Air Force awards $190M+ for airfield construction, with 3 projects delivered
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $190,235,516 ($190.2M)
Contractor: Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2009-04-30
End Date: 2012-06-07
Contract Duration: 1,134 days
Daily Burn Rate: $167.8K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Number of Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Construction
Official Description: CONSTRUCT 3 AIRFIELD PROJECTS
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $190.2 million to LAKESHORE ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. for work described as: CONSTRUCT 3 AIRFIELD PROJECTS Key points: 1. Contract value exceeds $190 million for multiple airfield construction projects. 2. Competition was full and open after exclusion of sources, suggesting a deliberate sourcing strategy. 3. The contract duration of over 1100 days indicates a long-term, complex undertaking. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs, but requires careful scope management. 5. The award to Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc. represents a significant investment in infrastructure. 6. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 236220 points to general building construction.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging without specific project details or comparable airfield construction projects. The total award of over $190 million is substantial, but its value for money depends heavily on the scope, quality, and timely completion of the three airfield projects. The firm fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs, but potential overruns or change orders could impact the final value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources.' This indicates that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were initially excluded, possibly due to pre-qualification requirements or specific technical needs. The number of bidders is not specified, but this procurement method suggests a more controlled competition than a purely full and open process.
Taxpayer Impact: This procurement method may limit the number of potential bidders, potentially impacting the most competitive pricing achievable for taxpayers. However, if the exclusions were justified by specific technical requirements, it could lead to better-suited solutions.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force and its operational readiness through improved airfield infrastructure. Services delivered include the construction of three distinct airfield projects. The geographic impact is localized to the Air Force installation(s) where the airfields are located. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, and project managers.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if scope creep occurs under the fixed-price contract.
- Risk of delays if unforeseen site conditions or regulatory hurdles arise during construction.
- Dependence on the contractor's ability to manage multiple complex construction projects simultaneously.
Positive Signals
- Firm fixed-price contract provides cost certainty if scope is well-defined.
- Award to a single entity for multiple projects may streamline management and coordination.
- The duration suggests a commitment to significant infrastructure improvement.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically Commercial and Institutional Building Construction (NAICS 236220). The market for large-scale government construction projects, particularly those involving critical infrastructure like airfields, is competitive but often involves specialized contractors. Spending in this area is driven by military readiness requirements, modernization efforts, and infrastructure maintenance needs.
Small Business Impact
The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the 'small business set-aside' flag is false. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. This suggests that the prime contractor, Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc., likely handled the majority of the work or subcontracted to larger, specialized firms, potentially limiting opportunities for the small business ecosystem on this particular contract.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Air Force project management office. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract type, which incentivizes the contractor to complete work within budget. Transparency is generally provided through contract award databases, though detailed project progress and specific oversight activities may not be publicly available.
Related Government Programs
- Military Construction
- Airfield Operations and Maintenance
- Infrastructure Development Contracts
- General Building Construction Services
Risk Flags
- Potential for cost overruns due to fixed-price contract type.
- Risk of schedule delays impacting operational readiness.
- Limited transparency on specific project details and oversight.
Tags
construction, defense, department-of-defense, air-force, airfield, infrastructure, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition-after-exclusion-of-sources, large-contract, multi-year-project
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $190.2 million to LAKESHORE ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.. CONSTRUCT 3 AIRFIELD PROJECTS
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is LAKESHORE ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $190.2 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2009-04-30. End: 2012-06-07.
What specific types of airfield construction were undertaken for these three projects?
The provided data does not specify the exact nature of the three airfield construction projects. However, typical airfield construction can include runway rehabilitation, taxiway expansion, apron construction, lighting system upgrades, drainage improvements, and the construction of associated support facilities. Given the substantial award amount, these projects likely involved significant structural work and infrastructure development critical to Air Force operations. Further details would require examining the contract's statement of work or associated project documentation.
How does the $190 million contract value compare to typical airfield construction projects of similar scope?
Comparing the $190 million value requires understanding the scale and complexity of the three projects. Large-scale airfield construction, especially for military bases, can range significantly in cost. Projects involving new runway construction, major rehabilitation, or the addition of complex systems can easily reach tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Without knowing if these were new builds, major overhauls, or smaller upgrades across three locations, a direct comparison is difficult. However, the amount suggests substantial infrastructure work was commissioned.
What were the key risks identified during the procurement process for this contract?
The provided data does not explicitly list the risks identified during the procurement. However, common risks for large construction contracts include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions, material price fluctuations, or scope creep. Schedule delays are also a significant risk, stemming from weather, regulatory approvals, or contractor performance issues. The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' might indicate a risk mitigation strategy related to ensuring specific technical capabilities were met by the bidders.
What is the track record of Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc. in completing large federal construction projects?
Information on Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc.'s specific track record for large federal construction projects is not detailed in the provided data. To assess their performance, one would need to review their past contract history, including project types, values, completion timeliness, and any reported issues or awards. Federal procurement databases and contractor performance systems (like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) would be the primary sources for evaluating their reliability and past performance on similar endeavors.
How has federal spending on airfield construction evolved over the past decade?
The provided data focuses on a single contract and does not offer historical spending trends for airfield construction. Generally, federal spending on military airfield construction is influenced by defense budgets, strategic priorities, and the aging of existing infrastructure. Periods of increased geopolitical activity or modernization initiatives often lead to higher spending. Analyzing aggregate data from agencies like the Department of Defense and the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would be necessary to determine broader spending evolution.
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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES
Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY
Offers Received: 3
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 7310 WOODWARD AVENUE, FIFT, DETROIT, MI, 48202
Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Subchapter S Corporation, Indian (Subcontinent) American Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $190,235,516
Exercised Options: $190,235,516
Current Obligation: $190,235,516
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FA890306D8505
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2009-04-30
Current End Date: 2012-06-07
Potential End Date: 2012-06-07 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2018-10-17
More Contracts from Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc.
- Demolish 104 Military Family Housing (MFH) Units, Construct 90 NEW MFH Units and Renovate 99 MFH Units Eielson, AFB, — $96.2M (Department of Defense)
- Migrated Data Value Unknown — $80.7M (Department of Defense)
- ADU Phase II Afghanistan — $70.0M (Department of Defense)
- Migrated Data Value Unknown — $59.2M (Department of Defense)
- TAS::57 3404::TAS Recoveryproject#::ftqwo94001::rp# Replace Military Family Housing Units AT Eielson AFB, AK — $51.7M (Department of Defense)
View all Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc. federal contracts →
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)