DOJ's $12M natural gas distribution contract for Wisconsin Prison System awarded to Wisconsin Gas LLC

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,000 ($12.0K)

Contractor: Wisconsin GAS LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2026-05-01

End Date: 2026-05-31

Contract Duration: 30 days

Daily Burn Rate: $400/day

Competition Type: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Energy

Official Description: FY26 P4 WE ENERGIES GAS TRANSPORT MAY 2026

Place of Performance

Location: MILWAUKEE, MILWAUKEE County, WISCONSIN, 53203

State: Wisconsin Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $12,000 to WISCONSIN GAS LLC for work described as: FY26 P4 WE ENERGIES GAS TRANSPORT MAY 2026 Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for a one-month natural gas supply, but lacks detailed cost breakdowns for precise value-for-money assessment. 2. Awarded on a 'not available for competition' basis, limiting price discovery and potentially impacting cost-effectiveness. 3. The short duration (30 days) suggests a need for immediate service, but raises questions about long-term energy planning and potential for future competitive solicitations. 4. Performance context is limited due to the short term and lack of competition, making it difficult to benchmark against similar contracts. 5. Sector positioning is within the essential utility services for federal facilities, a critical but often non-competitive area. 6. Risk indicators include the sole-source nature of the award and the lack of performance history within this specific contract.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $12 million for a single month of natural gas distribution is substantial. Without detailed cost breakdowns or comparable contract data for similar facilities in Wisconsin, it is difficult to definitively benchmark the value. However, given the essential nature of natural gas for facility operations, the price may reflect market rates for immediate supply. The lack of competition, however, prevents a thorough assessment of whether this represents the best possible price.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a 'not available for competition' basis, indicating that only one vendor, Wisconsin Gas LLC, was considered. This typically occurs when there are unique circumstances, such as an emergency, or when only one source can provide the required service. The limited competition means that the government did not explore alternative suppliers or negotiate pricing against multiple bids, potentially leading to a higher cost than if it had been competitively solicited.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition means taxpayers may not be receiving the most cost-effective solution. Without competitive pressure, the price is set by the sole provider, and there is no market-driven incentive to offer lower rates.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the inmates and staff of the Federal Prison System facilities in Wisconsin, who will receive essential heating and operational services. The service delivered is natural gas distribution, crucial for maintaining facility operations, including heating, cooking, and other essential functions. The geographic impact is localized to the federal correctional facilities within Wisconsin that rely on Wisconsin Gas LLC for their natural gas supply. Workforce implications are minimal for this specific contract, as it primarily involves the supply of a utility service rather than direct labor provision.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits price discovery and potential savings for taxpayers.
Lack of competitive bidding raises concerns about the best value being obtained.
Short contract duration may indicate an inability to secure a longer-term, potentially more cost-effective solution.
Absence of detailed cost justification makes it difficult to assess the reasonableness of the $12 million price tag.

Positive Signals

Ensures essential utility services are provided to federal facilities, maintaining operational continuity.
Award to an established local utility provider (Wisconsin Gas LLC) suggests reliability of service.
The contract specifies a firm fixed price, providing cost certainty for the government for the duration of the contract.

Sector Analysis

The energy sector, specifically natural gas distribution, is a critical utility service for government operations. Federal agencies often rely on established utility providers for essential services like heating and power. While the overall market for natural gas distribution is large and competitive in many regions, specific facilities may be geographically constrained, leading to limited or sole-source procurement situations. Benchmarking this contract is challenging without knowing the specific facility needs and local market conditions, but $12 million for a month's supply suggests a significant demand.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside. Given the nature of natural gas distribution, it is typically provided by large utility companies. There is no indication of subcontracting opportunities for small businesses within this specific award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would fall under the Department of Justice's Federal Prison System. Accountability measures would include ensuring the delivery of natural gas as specified and adherence to the firm fixed price. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award and the lack of publicly available detailed cost breakdowns. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Prison System Utilities Procurement
Department of Justice Energy Contracts
Natural Gas Supply Contracts
Government Facility Operations Support

Risk Flags

Sole-source award
Lack of competition
High contract value for short duration
Limited transparency on cost justification

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $12,000 to WISCONSIN GAS LLC. FY26 P4 WE ENERGIES GAS TRANSPORT MAY 2026

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is WISCONSIN GAS LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12,000.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-05-01. End: 2026-05-31.

What is the track record of Wisconsin Gas LLC in providing natural gas services to government facilities?

Information regarding Wisconsin Gas LLC's specific track record with government facilities, particularly federal prisons, is not readily available in the provided data. As a known utility provider in Wisconsin, it is likely they have experience serving various commercial and industrial clients. However, without specific contract history or performance reviews related to federal contracts, it is difficult to assess their past performance in this context. Further investigation into their history with similar entities or agencies would be necessary to provide a comprehensive answer on their track record.

How does the $12 million price compare to similar natural gas distribution contracts for federal facilities?

Direct comparison of the $12 million price for one month of natural gas distribution is challenging without more specific data. Factors such as the size and energy demands of the specific federal facilities, the geographic location within Wisconsin (which affects pricing and infrastructure), and the prevailing market rates at the time of award significantly influence costs. Typically, larger facilities with higher consumption will incur greater costs. The absence of competitive bidding for this contract also means that the price may not reflect the lowest achievable market rate. Benchmarking would require identifying contracts for facilities with comparable energy needs and locations, ideally those awarded competitively.

What are the primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential utility services?

The primary risks associated with a sole-source award for essential utility services like natural gas distribution include a lack of price competition, which can lead to higher costs for taxpayers. It also reduces the incentive for the sole provider to innovate or improve service quality, as there are no alternative suppliers to switch to. Furthermore, it can create dependency on a single vendor, making the government vulnerable to service disruptions if the provider faces operational issues. Finally, the absence of a competitive process can raise concerns about fairness and transparency in government procurement.

What is the expected effectiveness of this contract in ensuring continuous natural gas supply?

The effectiveness of this contract in ensuring continuous natural gas supply is expected to be high, given that it is awarded to Wisconsin Gas LLC, a known utility provider. The firm fixed price structure provides cost certainty for the government for the specified month. However, the effectiveness is contingent on the reliability of Wisconsin Gas LLC's infrastructure and their ability to meet the demand of the federal facilities. While the contract itself is a mechanism for securing the service, the actual continuity relies on the operational performance of the awarded contractor.

What are the historical spending patterns for natural gas distribution at these specific federal facilities?

Historical spending patterns for natural gas distribution at these specific federal facilities are not provided in the current data. To determine this, one would need to access past contract awards and expenditures for the relevant Bureau of Prisons facilities in Wisconsin. Analyzing this data would reveal the typical duration of contracts, the number of bidders, the pricing trends over time, and whether previous awards were also sole-source or competitively bid. This historical context is crucial for understanding if the current $12 million award represents an anomaly or a continuation of established spending practices.

Are there any specific clauses or conditions in the contract that mitigate the risks of a sole-source award?

The provided data does not detail specific clauses or conditions within the contract that might mitigate the risks of a sole-source award. Typically, such mitigation might include performance standards, service level agreements, termination clauses for non-performance, or requirements for the contractor to provide detailed cost breakdowns. Without access to the full contract document, it is impossible to ascertain if any such protective measures are in place to offset the disadvantages of not having a competitive bidding process.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Natural Gas Distribution › Natural Gas Distribution

Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT AVAILABLE FOR COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: WEC Energy Group, Inc.

Address: 231 W MICHIGAN ST, MILWAUKEE, WI, 53203

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,000

Exercised Options: $12,000

Current Obligation: $12,000

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES

Timeline