DoD's $106.7M Telecom Contract with BellSouth: A Decade of Service
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $26,352,995 ($26.4M)
Contractor: Bellsouth Telecommunications, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2002-11-05
End Date: 2005-11-05
Contract Duration: 1,096 days
Daily Burn Rate: $24.0K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Number of Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: IT
Official Description: 200307!000178!2100!BL03 !ACA, FORT HUACHUCA !DABL0303C1001 !A!N! !N! !20021105!20041106!006925333!006925333!106678006!N!BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS I!675 W PEACHTREE STREET NE !ATLANTA !GA!30375!63912!089!01!REDSTONE ARSENAL !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000666487!N!N!000000000000!S113!TELEPHONE AND/OR COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !517110!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B!E!Y!A! !D!U!J!1!001!N!1A!Z!N!Z! ! !Y!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!B!N! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! !
Place of Performance
Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35898
State: Alabama Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $26.4 million to BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. for work described as: 200307!000178!2100!BL03 !ACA, FORT HUACHUCA !DABL0303C1001 !A!N! !N! !20021105!20041106!006925333!006925333!106678006!N!BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS I!675 W PEACHTREE STREET NE !ATLANTA !GA!30375!63912!089!01!REDSTONE ARSENAL !MADIS… Key points: 1. The contract awarded to BellSouth Telecommunications Inc. for wired telecommunications services is valued at $106.7 million. 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about potential price discovery and value for taxpayer money. 3. The duration of the contract is 1096 days, spanning from November 2002 to November 2005. 4. The sector is IT, specifically Wired Telecommunications Carriers, a critical infrastructure component for military operations.
Value Assessment
Rating: questionable
The contract value of $106.7 million for 1096 days suggests a daily rate of approximately $97,375. Without comparable contract data or detailed service breakdowns, it's difficult to definitively assess if this pricing is competitive.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: limited
The contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' indicating a lack of competitive bidding. This limits price discovery and may result in higher costs for the government compared to a fully competed contract.
Taxpayer Impact: The absence of competition could lead to taxpayers paying a premium for these essential telecommunications services.
Public Impact
Ensures critical communication infrastructure for Fort Huachuca and Redstone Arsenal operations. Potential for overpayment due to lack of competitive bidding. Long-term reliance on a single provider for essential services. Impact on military readiness if communication services are not cost-effectively procured.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Lack of competition
- Potential for inflated pricing
- Long contract duration without re-evaluation
Positive Signals
- Provides essential communication services
- Established provider with existing infrastructure
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the IT sector, specifically Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Spending in this area is crucial for maintaining secure and reliable communication networks for government operations, but competitive procurement is key to ensuring value.
Small Business Impact
There is no indication in the provided data whether small businesses were involved in subcontracting or if this contract offered opportunities for them. The focus appears to be on a large telecommunications provider.
Oversight & Accountability
The 'NOT COMPETED' status suggests a potential gap in oversight regarding the procurement process. Further review would be needed to understand the justification for not competing and to ensure accountability for the funds expended.
Related Government Programs
- Wired Telecommunications Carriers
- Department of Defense Contracting
- Department of the Army Programs
Risk Flags
- Lack of competition
- Potential for price gouging
- Limited transparency in procurement
- Risk of vendor lock-in
- Uncertainty of value for taxpayer money
Tags
wired-telecommunications-carriers, department-of-defense, al, dca, 10m-plus
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $26.4 million to BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.. 200307!000178!2100!BL03 !ACA, FORT HUACHUCA !DABL0303C1001 !A!N! !N! !20021105!20041106!006925333!006925333!106678006!N!BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS I!675 W PEACHTREE STREET NE !ATLANTA !GA!30375!63912!089!01!REDSTONE ARSENAL !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000666487!N!N!000000000000!S113!TELEPHONE AND/OR COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES !A7 !ELECTRONICS AND COMMUNICATION !1000!NOT DISCERNABLE OR CLASSIFIED !517110!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, 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 $26.4 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2002-11-05. End: 2005-11-05.
What was the specific justification for not competing this significant telecommunications contract?
The provided data states the contract was 'NOT COMPETED.' Without further documentation or context, the specific justification remains unknown. Typically, justifications for non-competitive awards include factors like urgent and compelling needs, sole-source availability of the service, or specific technical requirements that only one vendor can meet. A thorough review would be required to validate any such claims.
How did the government ensure fair and reasonable pricing without competition?
Ensuring fair and reasonable pricing without competition is challenging. Agencies often rely on historical pricing data, should-cost analyses, or comparisons to commercially available services. However, the absence of competitive bids inherently limits the government's ability to validate pricing against market alternatives, increasing the risk of paying above fair market value.
What was the impact of this non-competed contract on the availability of competitive options for future telecommunications needs?
A non-competed contract can stifle competition by locking in a provider for an extended period. This may discourage other potential vendors from developing competing solutions or preparing bids for future requirements. Over time, this can lead to reduced market innovation and potentially higher prices for the government when future procurements do occur.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Information › Wired and Wireless Telecommunications (except Satellite) › Wired Telecommunications Carriers
Product/Service Code: UTILITIES AND HOUSEKEEPING › UTILITIES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Offers Received: 1
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Contractor Details
Parent Company: AT&T Inc. (UEI: 108024050)
Address: 675 W PEACHTREE STREET NE, ATLANTA, GA, 90
Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business
Contract Characteristics
Cost or Pricing Data: NO
Timeline
Start Date: 2002-11-05
Current End Date: 2005-11-05
Potential End Date: 2005-11-05 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2009-06-07
Other Department of Defense Contracts
- Federal Contract — $51.3B (Humana Government Business Inc)
- Lrip LOT 12 Advance Acquisition Contract — $35.1B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- SSN 802 and 803 Long Lead Time Material — $34.7B (Electric Boat Corporation)
- 200204!008532!1700!AF600 !naval AIR Systems Command !N0001902C3002 !A!N! !N! !20011026!20120430!008016958!008016958!834951691!n!lockheed Martin Corporation !lockheed Blvd !fort Worth !tx!76108!27000!439!48!fort Worth !tarrant !texas !+000026000000!n!n!018981928201!ac15!rdte/Aircraft-Eng/Manuf Develop !a1a!airframes and Spares !2ama!jast/Jsf !336411!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !A! !a!n!r!2!002!n!1a!a!n!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! !Y! !N00019!0001! — $34.2B (Lockheed Martin Corporation)
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (THE Boeing Company)