DoD's $110.8M GBSD Software Sustainment contract awarded to M. A. Mortenson Company for construction services

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $110,853,571 ($110.9M)

Contractor: M. a. Mortenson Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2022-07-15

End Date: 2026-02-20

Contract Duration: 1,316 days

Daily Burn Rate: $84.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Construction

Official Description: GROUND BASED STRATEGIC DEFENSE (GBSD) SOFTWARE SUSTAINMENT CENTER (SSC), HILL AFB

Place of Performance

Location: LAYTON, DAVIS County, UTAH, 84040

State: Utah Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $110.9 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY for work described as: GROUND BASED STRATEGIC DEFENSE (GBSD) SOFTWARE SUSTAINMENT CENTER (SSC), HILL AFB Key points: 1. Contract awarded for construction services related to the Ground Based Strategic Defense (GBSD) Software Sustainment Center. 2. M. A. Mortenson Company secured the definitive contract valued at over $110 million. 3. The contract has a duration of 1316 days, extending into February 2026. 4. This award falls under the Commercial and Institutional Building Construction NAICS code. 5. The contract was awarded through full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which sets a ceiling on the total cost. 7. The project is located in Utah, specifically at Hill AFB.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific construction contract is challenging without detailed cost breakdowns and scope of work. However, the $110.8 million award for a software sustainment center's physical infrastructure suggests a significant investment. Comparing it to similar large-scale construction projects for defense facilities would provide better context on whether the pricing is competitive. The firm fixed-price nature offers cost certainty but requires careful initial estimation to ensure value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded through full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. With 6 bidders identified, this indicates a healthy level of competition for this significant construction project. A competitive process generally leads to better price discovery and potentially more favorable terms for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition ensures that taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently by driving down costs through market forces. A robust bidding process helps prevent overpayment and encourages contractors to offer their best value.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the personnel operating the GBSD system, ensuring the sustainment of critical software infrastructure. The contract delivers essential construction services for a new Software Sustainment Center at Hill Air Force Base. The geographic impact is concentrated in Utah, supporting local construction industry jobs and economic activity. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for construction workers, engineers, and project managers involved in the building process.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Positive Signals

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader construction sector, specifically focusing on commercial and institutional buildings. The market for defense facility construction is substantial, driven by the need for secure, specialized infrastructure. This project contributes to the modernization of critical defense systems, aligning with government priorities for maintaining strategic capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other large-scale military construction projects.

Small Business Impact

The provided data indicates that small business participation (ss: false, sb: false) was not a specific set-aside requirement for this contract. Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications mandated by small business set-asides. However, the prime contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company, may engage small businesses as subcontractors based on their own procurement strategies, which could indirectly benefit the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the contracting officer and the relevant Department of the Army contracting command at Hill AFB. Accountability measures are embedded within the firm fixed-price contract terms, requiring adherence to specifications and delivery schedules. Transparency is facilitated through contract award announcements and public databases, though detailed project oversight specifics are typically internal.

Related Government Programs

Risk Flags

Tags

defense, construction, hill-afb, utah, definitive-contract, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, commercial-and-institutional-building-construction, ground-based-strategic-defense, software-sustainment, m-a-mortenson-company, department-of-the-army

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $110.9 million to M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY. GROUND BASED STRATEGIC DEFENSE (GBSD) SOFTWARE SUSTAINMENT CENTER (SSC), HILL AFB

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is M. A. MORTENSON COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $110.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2022-07-15. End: 2026-02-20.

What is the track record of M. A. Mortenson Company with large-scale government construction contracts, particularly for defense facilities?

M. A. Mortenson Company has a significant history of undertaking large-scale construction projects, including those for government and defense clients. While specific details on their defense facility track record require deeper investigation into past performance databases and contract awards, their ability to win a $110.8 million definitive contract through full and open competition suggests a demonstrated capability. Analyzing their past performance on similar projects, including adherence to budget, schedule, and quality standards, would provide a clearer picture of their reliability for this GBSD Software Sustainment Center project. Their experience in commercial and institutional building construction, as indicated by the NAICS code, is a foundational element for such endeavors.

How does the $110.8 million cost compare to similar construction projects for defense software sustainment centers?

Directly comparing the $110.8 million cost to similar defense software sustainment center construction projects is challenging without access to a comprehensive database of such specialized facilities and their associated construction costs. The unique requirements for security, infrastructure, and technological integration in a software sustainment center can lead to significant cost variations. However, this figure represents a substantial investment, suggesting a project of considerable scale and complexity. Benchmarking against other large military construction projects, even if not specifically for software sustainment, could offer a general sense of the magnitude of the award relative to the defense construction market.

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

The primary risk indicators for this firm fixed-price contract revolve around the potential for scope creep, unforeseen site conditions, and material cost fluctuations. While the fixed price offers cost certainty, it places the burden of managing these risks on the contractor, M. A. Mortenson Company. If the initial estimates do not fully account for all construction complexities or if unexpected issues arise during the build, the contractor may face financial strain, potentially impacting quality or schedule. Conversely, if the contractor has overestimated, the government might be paying a premium. Close monitoring of progress, adherence to specifications, and proactive issue resolution are crucial to mitigate these risks.

How effective is the 'full and open competition' strategy in ensuring value for money for this specific defense construction contract?

The 'full and open competition' strategy is generally considered effective in ensuring value for money by fostering a competitive environment where multiple contractors vie for the award. For this $110.8 million GBSD Software Sustainment Center construction contract, having 6 bidders suggests that the market was sufficiently engaged. This competition should drive down prices and encourage contractors to offer their best technical solutions and pricing. The effectiveness is further realized if the evaluation criteria prioritize not just cost but also technical merit and past performance, ensuring that the lowest bid is also the best value for the government and, by extension, the taxpayer.

What are the historical spending patterns for software sustainment infrastructure within the Department of Defense?

Historical spending patterns for software sustainment infrastructure within the Department of Defense are complex and often integrated into broader program budgets rather than being a distinct, easily isolatable category. Investments in sustainment typically include not only physical infrastructure like the Software Sustainment Center being built but also software licenses, maintenance contracts, personnel, and upgrades. Over recent years, there has been a recognized trend towards modernizing legacy systems and investing in robust sustainment capabilities to ensure the long-term operational readiness of critical defense assets like the GBSD. Specific dollar amounts for 'software sustainment infrastructure' are difficult to aggregate without detailed programmatic analysis across various defense branches and systems.

What is the significance of the 1316-day contract duration for the GBSD Software Sustainment Center project?

The 1316-day duration, approximately 3.6 years, for the GBSD Software Sustainment Center construction project is significant as it indicates a substantial and complex undertaking. Such a long timeline suggests that the project involves extensive planning, design, procurement, and phased construction activities. It allows for meticulous execution of specialized requirements inherent in defense infrastructure. This duration also implies a sustained commitment of resources and a long-term focus on establishing a critical capability for the GBSD program. Managing such a lengthy project requires robust contract administration and consistent oversight to maintain momentum and control costs effectively.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ConstructionNonresidential Building ConstructionCommercial and Institutional Building Construction

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Solicitation ID: W9123821R0001

Offers Received: 6

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: M. a. Mortenson Companies, Inc.

Address: 700 MEADOW LN N, MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 55422

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $145,404,960

Exercised Options: $125,633,960

Current Obligation: $110,853,571

Actual Outlays: $-26,912,991

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 10

Total Subaward Amount: $41,017,321

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline

Start Date: 2022-07-15

Current End Date: 2026-02-20

Potential End Date: 2026-02-20 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2025-12-19

More Contracts from M. a. Mortenson Company

View all M. a. Mortenson Company federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending