DoD's Light Tactical Trailers program awarded $26.2M to Silver Eagle Manufacturing, with 2 bids received

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $26,195,136 ($26.2M)

Contractor: Silver Eagle Manufacturing CO

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2009-07-24

End Date: 2010-11-30

Contract Duration: 494 days

Daily Burn Rate: $53.0K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: LIGHT TACTICAL TRAILERS (LTTS) PROGRAM

Place of Performance

Location: PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH County, OREGON, 97218

State: Oregon Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $26.2 million to SILVER EAGLE MANUFACTURING CO for work described as: LIGHT TACTICAL TRAILERS (LTTS) PROGRAM Key points: 1. Value for money appears fair given the firm fixed-price contract type, though specific performance metrics are not detailed. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a limited competition environment, with only two bids submitted. 3. Risk indicators are moderate, stemming from the limited competition and the fixed-price nature which shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor. 4. Performance context is for tactical trailers, a critical but specialized equipment category. 5. Sector positioning is within defense manufacturing, specifically trailer production for military logistics.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The total award of $26.2 million for Light Tactical Trailers (LTTS) is difficult to benchmark without more granular data on the number and specifications of trailers procured. The firm fixed-price contract type suggests a defined cost expectation. However, without comparative pricing for similar trailer systems or detailed cost breakdowns, a definitive value-for-money assessment is challenging. The contract was awarded in 2009, and market conditions for manufacturing have evolved since then.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources,' which implies that while the competition was intended to be broad, specific sources were excluded, leading to a limited pool of bidders. Only two bids were received, suggesting a constrained market or specific technical requirements that narrowed the field. This level of competition may not have driven the most aggressive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: With only two bidders, taxpayers may not have benefited from the full price discovery that a more robust competition could have provided, potentially leading to a higher-than-optimal price.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Army, receiving essential tactical trailers for logistical support. Services delivered include the manufacturing and delivery of specialized light tactical trailers. Geographic impact is primarily within the United States, where the contractor is based and trailers are manufactured. Workforce implications include jobs supported at Silver Eagle Manufacturing Co. and its supply chain.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition could lead to higher prices for taxpayers.
Contract duration of 494 days is relatively short for a large manufacturing program, potentially impacting production ramp-up.
The specific exclusion of sources in the competition warrants further investigation into the rationale.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract shifts cost overrun risk to the contractor.
Award to a single contractor (Silver Eagle Manufacturing Co.) can streamline execution and accountability.
The program addresses a specific military equipment need, indicating focused procurement.

Sector Analysis

The defense manufacturing sector, particularly for specialized vehicles and trailers, is characterized by stringent technical requirements and often involves a limited number of qualified suppliers. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 336212 (Truck Trailer Manufacturing) covers this domain. Spending in this area is driven by military readiness and operational needs. Comparable spending benchmarks would typically involve other military vehicle procurements or trailer contracts, which are often subject to specific defense budget allocations and strategic priorities.

Small Business Impact

The contract details indicate that small business participation was not a primary focus, as the 'ss' (small business set-aside) field is false and the 'sb' (small business) field is also false. There is no explicit mention of subcontracting goals for small businesses within the provided data. This suggests that the procurement likely did not prioritize small business set-asides, and the impact on the small business ecosystem for this specific contract is likely minimal unless Silver Eagle Manufacturing Co. voluntarily engaged small businesses in its supply chain.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would fall under the Department of the Army's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are typically enforced through contract clauses, performance reviews, and payment schedules tied to deliverables. Transparency is facilitated through contract award databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected or reported.

Related Government Programs

Tactical Vehicle Procurement
Military Logistics Support Equipment
Defense Industrial Base Manufacturing
Trailer Manufacturing Contracts

Risk Flags

Limited Competition
Potential for Price Inflation
Lack of Detailed Performance Metrics

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $26.2 million to SILVER EAGLE MANUFACTURING CO. LIGHT TACTICAL TRAILERS (LTTS) PROGRAM

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is SILVER EAGLE MANUFACTURING CO.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $26.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-07-24. End: 2010-11-30.

What is the track record of Silver Eagle Manufacturing Co. with Department of Defense contracts prior to and after this award?

Silver Eagle Manufacturing Co. has a history of contracts with the Department of Defense, primarily related to trailer manufacturing. Prior to the 2009 LTTS award, the company likely held contracts for various trailer types. Post-2010, their contract history would reflect their continued ability to secure defense work, potentially including follow-on orders or similar trailer systems. Analyzing their full contract portfolio would reveal their specialization, performance history (on-time delivery, quality), and any significant issues or accolades received from the DoD. A review of their contract awards and modifications in FPDS would provide a comprehensive view of their engagement with the federal government, highlighting their capacity and reliability as a defense contractor.

How does the per-unit cost of these Light Tactical Trailers compare to similar military trailer procurements?

Determining the precise per-unit cost for the Light Tactical Trailers (LTTS) program is challenging with the provided aggregate data ($26.2 million total award). To compare effectively, one would need the total number of trailers procured under this contract and their specific configurations. Without this, a direct per-unit cost benchmark is not feasible. However, a comparative analysis would involve researching other DoD contracts for tactical trailers of similar size, payload capacity, and intended use (e.g., general purpose, specific equipment transport). Factors like advanced suspension, environmental hardening, and specialized braking systems significantly influence trailer costs. If the LTTS trailers were standard, off-the-shelf designs, their per-unit cost should align with commercial equivalents adjusted for military specifications. Conversely, highly specialized or ruggedized trailers would naturally command higher prices.

What were the specific reasons for excluding other potential sources in the 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' award?

The designation 'Full and Open Competition After Exclusion of Sources' suggests that the initial solicitation was intended for broad competition, but certain sources were subsequently excluded. The specific reasons for exclusion are not detailed in the summary data but typically stem from factors such as: failure to meet mandatory minimum technical requirements, inability to meet security or facility clearances, past performance issues, or failure to submit a compliant proposal by the deadline. In some cases, it could also relate to specific government-mandated requirements (e.g., Buy American Act compliance) that only certain manufacturers could meet. Understanding the exact criteria used for exclusion is crucial to assess whether the competition was appropriately narrowed or if it unduly restricted the bidder pool, potentially impacting price and innovation.

What is the typical lifespan and maintenance cost associated with these Light Tactical Trailers?

The typical lifespan and maintenance costs for Light Tactical Trailers (LTTS) are not explicitly provided in the contract award data. However, military equipment, especially tactical vehicles and trailers, is generally designed for durability and extended service life under demanding conditions. Lifespans can range from 10 to 20 years or more, depending on usage intensity, operating environment, and maintenance protocols. Maintenance costs are influenced by the complexity of the trailer's systems (e.g., suspension, braking, electrical), the availability of spare parts, and the frequency of repairs. The Department of the Army would typically establish maintenance schedules and budgets based on technical manuals and operational experience. Without specific maintenance logs or technical specifications for these LTTS, estimating precise costs is speculative, but they would likely be factored into the total cost of ownership over the trailer's lifecycle.

How has spending on tactical trailers evolved within the Department of the Army since the 2009 LTTS award?

Tracking the evolution of spending on tactical trailers within the Department of the Army since the 2009 LTTS award requires analyzing subsequent procurement data. Post-2010, the Army's trailer needs would likely have continued, potentially through follow-on contracts for the LTTS program or procurements of different trailer types to meet evolving operational requirements. Factors influencing spending include changes in military doctrine, deployment tempos, technological advancements in trailer design, and overall defense budget fluctuations. Analyzing annual reports, budget requests, and contract award databases (like FPDS) for trailer procurements would reveal trends in quantity, cost, and technology. It's probable that spending has adapted to new mission requirements and potentially incorporated lessons learned from earlier procurements like the LTTS program.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Motor Vehicle Body and Trailer Manufacturing › Truck Trailer Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 5825 NE SKYPORT WAY, PORTLAND, OR, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $26,195,136

Exercised Options: $26,195,136

Current Obligation: $26,195,136

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: W56HZV08D0106

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline