Department of Defense awards $20.08M for SITE R Consolidated Maintenance Facility to Grunley Construction Co., Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $20,081,290 ($20.1M)

Contractor: Grunley Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2023-03-30

End Date: 2026-11-28

Contract Duration: 1,339 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: SITE R CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFIELD, ADAMS County, PENNSYLVANIA, 17320

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $20.1 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: SITE R CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is a firm-fixed-price delivery order, providing cost certainty for the government. 3. Performance period spans over three years, indicating a significant, long-term facility need. 4. The contractor, Grunley Construction Co., Inc., has a track record in commercial and institutional building. 5. The project is located in Pennsylvania, potentially impacting the local construction workforce and economy. 6. No small business set-aside was indicated, suggesting the primary award was not specifically targeted for small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $20.08 million for a consolidated maintenance facility appears reasonable given the project scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale construction projects for federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure helps mitigate cost overruns, which is a positive indicator for value.

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 number of bidders is not specified, but this method generally fosters price discovery and encourages competitive pricing. The agency sought proposals from a wide range of qualified contractors.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is generally favorable for taxpayers as it is expected to yield the most competitive pricing and best value by allowing a broad base of contractors to compete.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the Army, who will receive a new consolidated maintenance facility. The facility will support critical maintenance operations, ensuring readiness and operational efficiency. The geographic impact is concentrated in Pennsylvania, where the facility will be constructed. The project is likely to create or sustain jobs within the construction sector in the local Pennsylvania area.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for construction delays impacting facility readiness.
Risk of unforeseen site conditions requiring change orders.
Dependence on a single contractor for a significant facility build.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty.
Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.
Contractor has experience in similar construction projects.
Long-term performance period allows for phased execution and oversight.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this sector often supports infrastructure development, military facilities, and government buildings. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot or per project for similar-sized federal construction projects.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting goals for small businesses in the provided data. This suggests that the primary contract was awarded to a large business. Further analysis would be needed to determine if the prime contractor intends to utilize small businesses for subcontracting opportunities, which could impact the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and relevant Army personnel. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides a degree of accountability for the contractor to deliver within the agreed-upon cost. Transparency is facilitated by the public nature of federal contract awards, though detailed project oversight mechanisms are not specified.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Maintenance and Repair
Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Army Base Operations Support

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if contractor mismanages risks.
Risk of schedule delays impacting facility operational readiness.
Quality control challenges on a large-scale construction project.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $20.1 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. SITE R CONSOLIDATED MAINTENANCE FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $20.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-03-30. End: 2026-11-28.

What is the track record of Grunley Construction Co., Inc. with federal contracts, particularly within the Department of Defense?

Grunley Construction Co., Inc. has a history of performing construction services for various entities, including federal agencies. While specific details on their Department of Defense contract history are not provided in this data snippet, their award for the SITE R Consolidated Maintenance Facility suggests they meet the qualifications and experience required for such projects. A deeper dive into their past performance ratings, contract values, and project types within the DoD would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their track record and reliability for this specific type of work.

How does the awarded amount of $20.08 million compare to similar federal maintenance facility construction projects?

The $20.08 million award for the SITE R Consolidated Maintenance Facility is a substantial investment. To benchmark its value, one would compare it against similar projects in terms of size (square footage), complexity, location, and the specific types of maintenance operations supported. Factors like prevailing construction costs in Pennsylvania, the firm-fixed-price nature of the contract (which aims for cost certainty), and the duration of the performance period (over three years) are crucial for a comprehensive comparison. Without specific data on comparable projects, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents excellent or fair value, but it aligns with significant infrastructure investments.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm-fixed-price contract for a large construction project?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price contract for a large construction project like the SITE R Consolidated Maintenance Facility lies in the potential for the contractor to face unforeseen cost increases that erode their profit margin, potentially leading to quality compromises or disputes if not managed carefully. While the government benefits from cost certainty, the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns due to factors like material price volatility, labor shortages, or unexpected site conditions. Effective project management, clear contract specifications, and robust oversight are crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the project's successful completion within budget and to the required standards.

How effective is full and open competition in ensuring the best value for taxpayers on large construction projects?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective method for ensuring the best value for taxpayers on large construction projects. By allowing all responsible sources to bid, it maximizes the pool of potential contractors, thereby increasing the likelihood of receiving competitive pricing and innovative solutions. This broad competition drives down costs and encourages contractors to offer their best value proposition. While it requires a thorough evaluation process to select the best offer, the inherent competition typically leads to more favorable outcomes for the government and, by extension, the taxpayers, compared to sole-source or limited competition scenarios.

What are the implications of the contract duration (1339 days) on project oversight and potential cost fluctuations?

A contract duration of 1339 days (approximately 3.6 years) for the SITE R Consolidated Maintenance Facility implies a significant, multi-phase construction project. This extended timeline necessitates robust and continuous oversight from the government to monitor progress, ensure quality control, and manage any potential scope changes or unforeseen issues. While the firm-fixed-price structure aims to cap costs, a longer duration increases the exposure to market fluctuations in material and labor costs, which the contractor bears. Effective management of the schedule and proactive risk mitigation are critical to prevent delays and cost escalations over this extended period.

What is the typical cost range for constructing similar consolidated maintenance facilities for the Department of Defense?

Determining a precise 'typical' cost range for similar consolidated maintenance facilities for the Department of Defense is complex, as project scope, size (square footage), specific functional requirements, geographic location, and prevailing market conditions vary significantly. However, a $20.08 million award for a facility of this nature suggests a project of considerable scale and complexity. Factors such as specialized equipment installation, environmental controls, security features, and the specific type of maintenance operations to be housed would heavily influence the final cost. Benchmarking would require detailed analysis of recently awarded contracts for comparable facilities, considering cost per square foot and the specific mission requirements.

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: W912DR22R0009

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 15020 SHADY GROVE RD STE 500, ROCKVILLE, MD, 20850

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,081,290

Exercised Options: $20,081,290

Current Obligation: $20,081,290

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912DR22D0007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline