Department of the Army awards $25.2M contract for Test Cell 12 Renovation to Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,257,903 ($25.3M)

Contractor: Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-08-19

End Date: 2025-07-30

Contract Duration: 1,441 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.5K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: PMXG: TEST CELL 12 RENOVATION

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73145

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $25.3 million to PORT FIDALGO CONSTRUCTORS INC for work described as: PMXG: TEST CELL 12 RENOVATION Key points: 1. Contract awarded on a firm-fixed-price basis, indicating clear cost expectations. 2. The contract duration of 1441 days suggests a significant, long-term project. 3. Awarded to a single contractor, raising questions about competitive pricing. 4. The project falls under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 5. The contract is a definitive contract, suggesting a clear scope of work. 6. The contract was not competed, limiting potential cost savings from market forces.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without comparable project data or a competitive bidding process. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty for the government, but the lack of competition means there's no direct market comparison to assess if the price is optimal. Further analysis would require understanding the specific scope of the Test Cell 12 Renovation and comparing it to similar construction projects in the region or for similar facilities.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple potential bidders. This approach is typically used when only one contractor can meet the specific requirements of the project, or in situations where competition is not feasible or practical. The lack of competition means the government did not benefit from the price discovery mechanisms that typically occur in a competitive bidding environment.

Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition for this contract means taxpayers may not have received the most cost-effective price. Without multiple bids, there is a risk that the awarded price is higher than it would have been in a competitive scenario.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Army, which will receive renovated facilities to support its testing operations. The services delivered include commercial and institutional building construction, specifically for Test Cell 12. The geographic impact is localized to the area where Test Cell 12 is located, likely within a Department of Defense facility. Workforce implications may include employment opportunities for construction workers and related trades during the contract period.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition raises concerns about potential overpricing and reduced value for taxpayer funds.
The long duration of the contract (over 3 years) increases the risk of cost overruns or scope creep if not managed effectively.
Sole-source awards can limit opportunities for new or smaller contractors to enter the market for such projects.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government, mitigating risks associated with fluctuating costs.
The contract is awarded to a specific entity, Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc., suggesting they possess the necessary qualifications for this specialized renovation.
The project aims to improve critical infrastructure (Test Cell 12), which is essential for the operational readiness of the Department of the Army.

Sector Analysis

The construction sector is a significant area of federal spending, encompassing a wide range of projects from infrastructure development to facility maintenance and renovation. This contract for Test Cell 12 Renovation falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction category. Federal spending in this sector often involves large, complex projects requiring specialized expertise. Benchmarking this specific contract's value is difficult without more detailed project specifications and comparable market data, but the overall federal construction market is substantial.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included a small business set-aside. The award to Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc. does not specify if they are a small business. Without subcontracting plans or set-aside requirements, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract is likely minimal, though larger prime contractors often engage small businesses for specialized services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and project management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency may be limited due to the sole-source nature of the award, but contract details and performance should be available through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Military Base Construction
Facility Renovation Contracts
Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Army Corps of Engineers Construction

Risk Flags

Sole-source award lacks competitive pricing.
Long contract duration increases risk exposure.
Limited public information on project specifics.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $25.3 million to PORT FIDALGO CONSTRUCTORS INC. PMXG: TEST CELL 12 RENOVATION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PORT FIDALGO CONSTRUCTORS 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 $25.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-08-19. End: 2025-07-30.

What is the specific nature and scope of the Test Cell 12 Renovation project?

The provided data indicates the contract is for the 'TEST CELL 12 RENOVATION' and falls under the 'Commercial and Institutional Building Construction' NAICS code (236220). However, the specific details of the renovation, such as the type of testing conducted in Cell 12, the extent of the structural or system upgrades required, and the intended improvements (e.g., modernization, capacity expansion, safety enhancements), are not detailed in the summary data. A comprehensive understanding of the project's scope is crucial for assessing its value and comparing it to similar construction endeavors. Without this, it's difficult to ascertain if the $25.2 million price tag is commensurate with the work to be performed.

Why was this contract awarded on a sole-source basis instead of being competed?

The data explicitly states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' and is a 'SOLE-SOURCE' award. Federal procurement regulations allow for sole-source awards under specific circumstances, such as when only one responsible source is available or capable of providing the required supplies or services, or when the agency determines that it is not in the public interest to compete the requirement. Without further documentation from the awarding agency (Department of the Army), the precise justification for this sole-source determination remains unknown. This lack of competition is a key factor in assessing the potential value for money, as it bypasses the price discovery benefits of a competitive bidding process.

What is the track record of Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

The provided data does not include information on the track record or past performance of Port Fidalgo Constructors Inc. To assess this aspect, one would typically need to review their contract history, including previous awards, performance evaluations (e.g., Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS), and any history of disputes or contract terminations. A contractor with a strong history of successful project completion, adherence to schedule and budget, and positive performance reviews generally presents lower risk. Conversely, a limited or poor track record could indicate higher risks for project success and cost control.

How does the $25.2 million cost compare to similar renovation projects for specialized testing facilities within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies?

Direct comparison of the $25.2 million cost is difficult without detailed project specifications and scope of work for the Test Cell 12 Renovation. However, general benchmarks for institutional building construction can provide a rough context. The NAICS code 236220 covers commercial and institutional building construction. Costs for such projects vary widely based on location, complexity, materials, and specific facility requirements. To perform a robust comparison, one would need to identify similar renovation projects for specialized testing cells (e.g., aerospace, weapons, environmental testing) within the DoD or other agencies, analyze their contract values, durations, and scopes, and adjust for inflation and regional cost differences. The sole-source nature of this award also complicates direct value-for-money comparisons.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a long-duration construction project like this?

While a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract is generally preferred for cost control, it carries specific risks for long-duration projects. For the government, the primary risk is that the contractor may cut corners on quality or materials to maximize profit if the initial price was set too high or if unforeseen issues arise that strain the fixed price. For the contractor, the risk is absorbing unexpected cost increases due to inflation, labor shortages, or unforeseen site conditions that were not adequately accounted for in the initial bid. The long duration (1441 days) amplifies these risks, as market conditions can change significantly over more than three years. Effective government oversight and clear contract specifications are crucial to mitigate these risks.

What is the historical spending pattern for renovations or construction of similar test cells within the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for similar test cell renovations within the Department of the Army would require access to extensive federal procurement databases (like FPDS or SAM.gov) and the ability to filter for relevant keywords, NAICS codes, and agencies over several fiscal years. This would involve identifying past contracts for 'test cell' renovations, 'specialized facility upgrades,' or similar terms, and then examining their award values, contract types, and durations. Understanding historical spending can reveal trends in pricing, identify frequently used contractors, and highlight potential areas where costs have increased or decreased over time. Without this specific historical data analysis, it is impossible to comment on the spending patterns for such projects.

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: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Solicitation ID: W912BV21R0034

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 561 E 36TH AVE STE 400, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $27,672,374

Exercised Options: $25,257,903

Current Obligation: $25,257,903

Actual Outlays: $2,125,095

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline