DoD's $56.6M Beale AFB DCGS Facility Contract Awarded to Swinerton Builders
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $56,563,090 ($56.6M)
Contractor: Swinerton Builders
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2014-08-27
End Date: 2018-07-03
Contract Duration: 1,406 days
Daily Burn Rate: $40.2K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Number of Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN-BID-BUILD DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SUPPORT (DCGS) OPERATIONS FACILITY, BEALE AFB, CALIFORNIA
Place of Performance
Location: BEALE AFB, YUBA County, CALIFORNIA, 95903
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $56.6 million to SWINERTON BUILDERS for work described as: IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN-BID-BUILD DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SUPPORT (DCGS) OPERATIONS FACILITY, BEALE AFB, CALIFORNIA Key points: 1. The contract was awarded using a firm-fixed-price structure, indicating a defined scope and cost. 2. A full and open competition process was employed, suggesting a broad range of potential bidders. 3. The contract duration of 1406 days points to a significant, long-term construction project. 4. The project falls under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction, a key sector for infrastructure development. 5. The award to Swinerton Builders represents a substantial investment in military facility upgrades. 6. The contract's value is benchmarked against similar large-scale construction projects within the DoD.
Value Assessment
Rating: good
The contract value of approximately $56.6 million for a large-scale facility construction project appears reasonable within the context of Department of Defense infrastructure spending. Benchmarking against similar projects of comparable size and complexity would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that cost overruns are primarily the responsibility of the contractor, which can be a positive indicator for cost control.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded through a full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. With six bidders participating, the competition level suggests a healthy market response for this type of construction project. This broad competition is generally expected to drive competitive pricing and encourage efficiency from the winning bidder.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition with multiple bidders is beneficial for taxpayers as it increases the likelihood of securing the best possible price for the required construction services.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the personnel who will utilize the new Distributed Common Ground Support (DCGS) Operations Facility. The contract delivers a critical piece of infrastructure for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) operations. The geographic impact is localized to Beale Air Force Base in California, enhancing its operational capabilities. The project will likely involve a significant number of construction workers, providing employment opportunities in the region.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract does not adequately account for all project contingencies.
- Risk of schedule delays impacting the operational readiness of the DCGS facility.
- Ensuring the quality of construction meets stringent military standards throughout the project lifecycle.
Positive Signals
- The firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
- The full and open competition suggests a competitive bidding process that likely resulted in a fair market price.
- The long contract duration allows for thorough planning and execution of a complex construction project.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. The Department of Defense is a major client for construction services, frequently awarding large contracts for military bases, housing, and operational facilities. Spending in this sector is influenced by national security priorities, infrastructure modernization needs, and economic conditions. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects awarded by the Army or other branches.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). As a large-scale construction project, it is likely that the prime contractor, Swinerton Builders, will engage subcontractors. The extent to which small businesses will be involved as subcontractors will depend on the prime contractor's subcontracting plan and the availability of qualified small business firms for specific trades and services. Further analysis would be needed to determine the specific subcontracting goals and outcomes.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and their representatives within the Department of the Army. Quality assurance surveillance plans (QASPs) would be in place to monitor contractor performance and ensure compliance with contract requirements. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting mechanisms. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction Projects
- Department of Defense Facilities
- Ground Support Systems
- Intelligence Operations Infrastructure
- Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost growth if unforeseen site conditions arise.
- Risk of schedule delays impacting operational readiness.
- Ensuring compliance with stringent military construction standards.
- Adequacy of contractor's quality control plan.
Tags
department-of-defense, department-of-the-army, construction, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, firm-fixed-price, definitive-contract, full-and-open-competition, california, beale-air-force-base, large-contract, infrastructure, intelligence-support
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $56.6 million to SWINERTON BUILDERS. IGF::OT::IGF DESIGN-BID-BUILD DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SUPPORT (DCGS) OPERATIONS FACILITY, BEALE AFB, CALIFORNIA
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is SWINERTON BUILDERS.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Army).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $56.6 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2014-08-27. End: 2018-07-03.
What is Swinerton Builders' track record with large federal construction contracts, particularly for the Department of Defense?
Swinerton Builders has a significant history of performing large-scale construction projects, including many for federal agencies and the Department of Defense. Their portfolio often includes complex facilities requiring specialized construction methods and adherence to strict government standards. While specific details on past DoD projects would require deeper database analysis, their general experience suggests a capacity to handle contracts of this magnitude. Reviewing past performance evaluations and any documented issues on previous federal contracts would provide a more granular understanding of their reliability and quality of work in similar contexts.
