Department of the Army awards $14.1M contract for hangar repair and renovation, highlighting construction sector activity

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $14,104,338 ($14.1M)

Contractor: Armitage SAI JV

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2025-05-09

End Date: 2026-06-05

Contract Duration: 392 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: REPAIR AND RENOVATE FACILITY, P2060 (HANGAR)

Place of Performance

Location: FORT DRUM, JEFFERSON County, NEW YORK, 13602

State: New York Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $14.1 million to ARMITAGE SAI JV for work described as: REPAIR AND RENOVATE FACILITY, P2060 (HANGAR) Key points: 1. Contract value of $14.1 million for facility repair and renovation. 2. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract duration is 392 days, indicating a medium-term project. 4. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 5. The project is located in New York, impacting the regional construction market. 6. This award falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $14.1 million for repairing and renovating a hangar appears reasonable for a project of this scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar facility renovation contracts within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price structure suggests that the contractor has a strong incentive to manage costs effectively. Without specific details on the scope of work, a direct per-unit cost comparison is difficult, but the overall award seems aligned with typical construction project expenditures.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that while the competition was broad, certain sources may have been excluded based on specific criteria. The presence of 2 bids suggests a moderate level of competition. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and better value for the government. The exclusion of sources warrants further investigation to ensure it did not unduly limit competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition, even with exclusions, aims to secure the best possible price for taxpayers. The fact that there were 2 bidders suggests that the government received at least some competitive pressure on pricing.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, which will receive an upgraded or repaired hangar facility essential for its operations. The services delivered include the repair and renovation of facility P2060 (Hangar). The geographic impact is concentrated in New York, where the facility is located. The contract will likely have implications for the local construction workforce, potentially creating jobs for skilled tradespeople and laborers in the region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for limited competition due to 'exclusion of sources' clause.
Firm Fixed Price contract places cost overrun risk on the contractor, which could lead to quality compromises if not closely monitored.
The specific nature of 'repair and renovate' could involve unforeseen complexities impacting schedule or cost if not fully scoped.

Positive Signals

Full and open competition aims to ensure fair pricing and access to a wide range of contractors.
Firm Fixed Price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
The award to ARMITAGE SAI JV, a joint venture, may indicate a capacity to handle complex projects.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the U.S. economy. This sector encompasses a wide range of construction activities, from new builds to renovations and repairs of various facilities. Federal spending in this area is crucial for maintaining and upgrading government infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the average cost per square foot for similar hangar renovations or military facility upgrades, which can vary significantly based on location, age of the facility, and specific renovation requirements.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses arising from a small business set-aside. However, the prime contractor, ARMITAGE SAI JV, may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall project management strategy, which could indirectly benefit the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will primarily be managed by the Department of the Army, likely through contracting officers and project managers. Accountability measures are inherent in the Firm Fixed Price contract type, which obligates the contractor to complete the work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is generally facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected or alleged.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Facility Maintenance and Repair
Department of Defense Construction Contracts
Hangar Construction and Renovation

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition due to exclusion of sources.
Risk of quality compromises under Firm Fixed Price if contractor faces cost pressures.
Unforeseen complexities in renovation work could impact schedule and budget.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $14.1 million to ARMITAGE SAI JV. REPAIR AND RENOVATE FACILITY, P2060 (HANGAR)

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ARMITAGE SAI JV.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $14.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2025-05-09. End: 2026-06-05.

What is the track record of ARMITAGE SAI JV in performing similar federal construction contracts?

Assessing the track record of ARMITAGE SAI JV requires a review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those involving facility repair and renovation, and specifically hangar construction or maintenance. Information on past performance can often be found in federal procurement databases, which may include ratings from previous contracting officers. A strong track record would typically involve successful completion of similar projects on time, within budget, and to the required quality standards. Conversely, a history of performance issues, contract disputes, or significant cost overruns would raise concerns about their capacity to successfully execute this current $14.1 million award.

How does the awarded price of $14.1 million compare to market rates for similar hangar renovation projects?

To benchmark the $14.1 million award against market rates, one would need to compare it with similar hangar renovation projects in the New York region or other military installations. Key comparison factors include the size of the hangar, the extent of the renovation (e.g., structural repairs, HVAC upgrades, electrical work, roofing), and the specific materials and technologies used. Industry cost estimating guides and data from construction cost databases can provide average costs per square foot or per project type. Without detailed project specifications, a precise comparison is challenging, but the award appears to be within a plausible range for a significant facility renovation.

What are the specific risks associated with the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' clause indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, certain potential offerors were excluded based on predefined criteria. The primary risk is that this exclusion might have inadvertently limited the pool of qualified bidders, potentially leading to less competitive pricing or a reduced selection of innovative solutions. It is crucial to understand the justification for excluding specific sources to ensure that the exclusion was necessary, justified, and did not stifle fair competition. If the exclusion was not well-founded, it could raise questions about the integrity of the procurement process and potentially lead to protests.

What is the expected effectiveness of the repaired hangar facility in supporting Army operations?

The effectiveness of the repaired hangar facility will depend on the scope and quality of the renovation work performed under this contract. A successful renovation should restore or enhance the facility's structural integrity, operational functionality, and safety standards, ensuring it can adequately support the intended Army aviation or maintenance operations. Key performance indicators for effectiveness would include the facility's ability to meet current operational requirements, its resilience to environmental factors, and its compliance with all relevant safety and building codes. The Department of the Army's project managers will be responsible for ensuring the renovation meets these operational needs.

What has been the historical spending pattern for hangar repair and renovation by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for hangar repair and renovation by the Department of the Army would involve examining past contract awards for similar projects over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, types of services procured, geographic distribution of projects, and the primary contractors involved. Understanding these patterns can help identify whether this $14.1 million award is consistent with previous investments, or if it represents an increase or decrease in spending for such facilities. It can also highlight any shifts in procurement strategies or the types of repairs being prioritized.

What are the potential implications of the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type on project quality?

A Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type, like the one awarded here, obligates the contractor to complete the work for a predetermined price, regardless of the actual costs incurred. This structure incentivizes the contractor to control costs and improve efficiency. However, it also shifts the risk of cost overruns to the contractor. If the contractor faces unforeseen challenges or underestimates costs, they might be tempted to cut corners on quality to maintain profitability. Therefore, robust government oversight and quality assurance measures are crucial under an FFP contract to ensure that the final product meets all specified requirements and standards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Construction › Nonresidential Building Construction › Commercial and Institutional Building Construction

Product/Service Code: MAINT, REPAIR, ALTER REAL PROPERTY › MAINT, ALTER, REPAIR NONBUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 505 ELLICOTT ST, STE A2, BUFFALO, NY, 14203

Business Categories: Category Business, Joint Venture Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business, Joint Venture Women Owned Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, SBA Certified 8 a Joint Venture, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $14,104,338

Exercised Options: $14,104,338

Current Obligation: $14,104,338

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W911S223D8500

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline