Navy awards $7.4M design contract for Guam facility to ASMD LLC, with a 5-year performance period

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,441,049 ($7.4M)

Contractor: Asmd LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2020-01-07

End Date: 2026-06-30

Contract Duration: 2,366 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: X051 0-35% DESIGN (PRELIMINARY DESIGN AUTHORITY, PDA) EFFORT FOR P-306 CLB-4 FACILITY, US NAVSUPPACT MARINE CORPS BASE GUAM

Place of Performance

Location: AGANA HEIGHTS, GUAM County, GUAM, 96910

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $7.4 million to ASMD LLC for work described as: X051 0-35% DESIGN (PRELIMINARY DESIGN AUTHORITY, PDA) EFFORT FOR P-306 CLB-4 FACILITY, US NAVSUPPACT MARINE CORPS BASE GUAM Key points: 1. The contract focuses on preliminary design, indicating early-stage project development. 2. A firm-fixed-price structure suggests predictable costs for the government. 3. The long performance period of over five years allows for comprehensive design work. 4. The project is located in Guam, highlighting strategic infrastructure investments in the Pacific. 5. The award was made under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $7.4 million for preliminary design services appears reasonable given the scope and duration. Benchmarking against similar preliminary design contracts for large-scale facilities in overseas locations is challenging due to limited public data. However, the firm-fixed-price nature of the contract provides cost certainty. The contract's duration of over five years suggests a complex design process, which can justify the overall value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple qualified bidders had the opportunity to submit proposals. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters competitive pricing and allows the government to select the best value offer. The open competition suggests a healthy market for these engineering services.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition is beneficial for taxpayers as it is expected to drive down costs through market forces and ensure the government receives competitive pricing for essential services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps, who will receive updated facility designs. The services delivered include preliminary design engineering for a critical facility. The geographic impact is concentrated in Guam, supporting U.S. military presence in the Indo-Pacific region. The contract supports the engineering services sector, potentially creating or sustaining jobs for skilled professionals.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep in preliminary design phases if requirements are not clearly defined.
Geopolitical risks associated with projects in the Pacific theater could impact timelines or costs.
Reliance on a single contractor for a significant design effort could pose risks if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
Full and open competition suggests a competitive market and potential for best value.
Long performance period allows for thorough and detailed design work.
Strategic location of the facility supports long-term U.S. defense posture.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically related to architectural and engineering services for construction projects. The market for these services is competitive, with many firms capable of undertaking large-scale government design contracts. The $7.4 million award is a moderate-sized contract within this sector, supporting infrastructure development for defense purposes. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve looking at other large facility design projects awarded by the Department of Defense or other federal agencies.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded under full and open competition and does not indicate any specific small business set-aside. There is no information provided regarding subcontracting plans for small businesses. Therefore, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely limited unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for subcontracting opportunities.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily reside with the Department of the Navy's contracting and project management officials. Accountability measures are embedded in the firm-fixed-price contract terms, requiring the contractor to deliver specified design services. Transparency is facilitated through the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS), where contract awards are reported. Inspector General jurisdiction may apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Naval Facilities Engineering Command (NAVFAC) Contracts
Department of Defense Infrastructure Projects
Guam Military Construction Projects
Engineering Services for Government Facilities

Risk Flags

Long performance period may increase risk of design obsolescence.
Geographic location in Guam presents logistical and potential geopolitical risks.
Preliminary design phase requires careful scope management to avoid cost overruns.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $7.4 million to ASMD LLC. X051 0-35% DESIGN (PRELIMINARY DESIGN AUTHORITY, PDA) EFFORT FOR P-306 CLB-4 FACILITY, US NAVSUPPACT MARINE CORPS BASE GUAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is ASMD LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.4 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2020-01-07. End: 2026-06-30.

What is the track record of ASMD LLC in performing similar preliminary design contracts for the Department of Defense?

Information regarding ASMD LLC's specific track record in performing preliminary design contracts for the Department of Defense is not detailed in the provided data. A comprehensive assessment would require reviewing past performance evaluations, contract history, and any reported issues or successes on similar projects. Federal procurement databases and contractor performance systems (like the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System - CPARS) would be the primary sources for this information. Without access to these detailed records, it is difficult to definitively assess their experience and capability for this specific type of work, although the award itself suggests they met the minimum requirements for competition.

How does the $7.4 million value compare to similar preliminary design contracts for military facilities?

Benchmarking the $7.4 million value requires comparing it to similar preliminary design contracts for military facilities of comparable size and complexity, particularly those located in overseas or high-cost areas like Guam. Preliminary design efforts can vary significantly in cost depending on the scope of work, the type of facility, and the specific requirements. A direct comparison is difficult without more data on the facility's intended purpose and scale. However, for large-scale infrastructure projects, preliminary design costs can range from a few percent to over ten percent of the total project cost. The long performance period (over 5 years) suggests a complex design process, which could justify this investment.

What are the primary risks associated with this preliminary design contract?

The primary risks associated with this preliminary design contract include potential scope creep if the project requirements are not meticulously defined and managed from the outset. Given the long performance period, there's also a risk of design obsolescence if technology or operational needs change significantly over the five years. Furthermore, the location in Guam presents logistical challenges and potential geopolitical risks that could impact project execution. Contractor performance risk is always present, though mitigated by the competitive award process. Finally, ensuring the design adequately addresses future maintenance and operational needs is crucial.

How effective is the firm-fixed-price contract type in managing costs for this preliminary design effort?

The firm-fixed-price (FFP) contract type is generally effective in managing costs for preliminary design efforts by shifting the cost risk to the contractor. This means the contractor is obligated to complete the work for the agreed-upon price, regardless of their actual costs. This provides the government with cost certainty and predictability, which is a significant advantage. However, for complex or uncertain design tasks, an FFP contract can incentivize the contractor to cut corners if not carefully monitored, potentially impacting quality. Effective oversight is still necessary to ensure the contractor meets all performance requirements within the fixed price.

What is the historical spending pattern for engineering services by the Department of the Navy in Guam?

Analyzing historical spending patterns for engineering services by the Department of the Navy in Guam would require access to detailed procurement data over several fiscal years. This would involve querying databases like FPDS to identify all contracts awarded for engineering services in that geographic region by the Navy. Key metrics to examine would include the total annual spending, the types of services procured (e.g., design, construction management, environmental), the primary contractors receiving awards, and the average contract values. Such an analysis could reveal trends in infrastructure investment, identify key service providers, and provide context for the current $7.4 million award relative to historical norms.

What are the implications of the 5-year performance period for the preliminary design work?

A performance period of over five years for preliminary design work suggests a highly complex and potentially phased approach to the design process. This extended duration allows ample time for detailed analysis, stakeholder consultations, iterative design development, and incorporation of feedback. It can be particularly beneficial for large-scale or strategically important facilities where thoroughness is paramount. However, it also increases the risk of design obsolescence if market conditions, technological advancements, or operational requirements evolve significantly during the design phase. Careful contract management and regular reviews are essential to ensure the design remains relevant and meets future needs.

Industry Classification

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

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: ARCHITECT-ENGINEER FAR 6.102

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 733 BISHOP ST STE 3100, HONOLULU, HI, 96813

Business Categories: Category Business, Limited Liability Corporation, Not Designated a Small Business, Partnership or Limited Liability Partnership, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $7,441,049

Exercised Options: $7,441,049

Current Obligation: $7,441,049

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6274215D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline