DoD awards $10.6M for MC-6 systems, with Pioneer Aerospace Corp. as contractor

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $10,642,592 ($10.6M)

Contractor: Pioneer Aerospace Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2007-04-13

End Date: 2012-06-14

Contract Duration: 1,889 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.6K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: MODIFICATION TO PROCURE ADDITIONAL MC-6 SYSTEMS

Place of Performance

Location: SOUTH WINDSOR, HARTFORD County, CONNECTICUT, 06074

State: Connecticut Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $10.6 million to PIONEER AEROSPACE CORP for work described as: MODIFICATION TO PROCURE ADDITIONAL MC-6 SYSTEMS Key points: 1. Contract value of $10.6 million for additional MC-6 systems. 2. Pioneer Aerospace Corp. is the contractor for this modification. 3. The contract falls under the 'All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills' NAICS code. 4. This is a delivery order under a larger contract. 5. The contract duration is 1889 days. 6. The contract type is Firm Fixed Price. 7. This award was made under full and open competition.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award amount is $10.6 million. Without specific details on the MC-6 systems and their components, a direct value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the firm fixed-price nature suggests that the contractor bears the risk of cost overruns, which can be a positive indicator. Benchmarking against similar procurements for specialized aerospace components would be necessary for a more precise valuation.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple bidders were likely considered. This competitive process is generally expected to yield better pricing and terms for the government compared to sole-source or limited competition awards. The number of bidders and the specific bidding process details would provide further insight into the effectiveness of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically benefits taxpayers by driving down prices through market forces, ensuring the government receives the best possible value for its investment.

Public Impact

The Department of Defense is the primary beneficiary, receiving additional MC-6 systems. These systems are likely crucial for defense operations and readiness. The contract supports manufacturing and potentially related supply chains within the aerospace and textile sectors. The geographic impact is centered around the contractor's operations in Connecticut.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of detailed technical specifications for MC-6 systems makes it difficult to assess performance and long-term value.
Limited information on the competitive landscape beyond 'full and open' prevents a deeper understanding of price discovery.
The long contract duration (1889 days) could introduce risks related to technological obsolescence or changing operational needs.

Positive Signals

Firm Fixed Price contract type shifts cost risk to the contractor.
Full and open competition suggests a robust bidding process.
The contract is a modification, implying it's part of an established program with some level of prior vetting.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader aerospace and defense manufacturing sector, specifically related to specialized components. The 'All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills' NAICS code suggests a focus on materials or components that may incorporate textile elements. The defense industry is characterized by long-term contracts, high technological requirements, and significant government oversight. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve analyzing other procurements for similar defense systems or components.

Small Business Impact

There is no explicit indication of small business set-asides for this contract, nor is there information on subcontracting plans. As a modification to an existing contract, the initial award may have had different small business considerations. Further analysis would be needed to determine the impact on the small business ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which provides oversight for defense contracts. The firm fixed-price nature inherently includes accountability for the contractor to deliver within the agreed price. Transparency would be enhanced by public availability of detailed contract performance reports and any associated Inspector General findings.

Related Government Programs

Defense Procurement
Aerospace Systems
Military Equipment
Specialized Component Manufacturing

Risk Flags

Potential for technological obsolescence due to long contract duration.
Lack of detailed system specifications hinders comprehensive value assessment.
Limited information on the competitive bidding process beyond 'full and open'.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $10.6 million to PIONEER AEROSPACE CORP. MODIFICATION TO PROCURE ADDITIONAL MC-6 SYSTEMS

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is PIONEER AEROSPACE CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $10.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2007-04-13. End: 2012-06-14.

What are the specific functions and capabilities of the MC-6 systems being procured?

The provided data does not specify the exact functions or capabilities of the MC-6 systems. The NAICS code 'All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills' and the contractor 'PIONEER AEROSPACE CORP' suggest that these systems may involve specialized aerospace components, potentially with textile-based materials or applications. Without further technical documentation or program details, the precise role and importance of these systems within the Department of Defense's operational framework remain unclear. Understanding the system's purpose is crucial for evaluating its strategic value and the necessity of procuring additional units.

How does the unit cost of the MC-6 systems compare to similar defense procurements?

A direct unit cost comparison is not feasible with the current data. The total award is $10.6 million for an unspecified number of MC-6 systems. To benchmark effectively, we would need to know the quantity of systems procured in this modification and compare their individual costs to similar defense systems or components. Factors such as technological sophistication, production volume, and specific performance requirements heavily influence unit costs in the defense sector. The firm fixed-price nature of this contract suggests that Pioneer Aerospace Corp. has committed to a specific price, but without a quantity, the overall value proposition relative to the market is difficult to ascertain.

What is Pioneer Aerospace Corp.'s track record with the Department of Defense and similar contracts?

The data indicates that Pioneer Aerospace Corp. is the contractor for this modification. To assess their track record, a review of their past performance on Department of Defense contracts, particularly those involving aerospace components or systems similar to the MC-6, would be necessary. This would include examining contract history for on-time delivery, quality of work, adherence to budget (where applicable), and any history of disputes or contract terminations. Their experience with firm fixed-price contracts and full and open competition would also be relevant indicators of their capability and reliability.

What are the potential risks associated with a long contract duration of 1889 days?

A contract duration of 1889 days (approximately 5.2 years) for the procurement of MC-6 systems carries several potential risks. Technological obsolescence is a significant concern; defense technology evolves rapidly, and systems procured over such a long period might become outdated before their expected service life is complete. Furthermore, changing geopolitical landscapes or evolving military strategies could alter the perceived need or operational relevance of the MC-6 systems. There's also the risk of contractor performance degradation over time, or unforeseen economic factors impacting the contractor's ability to maintain production quality and delivery schedules consistently throughout the contract's life.

How does the 'All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills' classification impact the understanding of this defense contract?

The classification under NAICS code 314999, 'All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills,' is somewhat unusual for a direct aerospace system procurement, suggesting that the MC-6 systems likely incorporate significant textile-based components or materials. This could range from specialized fabrics for structural elements, insulation, or protective coverings to more integrated textile-based systems. This classification implies that the procurement might be focused on a specific aspect of the MC-6 system where textile manufacturing expertise is critical. It also suggests that the supply chain for these systems may involve companies with expertise in advanced textiles, potentially distinct from traditional aerospace manufacturers.

What is the significance of this contract being a 'Delivery Order' under a larger contract?

This award being a 'Delivery Order' signifies that it is a tasking under an existing, pre-established contract vehicle, likely a Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA) or Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. This structure allows the government to procure specific quantities of goods or services over time as needed, rather than awarding a single, large contract upfront. For taxpayers, this can be beneficial as it allows for flexibility and potentially better pricing through pre-negotiated terms. However, it also means that the total spending under the parent contract could exceed the amount of this individual delivery order, requiring ongoing monitoring of overall expenditure.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Textile Product Mills › All Other Miscellaneous Textile Product Mills

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 4

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: Zodiac Aerospace (UEI: 277636981)

Address: 45 SOUTH SATELLITE ROAD, SOUTH WINDSOR, CT, 06074

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $10,642,592

Exercised Options: $10,642,592

Current Obligation: $10,642,592

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W58P0506D0007

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline