Army Awards $118M for Bombs and Ammunition to Kaman Dayron, Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $22,052,163 ($22.1M)

Contractor: DSE, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1995-12-10

End Date: 2006-08-31

Contract Duration: 3,917 days

Daily Burn Rate: $5.6K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200503!000298!2100!W52P1J!U.S. ARMY INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS !DAAA0996C0015 !A!N! !N! !P00057!20041210!19961031!118312680!052543188!001155225!N!KAMAN DAYRON, INC !6655 E COLONIAL DR !ORLANDO !FL!32807!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORANGE !FLORIDA !+000000032108!N!N!000000000000!1325!BOMBS !A6 !AMMUNITION !000 !* !332993!E! !1! ! !C! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !D!N!J!1!001!N!1G!A!Y!C! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!B!Y! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32807

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $22.1 million to DSE, INC. for work described as: 200503!000298!2100!W52P1J!U.S. ARMY INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS !DAAA0996C0015 !A!N! !N! !P00057!20041210!19961031!118312680!052543188!001155225!N!KAMAN DAYRON, INC !6655 E COLONIAL DR !ORLANDO !FL!32807!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORAN… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for bombs and ammunition, a critical defense component. 2. Kaman Dayron, Inc. secured the award, indicating potential market concentration. 3. The contract was not competed, raising questions about price discovery and value. 4. Spending in the defense sector for munitions is substantial and ongoing.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $118,312,680 over approximately 10 years suggests a significant investment. Without specific unit data or comparison points for similar munitions contracts, assessing the pricing efficiency is difficult. The lack of competition further complicates a robust value assessment.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was awarded on a sole-source basis ('NOT COMPETED'). This limits price discovery mechanisms and may result in higher costs for taxpayers compared to a competitive bidding process. The government may have justified this based on specific capabilities or existing relationships.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition in this significant contract award could lead to suboptimal pricing, potentially increasing the financial burden on taxpayers for essential defense materiel.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may be paying a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding. The long duration of the contract (over 10 years) means sustained potential for overpayment. Dependence on a single supplier for critical munitions could pose supply chain risks. The specific type of munitions procured is vital for military readiness.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of Competition
Long Contract Duration
Potential for Overpricing
Sole-Source Award

Positive Signals

Essential Defense Materiel
Established Supplier Relationship

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense Industrial Base, specifically focusing on munitions. Spending in this sector is driven by national security needs and geopolitical factors. Benchmarks for similar large-scale, long-term munitions contracts are often proprietary or difficult to access due to classification.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that small businesses were involved as prime contractors or significant subcontractors in this particular award. The focus appears to be on a large, established entity for a substantial defense procurement.

Oversight & Accountability

The sole-source nature of this contract warrants close oversight to ensure fair pricing and prevent potential waste. Accountability would involve verifying the justification for non-competition and monitoring contract performance and costs throughout its lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Army Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of Competition
Sole-Source Award
Potential for Overpricing
Long Contract Duration
Limited Transparency

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $22.1 million to DSE, INC.. 200503!000298!2100!W52P1J!U.S. ARMY INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS !DAAA0996C0015 !A!N! !N! !P00057!20041210!19961031!118312680!052543188!001155225!N!KAMAN DAYRON, INC !6655 E COLONIAL DR !ORLANDO !FL!32807!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORANGE !FLORIDA !+000000032108!N!N!000000000000!1325!BOMBS !A6 !AMMUNITION !000 !* !332993!E! !1! ! !C! ! !202

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is DSE, 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 $22.1 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1995-12-10. End: 2006-08-31.

What was the specific justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis, and were alternative competitive strategies considered?

The justification for a sole-source award typically involves unique capabilities, urgent needs, or the unavailability of other sources. Without access to the contract's justification documentation, it's impossible to know the specific reasons. However, the absence of competition inherently limits the government's ability to ensure the best possible price through market forces, suggesting a potential trade-off between speed/availability and cost savings.

How does the per-unit cost of these munitions compare to similar items procured competitively by the Department of Defense or allied nations?

Direct comparison of per-unit costs is challenging without access to detailed pricing data and specific technical specifications for the munitions. Sole-source contracts, by their nature, lack the price transparency that competitive bidding provides. Therefore, it's difficult to definitively state whether this contract represents good value without further, detailed cost analysis and benchmarking against comparable, competitively sourced items.

What are the long-term risks associated with relying on a single supplier for such a critical defense component over an extended period?

Long-term reliance on a single supplier for critical munitions introduces several risks. These include potential supply chain disruptions due to the supplier's financial instability, production issues, or geopolitical events affecting their operations. It also reduces leverage for future negotiations and could lead to price increases over time. Furthermore, it may stifle innovation if alternative suppliers are unable to enter the market.

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

Address: 6655 E COLONIAL DR, ORLANDO, FL, 32807

Business Categories: Asian Pacific American Owned Business, Category Business, Minority Owned Business, Self-Certified Small Disadvantaged Business, Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline