Navy awards $13M for airfield structures, with a 3-bid competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,959,998 ($13.0M)

Contractor: Toltest, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-04-07

End Date: 2010-01-10

Contract Duration: 1,739 days

Daily Burn Rate: $7.5K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: 200507!600396!1700!N62470!NAV FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMA!N6247005C5026 !A!N! !N! ! !20050407!20071009!047306055!047306055!047306055!N!TOLTEST, INC !1480 FORD ST !MAUMEE !OH!43537!00000! !PO!* !* !PORTUGAL !+000012344283!N!N!000012344283!Y129!OTHER AIRFIELD STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !A!Y!J!2!003!A! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!M!N! ! ! ! ! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! !9700!SN0615!0001! !

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.0 million to TOLTEST, INC. for work described as: 200507!600396!1700!N62470!NAV FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMA!N6247005C5026 !A!N! !N! ! !20050407!20071009!047306055!047306055!047306055!N!TOLTEST, INC !1480 FORD ST !MAUMEE !OH!43537!00000! !PO!* !* … Key points: 1. Contract awarded to TOLTEST, INC. for construction services. 2. The contract duration spans over 5 years. 3. This award represents a significant investment in naval infrastructure. 4. The procurement method indicates a competitive bidding process. 5. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 237990. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, indicating predictable costs.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12,959,997.54 for 'Other Airfield Structures' appears reasonable given the 5-year duration and the nature of construction projects. Benchmarking against similar large-scale civil engineering construction contracts would provide a more precise value assessment. However, the presence of multiple bids suggests a degree of market validation for the pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, with three bids received. This level of competition is generally positive, suggesting that multiple capable contractors were aware of and interested in the opportunity. The presence of three bidders indicates a healthy market for this type of construction service, which can lead to more competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive process with multiple bidders helps ensure that taxpayer dollars are used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Navy and its operational readiness. Services delivered include the construction of essential airfield structures. The geographic impact is likely focused on a specific naval installation requiring airfield upgrades. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction labor and related trades.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Construction sector, specifically under heavy and civil engineering construction. The NAICS code 237990 covers establishments primarily engaged in the construction of infrastructure such as highways, streets, bridges, tunnels, and similar non-building structures. Federal spending in this area is crucial for maintaining and upgrading national infrastructure, including military installations. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale construction projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies for similar infrastructure needs.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside. While there is no direct set-aside, the prime contractor, TOLTEST, INC., may engage small businesses for subcontracting opportunities to fulfill project requirements. The impact on the small business ecosystem would depend on the extent of any subcontracting plan implemented by the prime.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Navy facilities engineering command. Accountability measures are inherent in the Firm Fixed Price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified work within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated through federal contract databases where award details are published.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

construction, department-of-defense, department-of-the-navy, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, heavy-and-civil-engineering, airfield-structures, large-contract, infrastructure, naval-base

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.0 million to TOLTEST, INC.. 200507!600396!1700!N62470!NAV FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMA!N6247005C5026 !A!N! !N! ! !20050407!20071009!047306055!047306055!047306055!N!TOLTEST, INC !1480 FORD ST !MAUMEE !OH!43537!00000! !PO!* !* !PORTUGAL !+000012344283!N!N!000012344283!Y129!OTHER AIRFIELD STRUCTURES !C2 !CONSTRUCTION !000 !* !237990!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TOLTEST, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.0 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-04-07. End: 2010-01-10.

What is the track record of TOLTEST, INC. with federal contracts, particularly with the Department of the Navy?

Information on TOLTEST, INC.'s track record with federal contracts, especially with the Department of the Navy, would require a detailed search of federal procurement databases such as FPDS-NG or SAM.gov. This would reveal the number of contracts awarded, their values, the agencies involved, and performance history. A review of past performance would indicate their experience with similar construction projects, adherence to schedules and budgets, and overall reliability as a federal contractor. Without specific historical data, it's difficult to definitively assess their suitability beyond this single award.

How does the awarded price compare to similar airfield structure construction projects?

To benchmark the $12.96 million award for airfield structures, a comparative analysis of similar projects is necessary. This would involve identifying contracts with comparable scope, scale, and complexity, particularly those awarded by the Department of Defense or other agencies responsible for aviation infrastructure. Factors such as geographic location, specific structural requirements (e.g., runways, taxiways, hangars), and the prevailing economic conditions at the time of award would need to be considered. A higher or lower price relative to benchmarks could indicate exceptional value, potential overpricing, or unique project challenges.

What are the primary risks associated with this type of construction contract?

Key risks for this construction contract include potential cost overruns due to unforeseen site conditions (e.g., soil instability, underground utilities), delays caused by weather or material shortages, and contractor performance issues. Given the Firm Fixed Price nature, the contractor bears the primary financial risk of cost overruns. However, the government faces risks related to schedule delays impacting operational readiness and potential disputes over contract scope or quality. Effective risk mitigation would involve thorough site investigations, robust project management, and clear communication channels.

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

Full and open competition is generally considered the most effective strategy for ensuring value in federal contracting, as it maximizes the pool of potential bidders and fosters price competition. In this case, receiving three bids suggests that the strategy successfully attracted multiple qualified contractors. The resulting price is likely more competitive than it would have been under a sole-source or limited competition scenario. However, the effectiveness also depends on the clarity of the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, and the government's ability to accurately define requirements to prevent scope creep or change orders that could inflate costs.

What is the historical spending trend for 'Other Airfield Structures' by the Department of the Navy?

Analyzing historical spending trends for 'Other Airfield Structures' by the Department of the Navy would involve examining procurement data over several fiscal years. This would reveal patterns in contract awards, average contract values, and the frequency of such procurements. Understanding these trends can help identify periods of increased investment in airfield infrastructure, potential budget fluctuations, and the typical number of contractors engaged in this market. Such analysis provides context for the current $13 million award, indicating whether it aligns with or deviates from historical spending patterns.

What are the implications of the Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type for cost control and contractor incentive?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type establishes a ceiling price that the contractor must not exceed, making it highly advantageous for cost control from the government's perspective. The contractor assumes the majority of the financial risk, incentivizing them to manage costs efficiently and complete the project within budget. This structure provides budget certainty for the government. However, it can also lead contractors to cut corners on quality or scope if not meticulously managed, or to include significant contingency in their initial bid, potentially leading to a higher base price than other contract types might yield if risks are low.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ConstructionOther Heavy and Civil Engineering ConstructionOther Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction

Product/Service Code: CONSTRUCT OF STRUCTURES/FACILITIESCONSTRUCTION OF BUILDINGS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SEALED BID

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Lakeshore Toltest Corporation (UEI: 962400151)

Address: 1480 FORD ST, MAUMEE, OH, 09

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

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-04-07

Current End Date: 2010-01-10

Potential End Date: 2010-01-10 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2012-09-22

More Contracts from Toltest, Inc.

View all Toltest, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending