DoD awards $12.6M for Tinker AFB hangar, highlighting engineering services for bomber modernization

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,603,754 ($12.6M)

Contractor: Mason & Hanger + Mead & Hunt Joint Venture

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2023-09-22

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,104 days

Daily Burn Rate: $11.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE FY26 BOMBER AGILE COMMON HANGAR AT TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OK.

Place of Performance

Location: TULSA, TULSA County, OKLAHOMA, 74120

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.6 million to MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT JOINT VENTURE for work described as: TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE FY26 BOMBER AGILE COMMON HANGAR AT TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OK. Key points: 1. Contract focuses on essential engineering services for a critical Air Force Base infrastructure project. 2. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs and provide predictability. 4. Project duration extends over three years, indicating a significant, long-term commitment. 5. The contract is a task order, suggesting it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle. 6. The geographic focus is Oklahoma, potentially impacting local engineering and construction sectors.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.6 million for engineering services for a bomber hangar appears reasonable given the project's scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale military construction engineering contracts would provide a more precise value assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure suggests an effort to manage costs effectively, but detailed cost breakdowns are not available to fully assess pricing against market rates. The award to a joint venture indicates a capacity to handle complex projects.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this method generally fosters a competitive environment, which can lead to better pricing and innovation. The open competition suggests the government sought the best value from a wide range of qualified engineering firms.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it maximizes the pool of potential offerors, driving down prices through market forces and ensuring the government receives competitive bids.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Air Force and its bomber fleet, which will receive modernized hangar facilities. Services delivered include critical engineering design and planning for the FY26 Bomber Agile Common Hangar. The geographic impact is concentrated at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma. The project may have implications for the local engineering and construction workforce in Oklahoma.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the number of bidders in the full and open competition limits a deeper assessment of competitive intensity.
The duration of the contract (over 3 years) requires ongoing monitoring to ensure performance remains on track and within budget.
The nature of 'agile common hangar' implies potential for scope adjustments, necessitating robust change management.

Positive Signals

Award under full and open competition suggests a robust market response and potential for competitive pricing.
The firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The joint venture structure (MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT) indicates a strong capability to execute complex engineering projects.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense infrastructure. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 (Engineering Services) covers establishments primarily engaged in providing architectural, engineering, and related services. Spending in this sector for defense-related infrastructure projects can be substantial, often involving complex design, planning, and project management for specialized facilities like aircraft hangars.

Small Business Impact

The contract was not set aside for small businesses, and the awardee is a joint venture, suggesting it is likely a larger entity or a collaboration of larger entities. There is no explicit mention of small business subcontracting requirements in the provided data. Further investigation into the specific IDIQ vehicle under which this task order was issued would be necessary to determine any subcontracting goals or opportunities for small businesses.

Oversight & Accountability

As a task order under a larger contract vehicle, oversight is likely managed through the terms of that parent contract, potentially involving program managers at the Department of Defense and the Air Force. The firm-fixed-price nature provides a degree of financial oversight. Transparency regarding the specific performance metrics and oversight mechanisms would require access to the full contract documentation and any associated Inspector General reports.

Related Government Programs

Air Force Base Infrastructure Modernization
Defense Engineering Services Contracts
Agile Development Contracts
Tinker Air Force Base Projects
Bomber Support Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep in agile development
Schedule adherence risk
Cost management risk under FFP
Dependency on contractor's technical expertise

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.6 million to MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT JOINT VENTURE. TASK ORDER AWARD FOR THE FY26 BOMBER AGILE COMMON HANGAR AT TINKER AIR FORCE BASE, OK.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT JOINT VENTURE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-09-22. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the track record of MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT joint venture on similar defense infrastructure projects?

The provided data does not detail the specific track record of the MASON & HANGER + MEAD & HUNT joint venture on similar defense infrastructure projects. However, both MASON & HANGER and MEAD & HUNT are established engineering and construction firms with significant experience in government and military projects. MASON & HANGER has a long history in designing and constructing facilities for various government agencies, including the Department of Defense. MEAD & HUNT also possesses extensive experience in engineering, architecture, and program management for federal clients, often involving large-scale infrastructure. Their joint venture likely leverages these combined strengths to undertake complex projects like the Tinker AFB hangar. A deeper analysis would require reviewing their past performance evaluations and contract histories for projects of comparable scale and complexity.

How does the $12.6 million cost compare to similar bomber hangar construction engineering contracts?

Benchmarking the $12.6 million cost for engineering services against similar bomber hangar projects is challenging without more specific data on the scope of services included and the size/complexity of the hangar. However, for large-scale military construction projects, engineering services can represent a significant portion of the total project cost, often ranging from 5% to 15% or more, depending on the complexity and required design rigor. Given that this is a task order for engineering services and not the full construction cost, $12.6 million appears to be within a plausible range for a project of this nature at a major Air Force base. A precise comparison would necessitate identifying comparable projects with similar engineering requirements and contract types.

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

Primary risks associated with this contract include potential scope creep due to the 'agile' nature of the project, schedule delays impacting Air Force modernization timelines, and cost overruns despite the firm-fixed-price structure if unforeseen technical challenges arise. Mitigation strategies likely involve robust project management by the joint venture, clear definition of requirements and milestones, and active oversight from the Department of Defense. The firm-fixed-price contract itself is a risk mitigation tool for the government, shifting some cost uncertainty to the contractor. The extended duration also presents risks related to material price fluctuations or changes in regulatory requirements, which the contractor must manage.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in ensuring value for money for this specific project?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in ensuring value for money by providing cost certainty to the government. Under an FFP contract, the contractor assumes the risk of cost overruns, incentivizing them to manage resources efficiently and control expenses. For a project like the Tinker AFB hangar, where the scope of engineering services can be defined with reasonable clarity, FFP is a suitable choice. It encourages the contractor to deliver the specified services within the agreed-upon price. However, the effectiveness hinges on the accuracy of the initial cost estimate and the contractor's ability to manage risks. If the scope is highly uncertain or prone to significant changes, an FFP contract could lead to the contractor building in substantial contingencies, potentially increasing the price.

What are the historical spending patterns for engineering services at Tinker Air Force Base or for similar bomber support facilities?

Historical spending patterns for engineering services at Tinker Air Force Base or for similar bomber support facilities are not detailed in the provided data. However, Tinker AFB is a major hub for aircraft maintenance, repair, and modification, particularly for bomber aircraft. This implies consistent and significant investment in infrastructure, including hangars and support facilities, over many years. Spending on engineering services for such projects would fluctuate based on modernization cycles, new aircraft acquisitions, and infrastructure upgrades. Analyzing historical contract awards for engineering services at Tinker AFB, categorized by project type (e.g., hangars, maintenance facilities), would reveal trends in spending levels, contract durations, and typical award values for this type of work.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - CONSTRUCTION

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1616 E 15TH ST, TULSA, OK, 74120

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,603,754

Exercised Options: $12,603,754

Current Obligation: $12,603,754

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W912BV20D0032

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline