DOT's FAA awards $18.4M for NAS Operations Support, highlighting engineering services for air traffic management

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,425,900 ($18.4M)

Contractor: AS and D, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2007-08-03

End Date: 2012-07-07

Contract Duration: 1,800 days

Daily Burn Rate: $10.2K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Transportation

Official Description: ESTABLISH NAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT TASK AJW-141, INCREMENTAL FUNDING

Place of Performance

Location: GREENBELT, PRINCE GEORGE'S County, MARYLAND, 20770, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Transportation obligated $18.4 million to AS AND D, LLC for work described as: ESTABLISH NAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT TASK AJW-141, INCREMENTAL FUNDING Key points: 1. The contract value of $18.4M over five years suggests a significant investment in maintaining and improving National Airspace System operations. 2. Engineering services are critical for the complex and evolving needs of air traffic control and management. 3. The award was made under full and open competition, indicating a broad market search and potential for competitive pricing. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type shifts performance risk to the contractor, incentivizing efficient service delivery. 5. The duration of 1800 days (approximately 5 years) allows for sustained support and project continuity. 6. The contractor, AS AND D, LLC, has been awarded this task order, suggesting prior experience or capability in this specialized area.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $18.4M spread over approximately five years averages around $3.68M annually. This figure needs to be benchmarked against similar contracts for National Airspace System (NAS) operations support or engineering services. Without direct comparable data, it's difficult to definitively assess value for money. However, the firm-fixed-price structure suggests that the government has negotiated a set price, which can be advantageous if the contractor manages costs effectively. The number of bids received (3) is moderate, which might indicate a competitive but not overly crowded market for these specific services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The solicitation resulted in three offers, indicating a reasonable level of competition for these specialized engineering services. While three bidders is not exceptionally high, it suggests that the market is not entirely dominated by a few large players and that multiple firms possess the capability to perform the required work. The competitive process likely contributed to price discovery and ensured that the selected contractor offered a compelling technical and cost solution.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can lead to more favorable pricing and innovative solutions. The presence of multiple bidders suggests that taxpayer funds are being utilized in a manner that seeks the best value through market forces.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the users of the National Airspace System (NAS), including airlines, cargo operators, and general aviation pilots. The services delivered are crucial for the ongoing operations, maintenance, and potential upgrades of air traffic control systems and related infrastructure. The geographic impact is nationwide, as the NAS supports air travel and commerce across the entire United States. Workforce implications may include employment for engineers, technical specialists, and support staff within the contracting company and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if requirements are not clearly defined and managed throughout the contract lifecycle.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical NAS operations support could pose a risk if performance issues arise.
Ensuring continuous innovation and adaptation to new technologies within the fixed-price contract structure may require careful management.

Positive Signals

The firm-fixed-price contract type incentivizes the contractor to control costs and deliver services efficiently.
Awarding under full and open competition suggests a thorough vetting process and potential for competitive pricing.
The multi-year duration allows for stability and continuity in supporting vital NAS operations.

Sector Analysis

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operates within the broader transportation sector, with a significant focus on aviation infrastructure and air traffic management. The market for engineering services supporting the National Airspace System (NAS) is specialized, requiring deep expertise in aerospace engineering, air traffic control systems, and related technologies. Spending in this area is driven by the need to maintain safety, efficiency, and capacity of the NAS, which is a critical component of national infrastructure. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other large-scale engineering and support contracts awarded by the FAA or similar aviation authorities globally.

Small Business Impact

This contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not appear to have a specific small business set-aside. The data indicates the prime contractor is AS AND D, LLC. Analysis of subcontracting plans and actual subcontracting performance would be necessary to determine the extent of small business participation. Without this information, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem, though larger contracts often involve a tiered subcontracting structure where small businesses can play a role.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) contracting officer and program managers. They are responsible for monitoring contractor performance, ensuring compliance with contract terms, and managing any modifications or disputes. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases and reporting requirements. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse arise during the contract's performance.

Related Government Programs

National Airspace System (NAS) Modernization Programs
Air Traffic Control Systems Engineering Support
Aviation Safety and Security Initiatives
FAA Operations and Maintenance Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for performance issues impacting critical NAS operations.
Risk of cost overruns if scope is not well-defined under FFP.
Dependence on contractor expertise for specialized engineering services.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $18.4 million to AS AND D, LLC. ESTABLISH NAS OPERATIONS SUPPORT TASK AJW-141, 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 $18.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

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

What is the track record of AS AND D, LLC in performing similar National Airspace System (NAS) operations support contracts?

Assessing the track record of AS AND D, LLC requires a detailed review of their past performance on federal contracts, particularly those related to the National Airspace System (NAS) or similar complex operational support. Information on past performance is typically collected by agencies during the source selection process and can be found in contract performance reports (CPARs). Without access to specific CPARs or a comprehensive database of their project history, it is difficult to definitively state their track record. However, being awarded a task order of this magnitude by the FAA suggests they possess the necessary qualifications and have likely demonstrated competence in prior engagements, either with the FAA or other relevant entities. Further investigation would involve examining their contract history for similar scope, value, and duration, as well as any reported performance issues or commendations.

How does the average annual value of this contract compare to other FAA engineering services contracts?

The average annual value of this contract is approximately $3.68 million ($18.4 million / 5 years). To benchmark this against other FAA engineering services contracts, one would need access to a database of historical FAA contract awards, filtered by service type (engineering services) and potentially by agency sub-component (e.g., specific FAA directorates). Comparing this average to the mean or median annual value of similar contracts would provide context. For instance, if the average annual value for comparable FAA engineering contracts is significantly higher or lower, it could indicate whether this award is typical, high-cost, or low-cost relative to the market. Factors such as contract complexity, duration, and specific technical requirements would also influence such comparisons.

What are the primary risks associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for NAS operations support?

The primary risk associated with a firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract for National Airspace System (NAS) operations support lies in the potential for the contractor to cut corners on quality or scope to maintain profitability, especially if unforeseen technical challenges arise or costs escalate beyond initial estimates. While FFP shifts cost risk to the contractor, it can also disincentivize innovation if the contractor is solely focused on meeting the minimum requirements to avoid cost overruns. For critical infrastructure like the NAS, any compromise in quality or performance could have significant safety and operational implications. Effective oversight by the FAA is crucial to mitigate these risks by ensuring adherence to specifications and quality standards throughout the contract period.

What is the historical spending trend for NAS operations support by the FAA?

Analyzing the historical spending trend for NAS operations support by the FAA would involve examining aggregate spending data over several fiscal years. This would require accessing FAA budget documents, contract award databases, and potentially Inspector General reports that track expenditures in this category. Key metrics to observe would include the total annual expenditure on NAS operations support, the number and value of contracts awarded in this area, and the distribution of spending across different types of services (e.g., engineering, maintenance, IT support). Understanding these trends can reveal patterns of investment, identify periods of increased or decreased spending, and highlight any shifts in the FAA's strategic priorities related to NAS operations.

How many other full and open competition contracts of similar scope and value has the FAA awarded in the last five years?

To determine how many other full and open competition contracts of similar scope and value the FAA has awarded in the last five years, a comprehensive search of federal procurement databases (such as FPDS or USAspending) would be necessary. The search criteria would include: agency (FAA), contract type (full and open competition), award period (last five years), and a value range comparable to $18.4 million (e.g., $10 million to $30 million). Additionally, filtering by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code (541330 - Engineering Services) or relevant Product Service Codes (PSCs) would refine the results. This analysis would reveal the frequency and scale of similar procurement actions, providing insight into the FAA's contracting patterns for NAS-related engineering support.

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: $1,001,605,169

Exercised Options: $18,425,900

Current Obligation: $18,425,900

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAAC07D00048

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline