Patrick Constructors awarded $4.3M contract for Fort Greely chiller replacement, highlighting Army's infrastructure investment

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $4,337,932 ($4.3M)

Contractor: Patrick Constructors, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-07-01

End Date: 2027-03-29

Contract Duration: 636 days

Daily Burn Rate: $6.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: FTG255 MEB 2 CHILLER REPLACEMENT, FORT GREELY, ALASKA

Place of Performance

Location: FORT GREELY, SOUTHEAST FAIRBANKS County, ALASKA, 99731

State: Alaska Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $4.3 million to PATRICK CONSTRUCTORS, LLC for work described as: FTG255 MEB 2 CHILLER REPLACEMENT, FORT GREELY, ALASKA Key points: 1. Contract addresses critical infrastructure needs at a remote military installation. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure aims to control costs for the government. 3. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate procurement strategy. 4. The contract duration of 636 days indicates a significant scope of work. 5. Performance is located in Alaska, potentially adding logistical complexities and costs. 6. The award value aligns with typical infrastructure replacement projects of this nature.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $4.3 million for a chiller replacement at Fort Greely appears reasonable given the scope and location. While direct comparisons are difficult without specific project details, similar large-scale HVAC replacement projects in remote or challenging environments can range from several hundred thousand to millions of dollars. The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests that the contractor assumes the risk for cost overruns, which is generally favorable for the government. Benchmarking against other Department of Defense infrastructure projects of similar size and complexity would provide further context on value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This procurement method indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain sources were excluded, possibly due to specific qualifications, past performance, or other criteria deemed necessary for this particular project. The exclusion of sources limits the pool of potential bidders compared to unrestricted full and open competition. The number of bids received (4) suggests a moderate level of competition within the qualified bidder pool.

Taxpayer Impact: The exclusion of sources, while potentially ensuring specialized capabilities, may limit the downward pressure on pricing that a wider, unrestricted competition could generate. Taxpayers benefit from the competition among the qualified bidders, but the exclusion means the absolute lowest price achievable through the broadest possible competition might not have been realized.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army and personnel stationed at Fort Greely, Alaska, who will receive improved and reliable climate control systems. The contract delivers essential infrastructure upgrades, ensuring the operational readiness and habitability of facilities. The geographic impact is localized to Fort Greely, Alaska, a key strategic location. The project will likely involve skilled labor in construction, HVAC, and project management within the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for increased costs due to the remote location in Alaska, impacting logistics and labor.
The exclusion of sources in the competition could limit price discovery and potentially lead to higher costs than a fully open bid.
Firm-fixed-price contracts can sometimes lead to reduced scope or quality if not carefully managed, though this is less common in infrastructure projects.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts cost-overrun risk to the contractor, protecting the government's budget.
Awarding to Patrick Constructors, LLC, suggests they met the specific requirements and qualifications set forth.
The project addresses critical infrastructure, ensuring long-term operational capability and safety at the base.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction and Facilities Maintenance sector, specifically focusing on HVAC systems. The market for large-scale government infrastructure projects, particularly in remote locations like Alaska, is specialized. The total addressable market for such projects is significant, driven by ongoing military base modernization and sustainment efforts. Comparable spending benchmarks for chiller replacements can vary widely based on facility size, age, and environmental conditions, but a $4.3 million award for a military installation suggests a substantial system requiring specialized engineering and installation.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Patrick Constructors, LLC, is listed as the contractor. Further investigation would be needed to determine if this company qualifies as a small business under relevant NAICS codes and size standards. If it is a large business, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses mandated by a set-aside. However, prime contractors on large federal projects often utilize small businesses for various components of the work, depending on their own subcontracting plans and the nature of the project.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily be managed by the Department of the Army, likely through contracting officers and project managers responsible for Fort Greely. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of specified services and equipment. Transparency is facilitated through federal contract databases like FPDS, where award details are published. The Inspector General for the Department of Defense would have jurisdiction to investigate any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse related to this contract.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Infrastructure Modernization
Department of Defense Facilities Sustainment
Army Corps of Engineers Construction Projects
HVAC System Replacements in Federal Buildings

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns due to remote location logistics.
Limited competition due to exclusion of sources may impact price.
Contract performance risk associated with complex infrastructure replacement.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $4.3 million to PATRICK CONSTRUCTORS, LLC. FTG255 MEB 2 CHILLER REPLACEMENT, FORT GREELY, ALASKA

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PATRICK CONSTRUCTORS, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $4.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-07-01. End: 2027-03-29.

What is the track record of Patrick Constructors, LLC, with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

A review of federal contract databases indicates that Patrick Constructors, LLC has a history of receiving federal awards, primarily from the Department of Defense and related agencies. Their contract portfolio often includes construction, renovation, and maintenance services, aligning with the nature of the current award. Specific details regarding past performance on similar HVAC replacement projects, adherence to schedules, and budget performance would require a deeper dive into individual contract histories. Analyzing their performance on previous firm-fixed-price contracts would be particularly relevant to assess their reliability in managing costs and delivering scope as agreed. Any past issues with contract closeouts, disputes, or performance deficiencies would be key risk indicators.

How does the $4.3 million award compare to similar chiller replacement projects at other military installations?

Benchmarking this $4.3 million award requires comparing it against similar projects at other military installations, considering factors like the size and capacity of the chillers being replaced, the complexity of the installation (e.g., existing infrastructure, accessibility), and the geographic location. Projects in remote or high-cost-of-living areas like Alaska often command higher prices due to logistical challenges and labor rates. Without specific technical details of the Fort Greely system, a precise comparison is difficult. However, large-scale chiller replacements in major facilities can range from $1 million to over $10 million. This award appears to be within a reasonable range for a significant infrastructure upgrade at a remote base, assuming the scope is substantial.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, given its location and the 'exclusion of sources' competition method?

The primary risks associated with this contract stem from its remote location in Alaska and the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' method. The Alaskan location introduces logistical challenges, potentially increasing transportation costs for materials and equipment, and may require higher labor rates due to the cost of living and availability of skilled workers. The 'exclusion of sources' method, while potentially ensuring specialized capabilities, inherently limits the competitive pool. This could lead to less aggressive pricing than a truly unrestricted competition might yield. There's also a risk that the excluded sources might possess unique expertise or cost efficiencies that are now unavailable. Finally, firm-fixed-price contracts carry inherent risks if unforeseen site conditions or scope creep occur, though the contractor assumes most of this risk.

What is the expected impact of this contract on the operational effectiveness and habitability at Fort Greely?

This contract is expected to have a significant positive impact on both the operational effectiveness and habitability at Fort Greely. Reliable and efficient climate control systems are crucial for maintaining comfortable and safe living and working environments for military personnel. Furthermore, critical operational equipment and facilities often require specific temperature and humidity controls to function optimally and prevent damage. By replacing aging or inefficient chillers, this contract ensures the continuity of essential services, reduces the risk of system failures that could disrupt operations or compromise safety, and likely improves energy efficiency, leading to lower long-term operating costs for the installation.

How does the current spending on HVAC replacements at Fort Greely compare to historical patterns?

To assess historical spending patterns for HVAC replacements at Fort Greely, one would need to analyze contract data over several years, looking specifically for awards related to chiller systems, HVAC upgrades, and major facility maintenance. This single award of $4.3 million represents a substantial investment. Understanding if this is a one-off major replacement or part of a larger, ongoing program of infrastructure renewal is key. If historical data shows frequent, smaller repairs or less frequent, larger replacements, this award's context becomes clearer. A significant increase in spending in this category could indicate aging infrastructure requiring urgent attention or a strategic decision to modernize facilities.

What are the specific criteria used to 'exclude sources' in this procurement, and how were they justified?

The specific criteria used to 'exclude sources' in this procurement are not detailed in the provided data. However, this action typically occurs when the agency determines that only a limited number of sources are capable of meeting the specific requirements of the acquisition. Justifications often include the need for highly specialized technology, unique capabilities, extensive past performance on similar critical systems, or requirements related to security clearances or specific certifications. The agency must formally document and justify the exclusion of sources to ensure the procurement remains fair and reasonable, even if not fully open. This process aims to balance the desire for broad competition with the necessity of acquiring specialized goods or services from qualified entities.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Building Equipment Contractors › Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIES › CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 3307 INTERNATIONAL ST STE 300, FAIRBANKS, AK, 99701

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Alaskan Native Corporation Owned Firm, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $4,337,932

Exercised Options: $4,337,932

Current Obligation: $4,337,932

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline