Devcon Construction Inc. awarded $25.9M contract for building ATCT/Construction by FAA

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,944,438 ($25.9M)

Contractor: Devcon Construction Incorporated

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2008-01-23

End Date: 2009-12-22

Contract Duration: 699 days

Daily Burn Rate: $37.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: A. BUILDING ATCT/CONSTRUCTION

Place of Performance

Location: MILPITAS, SANTA CLARA County, CALIFORNIA, 95035

State: California Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $25.9 million to DEVCON CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED for work described as: A. BUILDING ATCT/CONSTRUCTION Key points: 1. Contract value of $25.9 million for building construction services. 2. Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 3. Contract duration of 699 days indicates a medium-term project. 4. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 5. The contract falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 6. Geographic focus on California for this construction project.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $25.9 million for building ATCT/Construction appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this nature, though specific benchmarks are unavailable without more detailed project scope. The firm fixed-price structure suggests an attempt to manage cost overruns. However, without comparable project data or detailed cost breakdowns, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The award amount of $25,944,438 is the total obligated amount, and the base contract value might differ.

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 a bid. The presence of 3 bids suggests a moderate level of competition for this project. A higher number of bidders typically leads to more competitive pricing and better value for the government. The fact that it was competed fully is a positive sign for price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through a wider pool of potential contractors, leading to more cost-effective use of public funds.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits from the construction of Air Traffic Control (ATCT) facilities. This contract supports the delivery of essential infrastructure for air traffic management. The project's geographic impact is concentrated in California. The construction services will likely involve a workforce of skilled laborers and tradespeople in the specified region.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the fixed-price contract does not adequately account for all project contingencies.
Risk of delays in construction completion impacting operational readiness of the ATCT facility.
Quality control issues could arise if not managed rigorously throughout the construction process.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contractor, Devcon Construction Inc., has experience in commercial and institutional building construction.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant part of the broader construction industry. The construction of Air Traffic Control (ATCT) facilities is a specialized niche requiring adherence to stringent safety and operational standards. Comparable spending benchmarks for ATCT construction can vary widely based on size, complexity, and location, but this $25.9 million award suggests a medium-sized project within this specialized domain.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses. Without specific set-aside requirements or reporting on subcontracting, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem for this particular contract is likely limited, though Devcon Construction Inc. may engage small businesses as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), a division of the Department of Transportation. Accountability measures would be embedded in the contract terms, including performance standards and payment schedules. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Federal Aviation Administration Facilities and Equipment
Department of Transportation Construction Projects
Air Traffic Control System Modernization

Risk Flags

Contract awarded under full and open competition.
Firm Fixed Price contract type.
Contract duration of 699 days.
Awarded to Devcon Construction Inc.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $25.9 million to DEVCON CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED. A. BUILDING ATCT/CONSTRUCTION

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DEVCON CONSTRUCTION INCORPORATED.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $25.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2008-01-23. End: 2009-12-22.

What is the track record of Devcon Construction Inc. with federal contracts, particularly with the FAA?

Devcon Construction Inc. has a history of receiving federal contracts. While this specific data point does not detail their entire federal contracting history, their award for this FAA project indicates prior experience or qualification for government work. A deeper analysis would involve reviewing their past performance ratings, any past disputes or claims, and their overall volume of federal work across different agencies. For FAA-specific contracts, their performance on similar construction projects would be a key indicator of reliability and capability. Examining their award history can reveal patterns in contract types, values, and agencies served, providing a more comprehensive view of their federal track record.

How does the $25.9 million award compare to similar ATCT construction projects?

Benchmarking the $25.9 million award for ATCT construction requires access to a database of similar projects, including their scope, size, location, and final cost. Without such a comparative dataset, it's difficult to definitively state if this price is high or low. Factors influencing ATCT construction costs include the complexity of the tower, the technological integration required, site preparation challenges, and regional labor costs. A firm fixed-price contract, as in this case, aims to cap costs, but the initial bid's competitiveness is crucial. If this project involved significant new construction or major upgrades, the $25.9 million might be reasonable. Conversely, if it were a smaller scope or in a low-cost area, it could be considered high. Further analysis would involve identifying comparable projects and analyzing their cost per square foot or per functional unit.

What are the primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price construction contract?

The primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price construction contract revolve around potential cost overruns for the contractor and potential quality compromises if the contractor seeks to minimize costs. While the fixed price provides cost certainty for the government, the contractor bears the risk of unforeseen expenses, such as material price increases, labor shortages, or unexpected site conditions. If the contractor underbid or faces significant cost escalations, they might be tempted to cut corners on materials or labor quality to maintain profitability, potentially impacting the long-term durability and functionality of the ATCT. Conversely, the government risks receiving a product that meets the minimum contractual specifications but may not represent the best possible value if the competition was not robust or if the contractor's initial bid was excessively high.

How effective is the full and open competition strategy in ensuring value for this type of construction contract?

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective strategy for ensuring value in federal contracting, including for construction projects like this ATCT facility. By allowing all responsible sources to compete, the government maximizes the pool of potential bidders, which theoretically drives down prices through market forces. The presence of 3 bids suggests a degree of competition, but the optimal number for ensuring maximum value can vary. A more robust competition, with a larger number of qualified bidders, would likely yield even more competitive pricing. The effectiveness also depends on the clarity and completeness of the solicitation documents; vague requirements can lead to bids that don't fully address the government's needs or result in change orders later. Therefore, while full and open competition is a strong foundation, its effectiveness is amplified by well-defined requirements and sufficient bidder participation.

What are the historical spending patterns for ATCT construction by the FAA?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for ATCT construction by the FAA would involve examining contract data over several fiscal years. This would reveal trends in contract values, the number of awards, the types of contractors utilized (e.g., large vs. small businesses), and the geographic distribution of projects. Understanding these patterns can help identify periods of increased investment in air traffic infrastructure, potential budget cycles, and the typical cost ranges for different types of ATCT projects. For instance, a surge in spending might indicate a modernization initiative, while consistent, moderate spending could reflect ongoing maintenance and upgrades. Comparing the $25.9 million award to historical averages would provide context on whether this represents a typical, high, or low expenditure for such a project.

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

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 690 GIBRALTAR DR, MILPITAS, CA, 17

Business Categories: Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Other Minority Owned Business, Not Designated a Small Business, Subchapter S Corporation

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $474,902,820

Exercised Options: $25,944,438

Current Obligation: $25,944,438

Timeline