FAA awards $25.3M engineering contract to AS AND D, LLC for NAS Oklahoma communications

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,338,976 ($25.3M)

Contractor: AS and D, LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Transportation

Start Date: 2007-08-06

End Date: 2011-08-07

Contract Duration: 1,462 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: ESTABLISH NAS OKLAHOMA COMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING, AJW-173, 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 $25.3 million to AS AND D, LLC for work described as: ESTABLISH NAS OKLAHOMA COMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING, AJW-173, INCREMENTAL FUNDING Key points: 1. Contract awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract duration of 1462 days indicates a long-term need for these engineering services. 3. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 4. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 541330 points to engineering services. 5. The award was made by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), a key agency within the Department of Transportation. 6. The contract was awarded in 2007 and completed in 2011, providing historical context for spending.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $25.3 million over approximately four years for engineering services related to the National Airspace System (NAS) appears to be within a reasonable range for such specialized work. Benchmarking against similar large-scale engineering projects for critical infrastructure like air traffic control systems would provide a more precise value assessment. However, without specific details on the scope of work and deliverables, a definitive value-for-money judgment is challenging. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests that the agency aimed to control costs by transferring risk to the contractor.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of 3 bidders (no) suggests a moderate level of competition for this specific requirement. While three bidders are present, the extent of their engagement and the competitiveness of the bids are not detailed. A higher number of bidders typically correlates with better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The full and open competition process, even with a limited number of bidders, generally benefits taxpayers by encouraging competitive pricing and ensuring that the government receives offers from multiple qualified vendors.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Federal Aviation Administration and the users of the National Airspace System, who rely on robust communications engineering. The services delivered are critical for the modernization and maintenance of air traffic control communications infrastructure. The geographic impact is centered around the National Airspace System, with specific implications for Oklahoma facilities. The contract supports specialized engineering roles, potentially impacting the aerospace and defense engineering workforce.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope of work was not precisely defined, despite the fixed-price nature.
Dependence on a single contractor for a critical four-year period could pose risks if performance issues arise.
The limited number of bidders (3) might indicate potential barriers to entry for other qualified firms or a niche market.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure helps to contain costs and provides budget certainty.
Awarded through full and open competition, which generally promotes fair pricing and access for qualified vendors.
The contractor, AS AND D, LLC, was selected through a competitive process, implying they met technical and cost requirements.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting the aerospace and defense industry's critical infrastructure. The market for air traffic control communications engineering is specialized, often dominated by firms with deep expertise in government contracting and aviation technology. Spending in this area is driven by the need for continuous modernization and maintenance of the National Airspace System (NAS) to ensure safety and efficiency. Comparable spending benchmarks would likely be found within large-scale government IT and infrastructure projects requiring specialized engineering expertise.

Small Business Impact

This contract does not appear to have involved small business set-asides, as indicated by 'sb': false. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans or their impact on the small business ecosystem. Without specific subcontracting goals or achievements, it is difficult to assess the extent to which small businesses benefited from this award.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would have been managed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). As a large federal contract, it likely underwent standard procurement oversight processes, including contract administration and performance monitoring. Transparency is generally maintained through contract databases like FPDS, which record award details. Inspector General jurisdiction would typically fall under the Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector General for potential investigations into fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

National Airspace System (NAS) modernization programs
FAA Air Traffic Control Systems procurement
Department of Transportation Engineering Services contracts
Federal Aviation Administration Communications Infrastructure

Risk Flags

Potential for scope creep given the long duration and nature of engineering projects.
Dependence on contractor performance for critical NAS communications infrastructure.
Risk associated with the limited number of bidders in a specialized market.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Transportation awarded $25.3 million to AS AND D, LLC. ESTABLISH NAS OKLAHOMA COMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING, AJW-173, 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 $25.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-08-06. End: 2011-08-07.

What specific engineering services were provided under this contract?

The contract, "ESTABLISH NAS OKLAHOMA COMMUNICATIONS ENGINEERING, AJW-173," indicates that the services provided by AS AND D, LLC were focused on establishing or enhancing communications engineering for the National Airspace System (NAS) in Oklahoma. This likely encompassed a range of activities such as system design, integration, testing, and potentially installation or upgrade of communication systems critical for air traffic management. Given the context of NAS, these services could involve radio communication systems, data links, navigation aids, or other technologies essential for safe and efficient air traffic control. The incremental funding suggests a phased approach to the project, allowing for adjustments and continued development over the contract's duration.

How does the $25.3 million award compare to similar FAA engineering contracts?

Comparing the $25.3 million award requires context on the specific scope and duration. For large-scale engineering projects within the FAA, particularly those related to critical infrastructure like the National Airspace System (NAS), this figure is substantial but not extraordinary. For instance, major system upgrades or new installations within NAS have historically commanded tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. The four-year duration (1462 days) suggests a significant undertaking. To provide a precise benchmark, one would need to analyze contracts with similar NAICS codes (541330 - Engineering Services), agencies (FAA), and project types (e.g., air traffic control systems, communication infrastructure). Without such a direct comparison, it's fair to say the value is significant for a specialized engineering effort over several years.

What were the key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics for this contract?

Specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract are not detailed in the provided data. However, for an engineering services contract related to the National Airspace System (NAS), typical success metrics would likely include: adherence to project timelines and milestones, successful integration and testing of communication systems, compliance with FAA technical standards and specifications, system reliability and uptime post-implementation, and overall cost control within the firm fixed-price budget. Performance would also be assessed based on the contractor's ability to resolve technical challenges and deliver a functional, operational communication system that meets the FAA's requirements for air traffic management.

What is the track record of AS AND D, LLC in securing and performing on federal contracts?

AS AND D, LLC, as the contractor for this $25.3 million FAA contract, has a history of performing federal work. While the provided data doesn't detail their entire contract portfolio, this award itself signifies their capability to compete for and win significant government contracts. To fully assess their track record, one would need to examine their performance history across multiple contracts, looking at factors such as past performance ratings, any contract disputes or terminations, on-time delivery, and overall client satisfaction within the federal sector. Their ability to secure this multi-year engineering contract suggests they met the necessary qualifications and competitive requirements set by the FAA.

How did the firm fixed-price contract type influence the risk and cost for the government?

The Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract type significantly shifts the cost risk from the government to the contractor, AS AND D, LLC. Under an FFP agreement, the contractor is obligated to complete the work for a predetermined price, regardless of their actual costs incurred. This provides the government with budget certainty and protects against cost overruns, as the total payment is fixed. For the contractor, it incentivizes efficiency and cost management, as any savings achieved below the fixed price contribute directly to their profit. However, it also means the government may not benefit from cost reductions if the contractor's expenses are lower than anticipated. The risk for the government lies in ensuring the contract scope is well-defined to avoid change orders that could increase the price.

What is the significance of the 'INCREMENTAL FUNDING' notation?

The notation 'INCREMENTAL FUNDING' indicates that the full contract value of $25.3 million was not obligated at the time of award. Instead, funds were allocated in stages or increments. This is a common practice for multi-year contracts, especially those that are subject to annual appropriations by Congress or where the full scope of work may evolve over time. Incremental funding allows the government to commit to a project without obligating the entire amount upfront, providing flexibility and mitigating financial risk if the project needs to be modified or terminated. Each funding increment typically covers a specific period or phase of the contract, and subsequent increments are awarded based on continued need and availability of funds.

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: $876,791,645

Exercised Options: $25,338,976

Current Obligation: $25,338,976

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DTFAAC07D00048

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline