DOT's FAA awards $75.3M engineering support contract to AS AND D, LLC over 5 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $75,322,546 ($75.3M)

Contractor: AS and D, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2007-08-03

End Date: 2012-08-07

Contract Duration: 1,831 days

Daily Burn Rate: $41.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ESTABLISH NAS POWER OPERATIONS ENGINEERING SUPPORT TASK, AJW-223, INCREMENTAL FUNDING

Place of Performance

Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGES County, MARYLAND, 20770

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $75.3 million to AS AND D, LLC for work described as: ESTABLISH NAS POWER OPERATIONS ENGINEERING SUPPORT TASK, AJW-223, INCREMENTAL FUNDING Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive pricing environment. 2. The contract duration of 1831 days (approx. 5 years) indicates a long-term need for these services. 3. The firm fixed-price (FFP) structure shifts performance risk to the contractor. 4. Engineering services (NAICS 541330) are critical for maintaining and upgrading complex federal infrastructure. 5. The contract was awarded as a delivery order, implying it's part of a larger indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle or a previously established contract. 6. The presence of 3 bidders indicates a moderate level of competition for this specific award.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The total award amount of $75.3 million over approximately five years averages to about $15 million annually. Benchmarking this against similar large-scale engineering support contracts for federal agencies is challenging without more specific service details. However, the firm fixed-price nature and competitive award suggest an effort to secure value. The contract's value appears reasonable given the duration and the critical nature of FAA infrastructure support.

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 a bid. With three bidders participating, the competition level was moderate. This suggests that while multiple companies were aware of and interested in the opportunity, the market may not be saturated with potential offerors for this specific type of specialized engineering support.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing and potentially leading to lower overall costs compared to sole-source or limited competition awards.

Public Impact

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) benefits directly through the provision of essential engineering support services. This contract supports the operational integrity and modernization of the National Airspace System (NAS). The services delivered are crucial for ensuring the safety and efficiency of air travel. The primary geographic impact is likely within the United States, supporting FAA facilities and operations nationwide. The contract supports a specialized engineering workforce, potentially creating or sustaining jobs in this sector.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed.
Reliance on a single contractor for critical engineering functions could pose a risk if performance degrades.
The long duration may lead to challenges in adapting to rapidly evolving technological requirements without contract modifications.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure incentivizes contractor efficiency and cost control.
Awarded through full and open competition, indicating a potentially competitive price.
The contractor, AS AND D, LLC, has secured a significant federal contract, suggesting a level of established capability.
The contract duration implies a stable, long-term need, allowing for focused engineering expertise development.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS 541330), a vital component of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. This sector supports federal agencies in designing, developing, and maintaining complex infrastructure and systems. The market for federal engineering services is substantial, driven by ongoing modernization efforts, infrastructure upgrades, and the need for specialized technical expertise across various government departments. Comparable spending benchmarks would depend on the specific engineering disciplines involved, but large-scale support contracts for agencies like the FAA represent significant investments.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not awarded as a small business set-aside, and there is no indication of specific subcontracting requirements for small businesses in the provided data. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem appears minimal for this particular award. However, the prime contractor, AS AND D, LLC, may engage small businesses as subcontractors depending on their own business practices and the specific needs of the engineering tasks.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically be managed by the contracting officer and the contracting officer's representative (COR) within the Federal Aviation Administration. Performance monitoring, adherence to contract terms, and quality assurance are key oversight functions. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise.

Related Government Programs

National Airspace System (NAS) Modernization Programs
FAA Air Traffic Control Systems Engineering
Federal Aviation Administration Operations Support
Engineering Services for Federal Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Long-term contract duration may increase risk of scope creep or technological obsolescence.
Firm Fixed Price contract requires careful scope definition to avoid contractor disputes.
Moderate competition level (3 bidders) may not yield the lowest possible price.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $75.3 million to AS AND D, LLC. ESTABLISH NAS POWER OPERATIONS ENGINEERING SUPPORT TASK, AJW-223, INCREMENTAL FUNDING

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is AS AND D, LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $75.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-03. End: 2012-08-07.

What is the track record of AS AND D, LLC in performing similar federal engineering contracts?

AS AND D, LLC has a history of performing federal contracts, including those related to engineering and technical services. Analyzing their past performance on similar contracts, particularly those with the Department of Transportation or other agencies requiring complex system support, would provide insight into their reliability, quality of work, and ability to manage large-scale projects. Specific details on past contract values, durations, and performance reviews (if publicly available) would be crucial for a comprehensive assessment. Their ability to successfully complete this $75.3 million contract over five years will depend on their demonstrated capacity to manage resources, technical expertise, and project timelines effectively, as evidenced by their prior federal engagements.

How does the $75.3 million total contract value compare to other engineering support contracts awarded by the FAA or DOT?

The $75.3 million total contract value for five years of engineering support is a significant award, averaging approximately $15 million per year. To benchmark this effectively, one would need to compare it against similar engineering services contracts awarded by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the Department of Transportation (DOT) for the maintenance, operation, or modernization of critical infrastructure like the National Airspace System (NAS). Contracts for air traffic control systems, airport infrastructure, or aviation technology development could serve as comparators. Without access to a detailed database of comparable contracts, it's difficult to definitively state if this represents a high, low, or average value. However, the duration and the critical nature of FAA operations suggest that substantial investment in engineering support is expected.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the Federal Aviation Administration?

The primary risks for the FAA associated with this contract include potential performance failures by AS AND D, LLC, which could disrupt critical operations of the National Airspace System (NAS). Given the firm fixed-price nature, there's a risk that the contractor might cut corners on quality to maintain profitability, impacting the reliability and safety of engineering support. Contractor dependency is another risk; if AS AND D, LLC experiences financial instability or significant personnel turnover, it could jeopardize the continuity of essential services. Furthermore, the long duration of the contract (5 years) increases the risk of technological obsolescence or the need for significant scope adjustments, which could lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully through contract modifications.

How effective is the firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type in ensuring value for money in this context?

The firm fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally considered effective in ensuring value for money when the scope of work is well-defined and the risks are understood. For the FAA's engineering support contract, FFP shifts the primary cost-control risk to the contractor, AS AND D, LLC. This incentivizes the contractor to manage costs efficiently and complete the work within the agreed-upon price. If the engineering requirements are stable and clearly articulated, FFP can lead to predictable costs for the government and encourage the contractor to innovate in finding cost-effective solutions. However, if the scope is ambiguous or subject to frequent changes, FFP can lead to disputes or the contractor demanding higher prices upfront to buffer against uncertainty, potentially negating some of the value-for-money benefits.

What is the historical spending pattern for engineering support services by the FAA?

Historical spending patterns for engineering support services by the FAA are likely substantial, given the agency's responsibility for managing and modernizing the complex National Airspace System (NAS). The FAA consistently invests in areas such as air traffic control systems, navigation aids, communication infrastructure, and safety systems, all of which require extensive engineering expertise. Annual spending can fluctuate based on major modernization initiatives, such as NextGen implementation, and routine maintenance requirements. Analyzing historical data from sources like the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) would reveal trends in contract awards, average contract values, and the types of engineering services most frequently procured. This specific $75.3 million award represents a significant, multi-year commitment within that broader spending context.

What does the presence of 3 bidders signify regarding the market for these specialized engineering services?

The presence of three bidders for this $75.3 million engineering support contract suggests a moderately competitive market for these specialized services. It indicates that at least three firms possessed the necessary technical qualifications, capacity, and interest to pursue this significant federal opportunity. A higher number of bidders (e.g., 5+) typically signals a more robust and competitive market, potentially driving prices lower. Conversely, only one or two bidders might suggest a more limited market, potentially due to high barriers to entry (specialized expertise, security clearances, past performance requirements) or a lack of overall demand. Three bidders strike a balance, indicating sufficient competition to foster price discovery while acknowledging the specialized nature of the work.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

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

Parent Company: Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (UEI: 076637073)

Address: 3900 C STREET, STE-802, ANCHORAGE, AK, 99503

Business Categories: 8(a) Program Participant, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Native American Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $1,437,156,060

Exercised Options: $77,942,704

Current Obligation: $75,322,546

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAAC07D00048

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline