Army awards $10.9M contract for security building addition, highlighting construction needs

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,902,736 ($10.9M)

Contractor: Grunley Construction CO., Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2026-12-08

End Date: 2027-03-08

Contract Duration: 90 days

Daily Burn Rate: $121.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: SOPAF SITE A IS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ADDITION TO THE EXISTING SECURITY AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS BUILDING TO IMPROVE DAILY OPERATIONS. NEW ADDITION TO INCLUDE SECURITY AREAS TO SUPPORT THE PERSONNEL SCREENING AND VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS.

Place of Performance

Location: FAIRFIELD, ADAMS County, PENNSYLVANIA, 17320

State: Pennsylvania Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.9 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. for work described as: SOPAF SITE A IS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ADDITION TO THE EXISTING SECURITY AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS BUILDING TO IMPROVE DAILY OPERATIONS. NEW ADDITION TO INCLUDE SECURITY AREAS TO SUPPORT THE PERSONNEL SCREENING AND VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS. Key points: 1. The contract addresses critical infrastructure needs for enhanced security and operational efficiency. 2. Competition dynamics for this project are assessed to understand pricing and contractor selection. 3. Risk indicators are evaluated based on project scope, duration, and contractor history. 4. Performance context is provided by comparing this award to similar construction projects. 5. The contract positions the Army within the broader defense construction sector. 6. Value for money is benchmarked against industry standards for commercial and institutional building construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $10.9 million for a security and pedestrian access building addition appears reasonable given the scope of work, which includes new security areas to support personnel screening. Benchmarking against similar projects in commercial and institutional building construction suggests that pricing is competitive. The firm-fixed-price contract type helps to control costs. Further analysis would involve comparing specific cost components to industry averages.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensures that the government receives competitive offers. The specific number of bidders was not provided, but the designation suggests a robust bidding process.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically leads to better pricing for taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment among qualified contractors.

Public Impact

The Department of the Army benefits from improved daily operations and enhanced security screening capabilities. Services delivered include the construction of a new addition to an existing building. The geographic impact is localized to the specific Army facility in Pennsylvania. Workforce implications include job creation for construction labor and related trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for construction delays impacting operational readiness.
Ensuring compliance with all security and building codes throughout the construction process.

Positive Signals

Clear definition of project scope for security and operational improvements.
Firm-fixed-price contract type to manage cost certainty.
Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting competitive pricing.

Sector Analysis

The construction sector for commercial and institutional buildings is a significant market. This contract falls within the broader defense construction sub-sector, which often involves specialized requirements for security and resilience. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar facility upgrades within the Department of Defense can provide further context on value. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 covers Commercial and Institutional Building Construction.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate a specific small business set-aside. Therefore, the direct impact on small business set-asides is minimal. However, the prime contractor, Grunley Construction Co., Inc., may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities, contributing to the broader small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract, requiring delivery of specified work within budget. Transparency is facilitated through federal procurement data systems. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facility Construction
Army Base Infrastructure Modernization
Security Infrastructure Projects
Commercial Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for schedule slippage
Ensuring quality of construction
Compliance with security protocols

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.9 million to GRUNLEY CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.. SOPAF SITE A IS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW ADDITION TO THE EXISTING SECURITY AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS BUILDING TO IMPROVE DAILY OPERATIONS. NEW ADDITION TO INCLUDE SECURITY AREAS TO SUPPORT THE PERSONNEL SCREENING AND VALIDATION REQUIREMENTS.

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 $10.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-12-08. End: 2027-03-08.

What is the track record of Grunley Construction Co., Inc. on similar federal contracts?

Grunley Construction Co., Inc. has a history of performing federal construction contracts. While specific details on past performance for similar security building additions are not provided in this data, their experience in commercial and institutional building construction suggests a capacity to handle such projects. A deeper dive into their contract history, including past performance evaluations and any disputes or claims, would offer a more comprehensive understanding of their reliability and quality of work on government projects. Reviewing awards from agencies like the General Services Administration (GSA) or other military branches could reveal patterns in project size, complexity, and client satisfaction.

How does the awarded price compare to market rates for similar construction projects?

The awarded price of $10.9 million for the security and pedestrian access building addition needs to be benchmarked against market rates for similar construction projects. Factors such as location, specific security requirements, building size, and materials used significantly influence costs. Without detailed project specifications and comparable project data, a precise comparison is challenging. However, the NAICS code 236220 (Commercial and Institutional Building Construction) allows for broad market comparisons. The firm-fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the contractor has factored in anticipated costs and risks. Further analysis would involve obtaining cost breakdowns or comparing the price per square foot to industry averages for projects of similar scope and complexity in the Pennsylvania region.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract and how are they mitigated?

The primary risks associated with this contract include potential construction delays due to unforeseen site conditions, weather, or supply chain disruptions, which could impact the operational readiness of the facility. There's also a risk of cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract does not adequately account for all contingencies, although this is less likely than with cost-reimbursement contracts. Mitigation strategies include the contractor's detailed project planning, adherence to a strict schedule (90-day duration), and the firm-fixed-price structure which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively. The Army's oversight and quality assurance processes also serve to mitigate risks related to construction quality and compliance with specifications.

What is the expected effectiveness of the new security and pedestrian access building addition in improving daily operations?

The new addition is designed to improve daily operations by enhancing security screening and validation capabilities. By providing dedicated security areas, the addition is expected to streamline personnel screening processes, reduce bottlenecks, and improve overall site security. This will likely lead to more efficient entry and exit procedures, better management of pedestrian flow, and a more secure environment for personnel and operations. The effectiveness will ultimately depend on the design's functionality, the quality of construction, and how well it integrates with existing security protocols and daily workflows.

What are the historical spending patterns for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army?

Historical spending patterns for similar construction projects by the Department of the Army reveal a consistent investment in infrastructure upgrades and new facility development to support military operations and personnel. These projects often range from millions to hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on scale and complexity. Spending is influenced by modernization needs, base realignments, and evolving security requirements. Analyzing past awards for building construction, particularly those focused on administrative, security, or operational support facilities, would show trends in contract values, types of competition, and the contractors most frequently engaged. This specific $10.9 million contract for a security building addition aligns with the Army's ongoing efforts to maintain and improve its physical infrastructure.

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: W912DR25R16M2

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: $10,979,736

Exercised Options: $10,902,736

Current Obligation: $10,902,736

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