DoD's $837.7M Longbow Contract for Aircraft Components: A Decade of Sole-Source Spending

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $473,451,997 ($473.5M)

Contractor: Longbow LLC

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 1997-11-26

End Date: 2010-09-16

Contract Duration: 4,677 days

Daily Burn Rate: $101.2K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 199802!2100!0123!AH23 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH2398C0008 !A!*!* !19971126!20031201!837750223!837750223!837750223!N!04WF2!LONGBOW LIMITED LIABILITY CORP!5798 S SEMORAN BLVD !ORLANDO !FL!32822!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORANGE !FLORIDA !0001!+000107630000!N!N!000000000000!1680!MSL AIRCRAFT ACCESSORIES AND COMPONENTS !A1B!AIRCRAFT ENGINES AND SPARES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3728!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !U!J!1!001!N!1A!A!Y!A!* !* !N!C!*!A!A!A!A!A!*!* !*!N!A!D!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: ORLANDO, ORANGE County, FLORIDA, 32819

State: Florida Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $473.5 million to LONGBOW LLC for work described as: 199802!2100!0123!AH23 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH2398C0008 !A!*!* !19971126!20031201!837750223!837750223!837750223!N!04WF2!LONGBOW LIMITED LIABILITY CORP!5798 S SEMORAN BLVD !ORLANDO !FL!32822!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORANGE… Key points: 1. The contract, awarded to Longbow LLC, represents a significant sole-source expenditure for aircraft accessories and components. 2. With a duration of over 12 years, the contract's extended timeline raises questions about sustained competition and potential cost efficiencies. 3. The 'Not Competed' award type suggests a lack of market research or a specific justification for bypassing competitive bidding. 4. The sector is dominated by large prime contractors, making it challenging for smaller businesses to enter and compete for similar contracts.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The total contract value of $837.7 million over more than 12 years is substantial. Without competitive bidding, it's difficult to benchmark pricing against similar contracts for aircraft accessories and components.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source award to Longbow LLC. This method bypasses the price discovery benefits typically achieved through competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition likely resulted in taxpayers paying a premium for aircraft components over the contract's extended duration.

Public Impact

Taxpayers funded over $837 million for aircraft parts over more than a decade. The prolonged sole-source nature of this contract limits transparency and potential cost savings. This spending highlights the reliance on specific vendors for critical defense components.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of Competition
Extended Sole-Source Award
Potential for Overpricing

Positive Signals

Consistent supply of critical components
Long-term vendor relationship

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically for aircraft accessories and components. Spending in this area is often characterized by high technical requirements and long procurement cycles, but competitive bidding is generally expected to ensure value.

Small Business Impact

The 'Not Competed' and sole-source nature of this large contract likely excluded small businesses from participating. The defense contracting landscape, especially for specialized components, can be challenging for SMBs to penetrate.

Oversight & Accountability

The extended duration and sole-source award warrant scrutiny regarding the justification for not seeking competitive bids. Oversight should focus on whether the government received fair and reasonable pricing throughout the contract's life.

Related Government Programs

Department of Defense Contracting
Defense Contract Management Agency Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competitive bidding
Extended sole-source award
Potential for inflated pricing
Limited transparency in pricing
Missed opportunities for innovation

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $473.5 million to LONGBOW LLC. 199802!2100!0123!AH23 !USA AVIATION AND MISSILE COMMAND!DAAH2398C0008 !A!*!* !19971126!20031201!837750223!837750223!837750223!N!04WF2!LONGBOW LIMITED LIABILITY CORP!5798 S SEMORAN BLVD !ORLANDO !FL!32822!53000!095!12!ORLANDO !ORANGE !FLORIDA !0001!+000107630000!N!N!000000000000!1680!MSL AIRCRAFT ACCESSORIES AND COMPONENTS !A1B!AIRCRAFT ENGINES AND SPARES !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !3728!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!D !U!J!1!0

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is LONGBOW LLC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $473.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 1997-11-26. End: 2010-09-16.

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

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED'. A detailed review of the contract file and justification for other than full and open competition (J&A) would be necessary to understand the specific reasons. This could include factors like unique capabilities, urgent needs, or lack of viable alternatives. Without this documentation, it's impossible to assess the validity of the sole-source decision.

How does the per-unit cost of these aircraft components compare to market benchmarks or similar contracts awarded competitively?

Benchmarking the per-unit cost is challenging without specific itemized pricing data and a clear understanding of the components' specifications. The 'NOT COMPETED' status means there isn't a direct competitive baseline. A thorough analysis would require comparing the actual prices paid against industry standards for similar parts, considering factors like volume, technical complexity, and material costs.

What was the overall effectiveness of this contract in meeting the Department of Defense's needs for aircraft accessories and components over its 12+ year duration?

The contract's effectiveness hinges on whether it consistently delivered the required aircraft accessories and components on time and to specification. Given the long duration and sole-source nature, effectiveness also implies that the government's needs were met without significant disruptions or quality issues. However, the lack of competition raises concerns about whether the most effective and cost-efficient solution was secured.

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: Lockheed Martin Corp (UEI: 834951691)

Address: 5600 W SAND LAKE RD, ORLANDO, FL, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline