DoD Awards $13.19M for Small Arms, Ordnance to General Dynamics, Limited Competition

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $13,192,491 ($13.2M)

Contractor: General Dynamics-Ots, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2005-08-24

End Date: 2007-12-31

Contract Duration: 859 days

Daily Burn Rate: $15.4K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200511!003765!2100!W52H09!TACOM ROCK ISLAND !DAAE2000D0075 !A!N! !N!0011 ! !20050824!20070228!003567125!003567125!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS ARMAMENT AND !128 LAKESIDE AVE !BURLINGTON !VT!05401!64675!031!23!SACO !YORK !MAINE !+000000381225!Y!N!000000000000!1005!GUNS, THROUGH 30 MM !A5 !WEAPONS !000 !* !332994!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !D!Y!J!1!001!N!1G!A!Y!A! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !A! !A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: SACO, YORK County, MAINE, 04072

State: Maine Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $13.2 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS-OTS, INC. for work described as: 200511!003765!2100!W52H09!TACOM ROCK ISLAND !DAAE2000D0075 !A!N! !N!0011 ! !20050824!20070228!003567125!003567125!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS ARMAMENT AND !128 LAKESIDE AVE !BURLINGTON !VT!05401!64675!031!23!SACO !YORK… Key points: 1. Contract awarded to General Dynamics for small arms and ordnance. 2. Limited competition raises questions about price discovery and taxpayer value. 3. The contract duration of 859 days is substantial for this type of procurement. 4. Sector context suggests a mature market for ordnance manufacturing.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The awarded amount of $13.19M for ordnance and small arms appears within a reasonable range for a contract of this duration and scope, but without detailed cost breakdowns, a precise valuation is difficult. Benchmarking against similar DoD contracts for similar weapon systems would be necessary for a more definitive assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was not competed, indicating a limited source selection. This approach may lead to higher prices than if full and open competition were pursued, as it reduces pressure on the contractor to offer the most competitive pricing.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of full competition may result in taxpayers paying a premium for these goods, as the government did not explore all available sources to secure the best possible price.

Public Impact

Ensures continued supply of critical small arms and ordnance for military operations. Supports a key defense contractor, potentially preserving jobs and capabilities. Raises concerns about the government's ability to secure competitive pricing on defense articles.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

  • Limited competition
  • Lack of price transparency
  • Potential for overpayment

Positive Signals

  • Ensures supply of critical defense equipment
  • Supports established defense industrial base

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the defense manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on small arms and ordnance. Spending in this area is driven by military readiness requirements and technological advancements in weaponry. Benchmarks for similar contracts are highly variable based on specific weapon systems and quantities.

Small Business Impact

The contract was awarded to General Dynamics, a large defense contractor. There is no indication that small businesses were involved as prime contractors or significant subcontractors in this specific award, which is common for large-scale defense procurements.

Oversight & Accountability

The Department of Defense is responsible for overseeing this contract. Standard procurement regulations and oversight mechanisms should be in place, but the limited competition aspect warrants scrutiny to ensure fair pricing and adherence to acquisition policies.

Related Government Programs

  • Small Arms, Ordnance, and Ordnance Accessories Manufacturing
  • Department of Defense Contracting
  • Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

  • Potential for inflated pricing due to limited competition.
  • Lack of transparency in the source selection process.
  • Risk of reduced innovation from a non-competitive market.
  • Dependency on a single large contractor for critical supplies.

Tags

small-arms-ordnance-and-ordnance-accesso, department-of-defense, me, do, 10m-plus

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $13.2 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS-OTS, INC.. 200511!003765!2100!W52H09!TACOM ROCK ISLAND !DAAE2000D0075 !A!N! !N!0011 ! !20050824!20070228!003567125!003567125!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS ARMAMENT AND !128 LAKESIDE AVE !BURLINGTON !VT!05401!64675!031!23!SACO !YORK !MAINE !+000000381225!Y!N!000000000000!1005!GUNS, THROUGH 30 MM !A5 !WEAPONS !000 !* !332994!E! !5!B!S! ! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS-OTS, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $13.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-08-24. End: 2007-12-31.

What specific factors justified the limited competition for this ordnance contract, and were these justifications thoroughly documented and reviewed?

The justification for limited competition typically involves factors such as unique technical requirements, urgent needs, or the unavailability of other sources. For this contract, the specific reasons would need to be detailed in the contract's justification and approval (J&A) document. A thorough review would assess if these reasons were valid, if alternative sources were genuinely unavailable or incapable, and if the government adequately negotiated the price despite the limited competition.

How does the unit cost of the ordnance procured under this contract compare to industry benchmarks or previous similar contracts awarded through full competition?

A precise comparison is difficult without knowing the exact items procured and their specifications. However, if this contract was awarded on a sole-source or limited basis, it is reasonable to expect the unit costs to be higher than if it had undergone full and open competition. Analyzing the contract's pricing structure against publicly available data for similar ordnance items, or against historical DoD contracts for comparable systems, would reveal the extent of any price premium.

What is the long-term strategic impact of awarding such contracts with limited competition on the overall defense industrial base and government's procurement leverage?

Consistently awarding contracts with limited competition can stifle innovation and reduce competition within the defense industrial base over time. It may lead to a reliance on a few key suppliers, diminishing the government's bargaining power and potentially increasing long-term costs. This practice can also discourage new entrants from developing capabilities, ultimately narrowing the available options for future procurements and potentially impacting national security readiness.

Industry Classification

NAICS: ManufacturingOther Fabricated Metal Product ManufacturingSmall Arms, Ordnance, and Ordnance Accessories Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: WEAPONS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp (UEI: 001381284)

Address: 128 LAKESIDE AVE, BURLINGTON, VT, 00

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DAAE2000D0075

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline

Start Date: 2005-08-24

Current End Date: 2007-12-31

Potential End Date: 2007-12-31 00:00:00

Last Modified: 2010-03-13

More Contracts from General Dynamics-Ots, Inc.

View all General Dynamics-Ots, Inc. federal contracts →

Other Department of Defense Contracts

View all Department of Defense contracts →

Explore Related Government Spending