How does the awarded amount of $56.6 million compare to similar DoD DCGS facility construction projects?
Benchmarking the $56.6 million award requires comparing it to similar Distributed Common Ground Support (DCGS) operations facilities or comparable intelligence/operations infrastructure projects undertaken by the Department of Defense. Factors such as square footage, complexity of technical requirements (e.g., IT infrastructure, security), geographic location (which affects labor and material costs), and the specific year of award are crucial for a fair comparison. Without access to a database of comparable projects with detailed cost breakdowns, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for a large-scale, specialized facility, this figure appears within a plausible range for major military construction.
What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a project of this duration and complexity?
The primary risks with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract, especially for a long-duration project like this (1406 days), revolve around potential cost increases for the contractor that are not adequately anticipated in the fixed price. This could lead to the contractor seeking change orders or, in extreme cases, facing financial distress if unforeseen issues (e.g., material price escalations, unforeseen site conditions, design changes) significantly impact their costs. For the government, the risk is ensuring the contractor has built in sufficient contingency, and that the fixed price truly represents best value. Robust oversight and a well-defined scope are critical to mitigating these risks.
What is the typical effectiveness of Inspector General (IG) oversight in ensuring accountability for large DoD construction contracts?
Inspector General (IG) oversight plays a crucial role in ensuring accountability for large DoD construction contracts by conducting audits, inspections, and investigations into allegations of fraud, waste, and abuse. Their work can identify systemic weaknesses in contract administration, procurement processes, or contractor performance. While IGs provide an essential layer of accountability, their effectiveness is dependent on their resources, scope of review, and the ability to enforce recommendations. Their findings often lead to corrective actions, policy changes, and, in some cases, criminal or civil penalties, thereby enhancing overall program integrity and taxpayer protection.
How has historical spending on similar DoD infrastructure projects evolved over the past decade?
Historical spending on similar DoD infrastructure projects has generally trended upwards, driven by modernization needs, aging facilities, and evolving operational requirements. Factors such as fluctuating defense budgets, geopolitical priorities, and the increasing complexity of military technology have influenced investment levels. While specific data for DCGS facilities would require targeted analysis, the overall trend in military construction spending often reflects a commitment to maintaining and upgrading critical infrastructure. Periods of increased global tension or new technological deployments typically correlate with higher spending on related facilities.
What are the implications of the 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' NAICS code for this contract's execution and oversight?
The NAICS code 236220, 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction,' signifies that the contract falls under general building construction for non-residential purposes. This implies the project involves standard construction practices for facilities like offices, operations centers, or similar institutional structures. For execution, it means the contractor will likely manage various trades (electrical, plumbing, HVAC, structural) and materials common in commercial construction. Oversight will focus on adherence to building codes, safety regulations, project timelines, and the specific technical requirements outlined in the contract, ensuring the facility is built to functional and durable standards.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction
Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Solicitation ID: W9123814R0008
Offers Received: 6
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Parent Company: Swinerton Incorporated
Address: 6890 W 52ND AVE STE 201, ARVADA, CO, 80002
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $58,632,804
Exercised Options: $56,563,090
Current Obligation: $56,563,090
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2014-08-27
Current End Date: 2018-07-03
Potential End Date: 2018-07-03 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2022-08-29
More Contracts from Swinerton Builders
- TAS::47 4543::TAS *recovery*construction Manager AS Constructor (CMC) Services for the Repair and Alteration of the Pjkk U. S. Courthouse (part I), 300 ALA Moana Boulevard, Honolulu, Hawaii — $101.3M (General Services Administration)
- M - Construction of 4TH Infantry Division (ID) Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB) General Support Aviation Battalion (gsab) Maintenance Hangar, Project Number (PN) 77304, Fort Carson, Colorado — $60.7M (Department of Defense)
- US Department of Agriculture (usda) Agriculture Research Services (ARS) Research & Development (R&D) Center, Design-Bid-Build (DBB) Construction — $57.7M (Department of Defense)
- 1141829 -- P234 C-40 Reserve Maintenance Hangar AT Naval AIR Station Whidbey Island, WA — $28.3M (Department of Defense)
- Parking Structure Igf::ot::igf — $27.2M (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)