View non-flash version
Navy Overhaul Market Exhibit 5 Overhaul Contracting Profile By Type Ship (regular overhauls only) Fiscal Year Cruisers/destroyers Number of overhauls 1984 5 1985 6 1986 4 Competing limits coastwide bids homeport areas only 5 6 4 Type contract awarded fixed price incentive CPAF 5 3 3 4 Type procurement used RFP-2P FSS/MSS/NSS 5 3 3 3 1 Frigates Number of overhauls 9 3 _ Competing limits coastwide bids homeport areas only 7 2 3 - Type contract awarded fixed price CPAF CPFF 6 2 1 3 - Type procurement used IFB RFP-2P FSS/MSS/NSS 6 3 1 2 - Amphibious Number of overhauls 7 9 3 Competing limits coastwide bids homeport areas only 5 2 5 4 3 Type contract awarded fixed price CPAF CPFF 4 1 2 8 1 3 Type procurement used IFB RFP-1P RFP-2P FSS/MSS/NSS 4 3 7 1 1 2 1 Support Number of overhauls Competing limits coastwide bids homeport areas only 4 1 3 8 5 3 6 6 Type contract awarded fixed price 4 8 6 Type procurement used IFB RFP-1P RFP-2P 3 1 4 3 1 5 1 Submarines Number of overhauls _ 2 _ Competing limits - N/A - Type contract awarded - TBD - Type procurement used Sole _ 2 _ Minesweepers/Patrol Hydro- foil Number of overhauls 1 3 1 Competing limits coastwide bids homeport areas only 1 3 1 Type contract awarded fixed price 1 3 1 Type procurement used IFB RFP-1P 1 3 1 Aircraft Carrier Number of overhauls _ _ 1 Competing limits - - N/A Type contract awarded - - TBD Type procurement used Sole - - 1 (continued from page 27) quest, the Department has sought funding totaling $36 million to open two new ports, one to sup- port a battleship surface action group at Staten Island, NY, and one for a carrier battle group at Everett, WA. The total military construction cost of facilities for these two ports is estimated at $750 million. However, a substan- tial part of these funds would be required to homeport these new ships whether new or existing ports are used. The committee has approved the initial projects requested for both of these facilities, subject to a requirement that no funds autho- rized to be appropriated in this act for naval strategic homeport- ing may be obligated or expended until 90 days have elapsed follow- ing the submission of a report to the Congress by the Secretary of the Navy justifying the expendi- tures of such funds on the basis of military necessity and cost effec- tiveness. INDUSTRY ACTIVITY Navy continues to be the domi- nant source of shipyard business in this country. Commercial work is depressed due to the strong dollar and poor economic conditions in international and domestic ship- ping. Most U.S. ship repair yards are relying on Navy contracts for their business base. Navy Contract Awards Major Navy contract awards over the past three months are described below: • Todd Shipyards—An $11.5 mil- lion fixed price contract was awarded the San Francisco divi- sion to overhaul the ammunition ship Mt. Hood (AE-29). Todd was one of five bidders. The San Pedro division received a $3.5 million fixed price contract to perform SRA work on the destroyer Paul Foster (DD 964). It was one of two bidders. • Boston Shipyard—The firm re- ceived a $5.0 million fixed price contract from the Military Sealift Command to overhaul the fleet oiler Mississinewa (TAO 143). Boston Shipyard was one of eight firms that bid the job. • Southwest Marine—The San Pe- dro division received a $14.9 mil- lion contract to overhaul the am- phibious landing ship Mt. Vernon (LSD 39). Two firms competed for this contract. • Continental Maritime (San Die- go)—A $7.5 million fixed price contract was received to overhaul the frigate Roark (FF 1053). Con- tinental was one of six firms com- peting for the contract. • NASSCO—The firm was awarded a $12.8 million fixed price contract to overhaul the amphibious as- sault ship Tripoli (LPH 10). Two companies competed for this job. A $6.0 million fixed price contract for SRA work on the destroyer Merrill (DD 976) was awarded to NASSCO. Three firms competed for the work. NASSCO also re- ceived a $3.5 cost plus award fee contract for phased maintenance of four tank landing ships. Two firms competed for this job. • Service Engineering—This San Francisco firm received a $4.2 mil- lion cost plus award fee contract for phased maintenance of four Kilauea-class ammunition ships: Kiska (AE 35), Shasta (AE 33), Mt. Hood (AE 29) and Flint (AE 32). Five firms competed for this contract. • Braswell-Hoboken—The yard re- ceived a $7.6 million fixed price contract to overhaul the frigate McCloy (FF 1038). Work is to be performed by its Hoboken divi- sion. Seven firms competed for this contract. Boston Shipyard was low bidder at $5.8 million but, according to the Navy contracting office, was "determined to be non- responsible." • Litton-Ingalls—A $12.0 million fixed price incentive contract was awarded to overhaul the destroyer Preble (DDG 46). Litton was one of five firms competing for this contract. • Burrard Yarrows—This Canadian firm was awarded a $3.0 million fixed price contract for work on the combat stores ship Spica (TAFS 9). The firm was one of six companies who competed for the job. • Alabama Dry Dock—The firm re- ceived an $8.8 million fixed price contract to overhaul and upgrade the combat stores ship Saturn (TAFS 10). Ten firms competed for this contract. PROJECTED NAVY SHIP MAINTENANCE In May Navy released its 1985-86 schedule of ship maintenance to be performed in commercial yards. It shows the dramatic change in over- haul scheduling which results from the shift to engineered operating cycle and phased maintenance. International Maritime Associates, Inc. (IMA) provides systematic cov- erage of the Navy ship maintenance and modernization market. Subscrib- ers to IMA's unique Navy ship maintenance reporting service receive quarterly updates and special memos which systematically report impor- tant business developments. Included in the reports are projected repair work, contract awards, industry developments, policy changes, legislation, etc. information is up-to-date, the analysis concise. The reports are designed for use by marketing managers and business planners. This service can be obtained for $380.00 to cover the period July 1985 through June 1986. To order please contact: International Maritime Asso- ciates, Inc., 1800 K Street N. W., Washington, D.C. 20006; Telephone (202) 296-4615; Telecopier (202) 293-7508; Telex 64325 IMA. 28 Maritime Reporter/Engineering News
