DoD's $15.8M contract for electric power distribution services awarded to miscellaneous foreign entities

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $15,819,252 ($15.8M)

Contractor: Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-12-03

End Date: 2008-03-25

Contract Duration: 1,208 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $15.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES for work described as: Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the duration and scope, though specific performance metrics are not detailed. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open process, suggesting potential for competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, with contract duration and foreign awardees presenting potential oversight challenges. 4. Performance context is limited to the service type (electric power distribution) without specific deliverables. 5. Sector positioning places this within defense infrastructure support, a critical but often opaque area.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $15.8 million over approximately 3.3 years (1208 days) for electric power distribution services is difficult to benchmark without more specific details on the scope of work and geographic location. However, considering the duration and the nature of infrastructure support, the overall price point does not immediately suggest overpayment. Further analysis would require comparing unit costs for specific services rendered against similar contracts in comparable regions.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of two bidders suggests a degree of competition, which typically helps in achieving a fair market price. However, the specific number of bids received and the details of the bidding process are not fully elaborated, leaving room for further inquiry into the robustness of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation, leading to better value for public funds.

Public Impact

Military personnel and operations in the covered geographic area benefit from reliable electric power infrastructure. Essential services for maintaining operational readiness and supporting troop welfare are delivered. The geographic impact is localized to the specific military installation or area served by the contract. Workforce implications may include the employment of skilled technicians and support staff for power distribution systems.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for supply chain disruptions or geopolitical risks associated with foreign awardees.
Oversight challenges may arise due to the foreign nature of the awardees, impacting monitoring and enforcement.
Limited transparency on specific performance metrics and quality control measures for the services provided.

Positive Signals

Awarded through a competitive process, suggesting a baseline level of cost-effectiveness.
Addresses a critical infrastructure need for defense operations.
Contract duration provides stability for service provision.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense infrastructure and utilities sector. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining operational readiness of military bases. Comparable spending benchmarks are highly dependent on the specific location, scale of the facility, and the type of power distribution infrastructure involved. The market for such services can be specialized, often involving companies with specific security clearances and expertise in supporting government facilities.

Small Business Impact

Information regarding small business participation, including set-asides or subcontracting plans, is not available for this contract. The awardees are listed as 'MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES,' which typically implies larger, potentially non-US-based entities. This suggests that the direct impact on the US small business ecosystem may be minimal unless these foreign entities engage US-based subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight mechanisms for this contract would typically involve the Department of Defense's contracting officers and potentially Inspector General's office. Accountability measures are tied to the contract terms and performance standards. Transparency is often limited in defense contracts, especially those involving foreign entities or sensitive infrastructure, making it challenging to assess the full extent of oversight and accountability without detailed reporting.

Related Government Programs

Defense Infrastructure Support Contracts
Utility Services Contracts
Foreign Military Sales Support
Base Operations Support Contracts

Risk Flags

Foreign Awardee Risk
Infrastructure Criticality
Limited Performance Data

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $15.8 million to MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES. See the official description on USAspending.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is MISCELLANEOUS FOREIGN AWARDEES.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $15.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-12-03. End: 2008-03-25.

What specific types of electric power distribution services were included in this contract?

The data provided indicates the contract was for 'Electric Power Distribution' (ND code 221122). This generally encompasses the operation, maintenance, repair, and potentially upgrade of electrical distribution systems within a defined area. Services could include managing substations, power lines, transformers, and ensuring a consistent and reliable supply of electricity to facilities. However, the precise scope, including the voltage levels, capacity, and specific components covered, is not detailed in the provided summary data. Further examination of the contract statement of work would be necessary for a comprehensive understanding.

How does the contract value of $15.8 million compare to similar electric power distribution contracts for the Department of Defense?

Benchmarking this $15.8 million contract requires comparing it against similar contracts for electric power distribution services awarded by the Department of Defense (DoD) or other federal agencies. Key comparison factors include the contract duration (1208 days, approx. 3.3 years), the geographic location and size of the installation served, and the specific services rendered. Without access to a database of comparable contracts with detailed service descriptions and pricing, a precise comparison is difficult. However, for a multi-year contract supporting critical infrastructure, the value appears within a plausible range, assuming standard service levels and market conditions.

What are the primary risks associated with awarding electric power distribution contracts to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees'?

Awarding contracts to 'miscellaneous foreign awardees' for critical infrastructure like electric power distribution introduces several risks. These can include geopolitical instability affecting service continuity, potential challenges in enforcing contract terms and quality standards due to differing legal jurisdictions, and heightened security concerns regarding access to sensitive infrastructure. Furthermore, currency exchange rate fluctuations could impact the final cost. Oversight and communication can also be more complex. While competition may be broadened, the associated risks necessitate robust due diligence and stringent contract management protocols.

What was the historical spending pattern for electric power distribution services by the Department of the Army prior to this award?

The provided data does not include historical spending patterns for electric power distribution services by the Department of the Army. To assess this, one would need to query federal procurement databases (like FPDS or USASpending) for contracts with similar North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes (e.g., 221122 - Electric Power Distribution) awarded by the Department of the Army over several fiscal years. Analyzing these historical data points would reveal trends in contract volume, average award values, and the types of contractors utilized, providing context for the $15.8 million award.

How does the 'full and open competition' designation impact the potential for cost savings for taxpayers on this contract?

A 'full and open competition' designation is generally positive for taxpayers as it theoretically maximizes the pool of potential bidders, thereby increasing competition. Increased competition typically drives down prices as contractors vie for the award. In this case, with two bidders participating, it suggests that the process allowed for multiple offers. However, the ultimate cost savings depend on the specific requirements of the solicitation, the number of responsive bids received, and the evaluation criteria used. A robust competition can lead to better price discovery and ensure the government secures services at a fair market value.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Utilities › Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution › Electric Power Distribution

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

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 2011 CRYSTAL DR STE 911, ARLINGTON, VA, 08

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline