DoD's $145.6M WPAFB construction contract awarded to Messer Construction Co. shows strong competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $145,646,512 ($145.6M)

Contractor: Messer Construction CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-08-12

End Date: 2025-12-13

Contract Duration: 1,949 days

Daily Burn Rate: $74.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: ADD/ALTER IPC - WPAFB

Place of Performance

Location: DAYTON, GREENE County, OHIO, 45433

State: Ohio Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $145.6 million to MESSER CONSTRUCTION CO for work described as: ADD/ALTER IPC - WPAFB Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, indicating a robust bidding process. 2. The firm-fixed-price structure helps manage cost certainty for the government. 3. Contract duration of nearly 2 years suggests a significant, ongoing project. 4. Project located in Ohio, potentially impacting local construction workforce and economy. 5. No small business set-aside noted, requiring further review of subcontracting plans. 6. The contract value is substantial, necessitating careful performance monitoring.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $145.6 million for construction services at WPAFB appears to be within a reasonable range for a project of this scale and duration. Benchmarking against similar large-scale federal construction projects would provide a more precise value-for-money assessment. The firm-fixed-price contract type is generally favorable for the government in managing cost overruns, assuming the scope is well-defined. The number of bids received (3) suggests a competitive environment, which typically drives better pricing.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. Three bids were received, indicating a moderate level of competition for this significant construction project. While three bidders suggest some level of price discovery, a higher number of bidders would typically lead to more aggressive pricing and potentially better value for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages multiple companies to compete, which can drive down costs and ensure the government receives competitive pricing for its construction needs.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the personnel at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, who will receive improved facilities. The contract will deliver essential construction and renovation services, enhancing infrastructure at a key military installation. The geographic impact is concentrated in Ohio, potentially creating jobs and economic activity within the state's construction sector. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for skilled tradespeople and construction professionals involved in the project.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of small business set-aside may limit opportunities for smaller firms unless significant subcontracting occurs.
The fixed-price nature requires meticulous scope definition to avoid change orders that could inflate costs.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a fair and accessible bidding process.
Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost certainty for the government.
The project's duration indicates a commitment to necessary infrastructure improvements.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction sector, a vital part of the broader construction industry. Federal spending in this sector supports military readiness, government operations, and infrastructure development. Comparable spending benchmarks for large-scale federal construction projects at military installations can vary significantly based on location, scope, and specific requirements. This contract represents a substantial investment in maintaining and upgrading critical defense infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

The contract data indicates that this was not set aside for small businesses, and there is no explicit mention of small business participation goals. This means that opportunities for small businesses would primarily come through subcontracting. The effectiveness of small business utilization will depend on Messer Construction Co.'s subcontracting plan and their commitment to engaging with the small business ecosystem. Without specific subcontracting targets, the direct impact on small businesses remains uncertain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting office at WPAFB. Performance monitoring will be crucial to ensure adherence to the firm-fixed-price terms and quality standards. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Military Construction
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Projects
Federal Building Construction
Department of Defense Facilities Management

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep in large fixed-price contracts.
Moderate competition level may impact optimal price discovery.
Lack of explicit small business set-aside requires monitoring subcontracting.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $145.6 million to MESSER CONSTRUCTION CO. ADD/ALTER IPC - WPAFB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MESSER CONSTRUCTION CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $145.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-08-12. End: 2025-12-13.

What is the historical spending pattern for construction contracts at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base over the last five years?

Analyzing historical spending at WPAFB requires access to detailed federal procurement databases. However, large military installations like WPAFB typically see consistent investment in infrastructure maintenance, upgrades, and new construction. Spending patterns are often influenced by military readiness requirements, BRAC actions, and specific modernization initiatives. Contracts can range from small repair jobs to multi-million dollar new builds. The $145.6 million awarded to Messer Construction Co. represents a significant single award, suggesting a major project is underway. To provide a precise historical pattern, one would need to aggregate data on contract awards by fiscal year, type of construction, and agency component within WPAFB, looking for trends in average contract value, number of awards, and dominant contract types (e.g., fixed-price vs. cost-plus).

How does the number of bidders (3) compare to the average number of bids for similar-sized federal construction contracts?

The average number of bids for federal construction contracts can vary significantly based on the contract's complexity, value, and the specific industry segment. For large-value contracts (e.g., over $10 million), receiving three bids under full and open competition is often considered moderate. Some sources suggest that for major construction projects, a higher number of bidders (5+) might be expected in a truly robust market. However, specialized construction requirements or specific geographic locations can limit the pool of qualified bidders. Three bidders indicate that the competition was sufficient to generate some price pressure, but it may not represent the maximum possible competitive advantage for the government. A lower number could signal potential market concentration or barriers to entry for other firms.

What are the potential risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract of this magnitude and duration?

The primary risk with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract of this magnitude ($145.6M) and duration (nearly 2 years) is the potential for scope creep and contractor claims if the initial requirements are not meticulously defined. If unforeseen issues arise or the government's needs evolve, the contractor is obligated to perform the work for the agreed price, but this can lead to disputes or requests for equitable adjustments. Conversely, if the contractor significantly underestimates costs or encounters unexpected difficulties, they bear the financial risk, which could impact their financial stability or lead to subpar performance if they attempt to cut corners. Effective contract administration, clear communication, and a well-defined SOW are critical to mitigating these risks.

What is Messer Construction Co.'s track record with federal construction contracts, particularly with the Department of Defense?

Messer Construction Co. has a history of performing federal construction contracts. A thorough review of their track record would involve examining past performance evaluations, any history of contract disputes or litigation, and the types and values of previous federal projects they have completed. Their experience with the Department of Defense specifically would be a key indicator of their suitability for this WPAFB contract. Federal procurement data often includes past performance information, which contracting officers use in source selection. Without direct access to Messer's specific federal contract history and performance reviews, it's difficult to provide a detailed assessment, but their ability to win a $145.6M DoD contract suggests they have demonstrated capability and reliability in prior federal engagements.

How does the $145.6M contract value compare to the total federal spending on construction in Ohio for the relevant fiscal years?

Comparing this single $145.6 million contract to total federal construction spending in Ohio requires comprehensive data aggregation. Federal construction spending in Ohio, like elsewhere, supports military bases, federal agency facilities, infrastructure projects (like transportation), and research institutions. Ohio hosts significant military installations like Wright-Patterson AFB, making it a consistent recipient of federal construction funds. The $145.6M represents a substantial portion of federal construction investment within the state for the period it covers, highlighting the importance of WPAFB. To establish a precise comparison, one would need to sum all federal construction contract awards in Ohio across all agencies for the relevant fiscal years (e.g., FY2020-2025) and then determine this contract's percentage contribution.

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

Solicitation ID: W912QR20R0002

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 643 W COURT ST, CINCINNATI, OH, 45203

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $145,646,512

Exercised Options: $145,646,512

Current Obligation: $145,646,512

Actual Outlays: $4,473,724

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline