DoD awards $12.8M for fire station construction, with TEPA EC, LLC winning via full and open competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $12,802,530 ($12.8M)

Contractor: Tepa EC, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2023-05-29

End Date: 2026-01-30

Contract Duration: 977 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.1K/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 FIRE STATION SUPPORT FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: COLORADO SPRINGS, EL PASO County, COLORADO, 80913

State: Colorado Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $12.8 million to TEPA EC, LLC for work described as: CONSTRUCT FIRE STATION SUPPORT FACILITY Key points: 1. Value appears reasonable given the scope of constructing a fire station support facility. 2. Full and open competition suggests a potentially competitive pricing environment. 3. Contract duration of 977 days indicates a significant, long-term project. 4. The definitive contract type suggests flexibility for the government. 5. Fixed-price contract type shifts risk to the contractor. 6. The project is categorized under Commercial and Institutional Building Construction.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $12.8 million for constructing a fire station support facility seems within a reasonable range for such a project. Benchmarking against similar government construction projects of this scale would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm fixed-price nature of the contract indicates that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator for the government if the contractor's bid was competitive.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered after an initial exclusion period. With 3 bidders identified, the competition level appears moderate. This suggests that the pricing achieved should reflect a degree of market competitiveness, although a more in-depth analysis of the bidding process and the specific reasons for source exclusion would be beneficial.

Taxpayer Impact: A competitive bidding process generally leads to better pricing for taxpayers by encouraging contractors to offer their best value. The presence of multiple bidders helps ensure that the government is not overpaying for the services rendered.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense personnel and operations requiring fire suppression and support services. The contract delivers a critical infrastructure asset: a fire station support facility. The geographic impact is localized to the area where the facility is constructed, likely a military installation in Colorado. The project will likely create or sustain jobs in the construction sector, including skilled trades and project management.

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 complexities.
Risk of delays impacting the operational readiness of the fire station support facility.
Ensuring compliance with all construction quality and safety standards throughout the project lifecycle.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive bid environment.
Award to TEPA EC, LLC, a known entity in construction.
Project duration allows for thorough planning and execution.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a significant segment of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this area supports the development and maintenance of essential facilities for various government agencies. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing the cost per square foot or per project for similar military or government building constructions.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside provision. However, the prime contractor, TEPA EC, LLC, may still engage small businesses as subcontractors, depending on their own procurement practices and the project's needs.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the Department of the Army's contracting and engineering divisions. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring delivery of the specified facility. Transparency is facilitated by public contract databases, though detailed project progress reports may not be publicly available. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Operations Support
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Facilities

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns
Risk of project delays
Quality control concerns
Adequacy of competition

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $12.8 million to TEPA EC, LLC. CONSTRUCT FIRE STATION SUPPORT FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TEPA EC, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $12.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2023-05-29. End: 2026-01-30.

What is the track record of TEPA EC, LLC with federal construction contracts?

TEPA EC, LLC has a history of performing federal construction contracts. Analyzing their past performance, including contract values, types of projects, and any reported issues or awards, would provide insight into their reliability and capability. For instance, reviewing their award history with the Department of Defense or other agencies can reveal patterns in project completion times, adherence to budget, and overall client satisfaction. A deeper dive into specific past projects similar in scope to the fire station construction would be particularly relevant for assessing their suitability for this current contract.

How does the awarded amount compare to similar fire station construction projects by the DoD?

The awarded amount of $12.8 million for the fire station support facility needs to be benchmarked against similar projects to assess value for money. This comparison should consider factors such as facility size (square footage), specific functionalities required (e.g., vehicle bays, living quarters, training areas), geographic location (which impacts labor and material costs), and the year the contract was awarded. Without specific data on comparable projects, it's difficult to definitively state if $12.8 million represents excellent, fair, or concerning value. However, given the typical costs associated with specialized government facility construction, this figure appears within a plausible range, assuming standard project requirements.

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

The primary risks associated with this firm fixed-price contract primarily lie with the contractor, TEPA EC, LLC. If the actual costs of labor, materials, or unforeseen construction challenges exceed the contractor's bid, they will absorb the loss. For the government, the main risks include potential quality compromises if the contractor seeks to cut costs, and project delays that could impact operational readiness. Ensuring robust oversight and clear performance standards in the contract is crucial to mitigate these risks and ensure the facility is built to required specifications and timelines.

How effective is the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' in ensuring competitive pricing?

The 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' aims to balance broad competition with specific needs that might initially exclude certain sources. Its effectiveness in ensuring competitive pricing depends heavily on the justification for the initial exclusion and the subsequent competitive process. If the exclusion was narrowly defined and a sufficient number of qualified bidders (in this case, 3) participated in the subsequent full and open competition, it should drive competitive pricing. However, if the exclusion significantly limited the pool of potential bidders, the resulting price might be higher than under unrestricted full and open competition.

What is the historical spending trend for fire station construction or similar facilities by the Department of the Army?

Analyzing historical spending trends for fire station construction or similar facilities by the Department of the Army would provide context for the $12.8 million award. This involves examining past contract awards for similar projects over several fiscal years to identify average costs, common contract types, and typical durations. Understanding these trends can help determine if current spending is consistent with historical patterns, or if there are significant deviations that warrant further investigation. For example, a rising trend in costs could indicate inflation or increased demand, while a sudden drop might suggest improved efficiency or a change in project scope.

What are the implications of the 977-day contract duration on project management and oversight?

A contract duration of 977 days (approximately 2.7 years) for the construction of a fire station support facility signifies a substantial, long-term project. This extended timeline necessitates robust project management and continuous oversight from the Department of the Army. Key implications include the need for detailed scheduling, regular progress monitoring, proactive risk management to address potential delays, and consistent quality control throughout all phases of construction. The extended duration also means that oversight personnel must remain engaged over a prolonged period, requiring sustained resource allocation and consistent communication channels with the contractor.

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: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9128F23R0016

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5045 LIST DR STE 110, COLORADO SPRINGS, CO, 80919

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Tax Exempt, Limited Liability Corporation, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Special Designations, Tribally Owned Firm, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $12,848,530

Exercised Options: $12,802,530

Current Obligation: $12,802,530

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline