DoD's $152M contract for NAWS China facility repairs awarded to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $152,489,685 ($152.5M)

Contractor: RQ Construction, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-09-03

End Date: 2025-08-14

Contract Duration: 1,806 days

Daily Burn Rate: $84.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: (CONSTR) RM19-1867 -- REPAIR WINGS 2-5 MICHELSON LAB, NAWS CHINA

Place of Performance

Location: RIDGECREST, KERN County, CALIFORNIA, 93555

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $152.5 million to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC for work described as: (CONSTR) RM19-1867 -- REPAIR WINGS 2-5 MICHELSON LAB, NAWS CHINA Key points: 1. Contract value of $152.5M for facility repairs. 2. Awarded to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC. 3. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price. 4. Duration of 1806 days. 5. Located in China Lake, California. 6. Competition was Full and Open.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $152.5 million for repairing wings 2-5 of the Michelson Lab at NAWS China Lake appears to be a significant investment. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale construction and repair projects within the Department of Defense is crucial for a comprehensive value assessment. Without specific details on the scope of work and materials, it's challenging to definitively assess pricing fairness. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests a degree of cost certainty for the government, provided the scope is well-defined.

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 bids. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. While more bidders could potentially drive prices lower, three offers generally provide a reasonable basis for price comparison and selection.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to bid, potentially leading to more competitive pricing and better value.

Public Impact

Benefits the Department of the Navy by ensuring the operational readiness of critical laboratory facilities. Delivers essential repair and maintenance services for Wings 2-5 of the Michelson Laboratory. Geographic impact is localized to NAWS China Lake, California. Supports the construction and skilled trades workforce in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope of work is not precisely managed under the fixed-price contract.
Dependence on a single contractor for a large-scale, critical facility repair project.
Risk of delays impacting the operational capabilities of the Michelson Laboratory.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process.
Awarded to a single entity, potentially leading to streamlined project management.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. The Department of Defense is a significant client for construction services, with substantial annual spending on facility maintenance, repair, and new construction. Benchmarking this $152.5 million contract against other large-scale military construction projects would provide context on its relative size and investment.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of small business subcontracting requirements. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears minimal for this specific award. However, the prime contractor, RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors, which would need to be tracked separately.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Department of the Navy. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed project progress and specific oversight activities may not be publicly disclosed.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facility Maintenance and Repair
Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake Construction Projects
Michelson Laboratory Infrastructure Upgrades

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep in long-term construction projects.
Reliance on contractor's ability to manage complex logistics and resources.
Risk of material cost escalation impacting fixed-price contract.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $152.5 million to RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC. (CONSTR) RM19-1867 -- REPAIR WINGS 2-5 MICHELSON LAB, NAWS CHINA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $152.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-09-03. End: 2025-08-14.

What is the specific scope of work for the repair of Wings 2-5 at the Michelson Lab?

The provided data does not detail the specific scope of work for the repair of Wings 2-5 at the Michelson Laboratory. This would typically include a comprehensive list of tasks such as structural repairs, HVAC system upgrades, electrical work, plumbing, roofing, interior renovations, and potentially specialized laboratory equipment integration or relocation. Understanding the detailed scope is essential for evaluating the appropriateness of the $152.5 million contract value and assessing potential risks related to unforeseen conditions or change orders.

How does the $152.5 million contract value compare to similar facility repair projects within the Department of Defense?

Without access to a database of comparable Department of Defense facility repair projects with detailed scope and cost information, a direct comparison is difficult. However, $152.5 million is a substantial sum, suggesting a large-scale renovation or repair effort. Factors influencing comparability include the size and condition of the facilities, the complexity of the required work (e.g., hazardous material abatement, specialized lab requirements), and the geographic location which can affect labor and material costs. A thorough benchmark analysis would require identifying projects with similar square footage, age, structural integrity issues, and functional requirements.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) being used to monitor the progress and success of this contract?

The provided data does not specify the key performance indicators (KPIs) for this contract. Typically, for construction and repair contracts, KPIs would include adherence to schedule (milestones and overall completion date), quality of workmanship (meeting specifications and standards), safety compliance (incident rates), and budget management. The contracting officer's representative (COR) would be responsible for monitoring these KPIs and ensuring the contractor meets contractual obligations. Performance metrics are crucial for ensuring the government receives the intended value and that the repairs are completed effectively.

What is the track record of RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC in performing similar large-scale government construction contracts?

Information regarding RQ CONSTRUCTION, LLC's specific track record on large-scale government construction contracts is not provided in the data. A comprehensive assessment would involve reviewing their past performance ratings on federal contracts, the types and values of previous projects completed, their history of on-time and on-budget delivery, and any past performance issues or disputes. Federal procurement data systems often contain contractor performance information that could shed light on their capabilities and reliability for a project of this magnitude.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm fixed-price contract for a project of this duration and scope?

Firm fixed-price (FFP) contracts offer cost certainty but can introduce risks if the scope of work is not perfectly defined or if unforeseen conditions arise. For a project of this duration (1806 days) and scale, risks include the contractor potentially underestimating costs, leading to quality compromises or requests for change orders to recoup losses. Conversely, if the contractor significantly overestimates, the government may pay a premium. Unforeseen site conditions, material price fluctuations, or design changes can also strain an FFP contract, potentially leading to disputes or delays if not managed proactively through contract modifications.

How does the competition level (3 bidders) impact the potential value for taxpayers on this $152.5 million contract?

A competition level with three bidders suggests a moderate degree of market interest and potential for competitive pricing. While more bidders could theoretically drive prices down further, three offers generally provide a reasonable basis for the government to assess whether the proposed prices are fair and reasonable. The contracting agency would have evaluated the proposals not just on price but also on technical merit and past performance. The value for taxpayers is influenced by whether these three bids represented the best available options and if the selection process ensured optimal value, considering both cost and quality.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Solicitation ID: N6247315R2434

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3194 LIONSHEAD AVE, CARLSBAD, CA, 92010

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $152,489,685

Exercised Options: $152,489,685

Current Obligation: $152,489,685

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 65

Total Subaward Amount: $66,792,408

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6247316D1885

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline