DoD's $7.2M P617 Transit Protection Facility Design Contract Awarded to MN-BMCD SE JV

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $7,224,448 ($7.2M)

Contractor: Mn-Bmcd SE JV

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2021-09-17

End Date: 2026-09-30

Contract Duration: 1,839 days

Daily Burn Rate: $3.9K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 21E-FULL DESIGN OF P617 TRANSIT PROTECTION PROGRAM FACILITY

Place of Performance

Location: KINGS BAY, CAMDEN County, GEORGIA, 31547

State: Georgia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $7.2 million to MN-BMCD SE JV for work described as: 21E-FULL DESIGN OF P617 TRANSIT PROTECTION PROGRAM FACILITY Key points: 1. Contract awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is for engineering services, specifically the full design of a transit protection program facility. 3. The contract duration is substantial at 1839 days, indicating a complex and long-term project. 4. The firm-fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 5. The award was made by the Department of the Navy, part of the Department of Defense. 6. The project is located in Georgia, potentially impacting the local economy and workforce.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific engineering design contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparable project data. The $7.2 million award for a full design of a specialized facility appears within a reasonable range for complex engineering projects, but a direct comparison to similar transit protection facilities is needed for a definitive assessment. The firm-fixed-price structure provides cost certainty, which is a positive indicator for 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 bidders were likely solicited and evaluated. The specific number of bidders is not provided, but this procurement method generally fosters price discovery and allows the government to select from a wide range of qualified contractors. The open competition suggests that the government sought the best value proposition available in the market.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through a competitive bidding process, ensuring that the government receives services at a fair market rate.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the Department of Defense and the Department of the Navy, who will receive the design for a critical transit protection program facility. The services delivered include comprehensive engineering design for a specialized facility. The geographic impact is concentrated in Georgia, where the facility will be designed. The project may have implications for the local engineering and construction workforce in Georgia during the design phase.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of specific details on the number of bidders limits the assessment of the true competitive intensity.
The long duration of the contract (over 5 years) introduces potential risks related to scope creep or changing requirements.
Without detailed cost breakdowns, it's difficult to fully assess the cost-effectiveness of the engineering services.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition, suggesting a robust bidding process.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
The contractor, MN-BMCD SE JV, is likely experienced in engineering services, given the nature of the award.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector (NAICS code 541330). This sector is crucial for government infrastructure projects, particularly in defense and transportation. The market for specialized facility design can be competitive, with a mix of large firms and joint ventures. The total federal spending on engineering services is substantial, and this contract represents a specific investment in defense-related infrastructure.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that this contract was not set aside for small businesses (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, there are no direct subcontracting implications for small businesses stemming from a set-aside requirement. However, the prime contractor may choose to subcontract portions of the work to small businesses as part of their overall project execution strategy, which could indirectly benefit the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would primarily fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified design within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the contract's award under full and open competition, with details typically available through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Facilities Engineering
Naval Facilities Engineering Command Contracts
Transit Infrastructure Projects
Defense Construction and Design Services

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of scope creep or requirement changes.
Limited information on the number of bidders makes full assessment of competition difficult.
Potential for cost overruns if initial estimates do not account for unforeseen complexities in specialized facility design.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $7.2 million to MN-BMCD SE JV. 21E-FULL DESIGN OF P617 TRANSIT PROTECTION PROGRAM FACILITY

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MN-BMCD SE JV.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $7.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2021-09-17. End: 2026-09-30.

What is the track record of MN-BMCD SE JV in performing similar large-scale engineering design contracts for the Department of Defense?

Assessing the specific track record of MN-BMCD SE JV requires a deep dive into federal procurement databases like SAM.gov and FPDS. While the award of this $7.2 million contract suggests they possess the necessary qualifications, understanding their past performance on similar projects is crucial. Key areas to investigate would include their experience with transit facilities, protection programs, and projects of comparable complexity and value. Examining past performance reviews, any contract disputes, or awards for exceptional performance would provide a more comprehensive picture of their capabilities and reliability for the Department of Defense.

How does the $7.2 million cost for the P617 Transit Protection Program Facility design compare to similar projects within the Department of Defense or other federal agencies?

Benchmarking the $7.2 million cost requires identifying comparable projects in terms of facility type, size, complexity, and scope of design services. Without specific details on the facility's square footage, specific protection requirements, or the level of detail in the design (e.g., schematic, detailed construction documents), a precise comparison is difficult. However, for large-scale, specialized government facilities, design costs can range significantly. Factors like geographic location, specific security requirements, and the uniqueness of the transit protection system would influence the overall cost. A thorough analysis would involve reviewing historical data for similar DoD or GSA projects to establish a cost-per-square-foot or cost-per-function benchmark.

What are the primary risk indicators associated with a firm-fixed-price contract for a complex facility design project spanning over five years?

The primary risk indicator for a firm-fixed-price contract of this duration (1839 days) is the potential for the contractor to face unforeseen cost increases that erode their profit margin, potentially leading to quality compromises or a desire to reduce scope if not managed tightly. Conversely, the government faces the risk of paying a premium if the initial price was set too high due to incomplete information at the time of award. Scope creep, where requirements evolve beyond the initial agreement, is another significant risk. Effective change management processes and clear initial scope definition are critical to mitigating these risks for both parties.

What is the expected effectiveness of the P617 Transit Protection Program Facility design in meeting its intended security and operational goals?

The effectiveness of the P617 Transit Protection Program Facility design hinges on the thoroughness and accuracy of the engineering services provided by MN-BMCD SE JV. The design must comprehensively address the specific threats and operational needs outlined by the Department of the Navy. Key performance indicators for effectiveness would include adherence to all relevant building codes, security standards, and operational requirements. The design's ability to integrate seamlessly with existing infrastructure and future technological advancements will also be critical. Post-design reviews and validation during the construction phase will be essential to confirm its intended effectiveness.

How has federal spending on engineering services for defense-related facilities evolved over the past five years, and where does this contract fit within that trend?

Federal spending on engineering services for defense-related facilities has generally remained robust, driven by modernization efforts, infrastructure upgrades, and new construction requirements within the Department of Defense. This $7.2 million contract for the P617 Transit Protection Program Facility design is a component of that broader spending trend. While specific year-over-year figures for this niche category are not provided, overall defense construction and engineering budgets are significant. This contract represents a targeted investment in a specific protective infrastructure capability, aligning with the DoD's ongoing commitment to maintaining and enhancing its operational facilities.

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: 501 E KENNEDY BLVD STE 1910, TAMPA, FL, 33602

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

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $7,224,448

Exercised Options: $7,224,448

Current Obligation: $7,224,448

Subaward Activity

Number of Subawards: 8

Total Subaward Amount: $751,715

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N6945021D0002

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline