam's sensitive ecosystem require careful management.
- Ensuring long-term durability and maintenance of specialized aviation facilities.
Positive Signals
- Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.
- Firm-fixed-price contract type helps to control costs if managed effectively.
- Strategic importance of the project for US military posture in the Indo-Pacific.
- Project addresses critical infrastructure needs for a significant military relocation.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the construction sector, specifically large-scale civil engineering and infrastructure development for military purposes. The market for such specialized projects is often limited to a few large, experienced contractors capable of handling the scale, complexity, and geographic challenges. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve other military airfield construction or major infrastructure projects in remote or high-cost locations. The total contract value of approximately $76 million places it in the category of significant federal construction awards.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Given the project's scale and specialized nature, it is unlikely that small businesses would be primary contractors, though they may participate as subcontractors. The prime contractor, Tutor Perini Corporation, is a large entity. Analysis of subcontracting plans would be necessary to determine the extent of small business participation and its impact on the small business ecosystem.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this project would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's construction and facilities management oversight structures. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, requiring the contractor to deliver specified work within budget. Transparency would be enhanced through regular progress reports, site inspections, and potentially public contract data portals. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction (MILCON) Projects
- Andersen Air Force Base Infrastructure
- Marine Corps Relocation Initiatives
- Indo-Pacific Defense Infrastructure
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns
- Construction delays
- Logistical challenges in remote location
- Environmental compliance risks
Tags
defense, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, construction, military-construction, aviation-infrastructure, full-and-open-competition, firm-fixed-price, guam, large-contract, infrastructure-development, marine-corps
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $75.9 million to TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION. THE FY 10 MILCON PROJECT P101&P101A, NORTH RAMP PARKING, IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A FULLY FUNCTIONAL AIRCRAFT PARKING APRON COMPLETE WITH A WASHRACK, RINSE FACILITIES, AND DIRECT FUELING STATIONS TO SUPPORT THE RELOCATION OF UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS AVIATION UNITS FROM OKINAWA JAPAN TO ANDERSEN AIR FORCE BASE, GUAM.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is TUTOR PERINI CORPORATION.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $75.9 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2011-04-06. End: 2014-07-21.
What is the track record of Tutor Perini Corporation on similar large-scale military construction projects?
Tutor Perini Corporation has a significant history of undertaking large-scale construction projects, including numerous military construction (MILCON) contracts for various branches of the U.S. military. Their portfolio includes projects involving airfield infrastructure, barracks, training facilities, and other critical base development. While their experience is extensive, like many large contractors, they have also faced scrutiny and challenges on some projects related to cost, schedule, and performance. A detailed review of their past performance on projects of similar scope, complexity, and geographic challenges (e.g., remote locations, overseas bases) would be necessary to fully assess their suitability and historical reliability for this specific Guam project. This would involve examining project completion records, any disputes or claims filed, and client satisfaction feedback.
How does the cost per square foot or per acre of this project compare to similar military aviation apron constructions?
Benchmarking the cost per unit for this $75.9 million project requires detailed information on the project's physical scope, such as the total area of the apron, the complexity of the pavement, and the specific features included (e.g., wash rack capacity, fueling system specifications). Without these granular details, a direct cost-per-unit comparison is challenging. However, military construction in remote locations like Guam often incurs higher costs due to logistical challenges, specialized labor requirements, and material transportation. Generally, large-scale airfield construction can range significantly, but projects involving specialized support facilities and remote execution tend to be at the higher end. A thorough analysis would involve comparing the square footage of the apron, the linear footage of fueling lines, and the capacity of the wash rack against similar projects executed by the DoD or other government agencies, adjusting for location and time.
What are the primary risks associated with constructing major infrastructure in Guam, and how were they mitigated?
Constructing major infrastructure in Guam presents several inherent risks. These include logistical challenges due to the island's remote location, potentially increasing material and equipment costs and delivery times. Environmental considerations are significant, given Guam's sensitive ecosystems, requiring strict adherence to environmental regulations and potentially impacting construction methods and timelines. Labor availability and costs can also be a factor. Furthermore, seismic activity and typhoon risks necessitate robust design and construction standards. Mitigation strategies typically involve detailed logistical planning, early engagement with environmental agencies, securing specialized labor, and incorporating resilient design features. The contract's firm-fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor assumed much of the cost-certainty risk, but schedule and performance risks remain.
What is the historical spending trend for similar aviation support infrastructure projects by the Department of the Navy?
Historical spending on similar aviation support infrastructure projects by the Department of the Navy (DoN) shows a consistent need for upgrades and new construction to support evolving aviation capabilities and force posture. Spending in this category, often falling under Military Construction (MILCON) appropriations, can fluctuate annually based on strategic priorities, budget allocations, and the lifecycle of existing facilities. Major projects like aircraft aprons, hangars, and fueling systems are typically high-cost, multi-year endeavors. Analyzing past DoN MILCON budgets and specific project awards for aviation facilities over the last 5-10 years would reveal trends in project scale, average costs, and the types of infrastructure prioritized. This specific project's $75.9 million cost should be viewed within the context of these broader spending patterns and the increasing strategic importance of facilities in the Indo-Pacific region.
How does the number of bidders (7) for this project inform the assessment of competition and potential value for money?
A total of 7 bidders for this large-scale military construction project suggests a reasonably competitive procurement process. Having multiple bidders generally increases the likelihood that the government receives competitive pricing and that the chosen contractor offers a strong value proposition. In a highly specialized field like military airfield construction, 7 bidders indicate a healthy market interest. However, the quality and responsiveness of those bids are critical. If only a few bids were technically compliant or financially competitive, the effective competition might be lower. The fact that it was awarded under 'full and open competition' reinforces the intent to maximize bidder participation. This level of competition is generally positive for taxpayers, as it pressures bidders to offer their best terms and prices to win the contract.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction › Highway, Street, and Bridge Construction
Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCT OF RESTORATION ACTIVITIES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Solicitation ID: N6274209R1314
Offers Received: 7
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 15901 OLDEN ST, SYLMAR, CA, 91342
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $75,913,721
Exercised Options: $75,913,721
Current Obligation: $75,913,721
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: N6274210D1312
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2011-04-06
Current End Date: 2014-07-21
Potential End Date: 2014-07-21 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2021-08-05
More Contracts from Tutor Perini Corporation
- 200312!001242!2100!CA78 !transatlantic Program Center !daca7803d0006 !A!N! !N!0002 !20030919!20040331!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 MT Wayte Avenue !framingham !MA!01701!* !* !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000000460000!n!n!000000000000!y199!other Miscellaneous Buildings !C2 !construction !1000!NOT Discernable or Classified !236220!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20040331!B! ! !n!a!d!n!u!1!001!n!2a!z!n!z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! !Y!Y! ! !0001! ! — $379.4M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Embassy Housing — $157.2M (Department of Defense)
- 200512!501265!2100!w912er!transatlantic Program Center !w912er04d0008 !A!N! !N!0003 ! !20050928!20061231!006954432!006954432!006954432!n!perini Corporation !73 Mount Wayte AVE !framingham !MA!01701!00000! !IZ!* !* !iraq !+000119283840!n!n!000000000000!y159!other Industrial Buildings !C2 !construction !000 !* !236220!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !a!u!j!2!001!b! !Z!N!A! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !a!a!000!a!b!n! ! ! !Y! ! !0001! ! — $127.2M (Department of Defense)
- Design/Build Hurricane Rebuild Task Order for SAN Juan Phase II East Base BID and Option 5: SE X Waterfront Boat Ramp — $117.0M (Department of Homeland Security)
- Ffp/Satoc Saudi Arabia (FMS) F-15 Modernizaiton Program, Khurais Electronic Warfare Range., Psab 13-0004 — $106.4M (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)