DOT awards $3.2M contract for PTS upgrades to Firelake Construction Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $3,216,137 ($3.2M)

Contractor: Firelake Construction Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2024-09-11

End Date: 2026-04-24

Contract Duration: 590 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: WO#22-026573 PTS UPGRADES

Place of Performance

Location: OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA County, OKLAHOMA, 73169

State: Oklahoma Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $3.2 million to FIRELAKE CONSTRUCTION INC for work described as: WO#22-026573 PTS UPGRADES Key points: 1. Contract value appears reasonable for the scope of building construction. 2. Full and open competition was utilized, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. The contract is a definitive contract, indicating a firm commitment. 4. The project duration is 590 days, providing a timeline for completion. 5. The contract is firm-fixed-price, offering cost certainty. 6. The contractor has a satisfactory rating. 7. The contract is not set aside for small businesses.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $3.2 million for building construction services seems within a reasonable range for a project of this nature. Benchmarking against similar commercial and institutional building construction contracts would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure helps manage cost risks for the government. Without specific details on the scope of 'PTS upgrades,' a direct comparison is challenging, but the price appears to be a fair reflection of the commitment.

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,' which implies that while the competition was broad, specific sources may have been excluded for defined reasons. Five bids were received, indicating a healthy level of interest and competition. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and ensuring the government receives competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The use of full and open competition with multiple bidders suggests that taxpayer funds are likely being used efficiently, as the lowest price technically acceptable offer was likely selected.

Public Impact

The Department of Transportation, specifically the Federal Aviation Administration, benefits from these upgrades. The contract will result in the construction and upgrade of facilities. The geographic impact is localized to Oklahoma. The contract will likely involve construction labor, impacting the local workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

The exclusion of sources in a 'full and open' competition warrants further investigation to ensure no viable small businesses were unfairly excluded.
The specific nature of 'PTS upgrades' is not detailed, which could obscure potential risks or scope creep.

Positive Signals

The use of firm-fixed-price contract type mitigates cost overrun risks for the government.
The receipt of five bids indicates a competitive environment, likely leading to a fair price.
The contractor has a satisfactory performance rating, suggesting reliability.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector. This sector is a significant part of the broader construction industry, encompassing a wide range of projects from office buildings to specialized facilities. Federal spending in this area supports infrastructure development and maintenance across various agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific type and scale of the building upgrades.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no indication of subcontracting requirements for small businesses. This means that opportunities for small business participation in this specific contract are likely limited unless they are prime contractors who were not excluded from the competition. The absence of a small business set-aside may mean larger firms dominated the bidding process.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration contracting officer and program managers. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms and performance requirements. Transparency is facilitated by the contract award notice, though detailed project specifics might be less publicly accessible. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse is suspected.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration Facilities and Equipment
Department of Transportation Construction Projects
Commercial Building Construction Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for unstated scope creep due to vague 'PTS upgrades' description.
Risk of performance issues despite a 'satisfactory' rating.
Possible limitation of competition due to 'exclusion of sources'.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $3.2 million to FIRELAKE CONSTRUCTION INC. WO#22-026573 PTS UPGRADES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is FIRELAKE CONSTRUCTION INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Transportation (Federal Aviation Administration).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $3.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2024-09-11. End: 2026-04-24.

What specific 'PTS upgrades' are included in this contract, and what is their criticality to FAA operations?

The provided data does not specify what 'PTS upgrades' entails. PTS typically stands for 'Performance Tracking System' or similar operational systems. Understanding the exact nature of these upgrades is crucial for assessing their criticality. If they relate to safety-critical systems, the risk associated with any delays or performance issues would be significantly higher. Conversely, if they are administrative or minor facility enhancements, the criticality would be lower. Further details from the contracting agency would be needed to determine the precise impact and importance of these upgrades to the Federal Aviation Administration's mission.

How does the awarded price of $3.2 million compare to similar building construction projects of comparable size and scope within the FAA or other federal agencies?

Without specific details on the scope of 'PTS upgrades,' a precise cost comparison is difficult. However, the contract value of $3.2 million for a definitive contract with a 590-day duration, awarded under full and open competition, appears to be within a reasonable range for commercial and institutional building construction. To provide a more robust benchmark, one would need to analyze similar FAA or DOT construction projects, considering factors like square footage, complexity of work (e.g., structural, electrical, HVAC), and geographic location. The fact that five bids were received suggests competitive pricing was sought and likely achieved.

What are the potential risks associated with Firelake Construction Inc. fulfilling this contract, given their satisfactory rating?

A 'satisfactory' rating suggests that Firelake Construction Inc. has met past performance expectations, but it is not an 'exceptional' rating. Potential risks could include standard construction project challenges such as unforeseen site conditions, material availability issues, or labor shortages, which could lead to delays or minor cost fluctuations if not managed proactively. While the firm-fixed-price contract limits direct cost increases to the government, any significant performance issues could still impact project timelines and operational readiness. A deeper dive into past performance reviews, if available, would offer more insight into specific risk areas.

What is the historical spending pattern for 'PTS upgrades' or similar construction projects by the Federal Aviation Administration?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for 'PTS upgrades' or similar construction projects by the Federal Aviation Administration. To analyze historical spending, one would need access to historical contract databases or agency budget reports. This analysis would involve identifying previous contracts for similar services, examining their values, durations, and contractors, and looking for trends in spending levels, frequency of awards, and average contract values. Such a review could reveal if this $3.2 million award represents an increase, decrease, or steady level of investment in such upgrades.

What does the 'After Exclusion of Sources' clause in the competition type signify, and could it have impacted the number or quality of bids?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' designation implies that the solicitation was initially intended for broad competition, but certain potential sources were deliberately excluded. The reasons for exclusion must be justified and documented by the agency, often related to specific capabilities, security requirements, or prior performance issues. While the competition was 'full and open' among the remaining eligible sources, the exclusion could potentially limit the pool of bidders and, consequently, the diversity of proposals or the aggressiveness of pricing. It is important to ensure that such exclusions are properly justified to maintain fair competition.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: 6973GH-24-R-00133

Offers Received: 5

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Firelake Construction, Inc.

Address: 1011 E 31ST ST, LAWRENCE, KS, 66046

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, American Indian Owned Business, Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, DoT Certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Subchapter S Corporation, U.S.-Owned Business, Woman Owned Business, Women Owned Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $3,969,912

Exercised Options: $3,216,137

Current Obligation: $3,216,137

Actual Outlays: $2,979,680

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline