DOJ's ATF Spent $25.6M on Vehicle Purchases via Non-Competed Contract

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $25,648,474 ($25.6M)

Contractor: GSA Financial and Payroll Service

Awarding Agency: Department of Justice

Start Date: 2009-05-22

End Date: 2010-09-30

Contract Duration: 496 days

Daily Burn Rate: $51.7K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: VEHICLE PURCHASES

Place of Performance

Location: WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA County, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20226

State: District of Columbia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Justice obligated $25.6 million to GSA FINANCIAL AND PAYROLL SERVICE for work described as: VEHICLE PURCHASES Key points: 1. Significant spending on vehicle purchases by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). 2. The contract was not competed, raising questions about price discovery and potential value. 3. Lack of competition poses a risk of overpayment and reduced taxpayer value. 4. The sector involves automobile manufacturing, a mature industry with established pricing benchmarks.

Value Assessment

Rating: questionable

The contract value of $25.6M for vehicle purchases is substantial. Without competition, it's difficult to assess if this price reflects fair market value compared to similar government or commercial procurements.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

The contract was not competed, indicating a sole-source or limited competition award. This method bypasses competitive bidding, potentially leading to higher prices and reduced transparency in price discovery.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of competition for a $25.6M contract means taxpayers may not have received the best possible price for these vehicles.

Public Impact

Taxpayers may have overpaid due to the absence of competitive bidding. The ATF's acquisition process for vehicles lacked transparency and accountability. This non-competed award could set a precedent for future vehicle procurements within the agency.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for overpricing
Limited transparency

Positive Signals

Firm fixed price contract type can provide cost certainty if priced appropriately.

Sector Analysis

The $25.6M spent on vehicle purchases falls under the broader category of transportation equipment. Government spending benchmarks for vehicles vary widely based on type and quantity, but significant non-competed awards warrant scrutiny.

Small Business Impact

The data does not indicate whether small businesses were involved in this procurement. Non-competed contracts often limit opportunities for small business participation.

Oversight & Accountability

The non-competed nature of this significant contract raises concerns about oversight. The ATF's Acquisition and Property Management Division should ensure robust justification for sole-source awards.

Related Government Programs

Automobile Manufacturing
Department of Justice Contracting
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Acquisition and Property Management Division Programs

Risk Flags

Lack of competition
Potential for inflated pricing
Limited transparency in award process
Absence of small business participation (likely)
Questionable value for taxpayer dollars

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Justice awarded $25.6 million to GSA FINANCIAL AND PAYROLL SERVICE. VEHICLE PURCHASES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GSA FINANCIAL AND PAYROLL SERVICE.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Acquisition and Property Management Division).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $25.6 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2009-05-22. End: 2010-09-30.

What was the specific justification for awarding this $25.6M vehicle purchase contract on a non-competed basis?

The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED' but does not offer the specific justification. Typically, sole-source awards require a documented justification, such as only one responsible source being available or an urgent need that precludes competition. Without this justification, it's impossible to assess the validity of the non-competitive award.

How does the $25.6M expenditure compare to the average cost of similar vehicle procurements by federal agencies?

Comparing this $25.6M expenditure requires detailed information on the types and quantities of vehicles purchased. However, as a non-competed contract, there's an inherent risk that the price is higher than what could have been achieved through competitive bidding. Benchmarking against similar, competitively awarded contracts would be necessary for a precise comparison.

What measures are in place to ensure accountability and prevent future non-competed awards of this magnitude without adequate justification?

Accountability for future procurements relies on adherence to federal acquisition regulations (FAR) and robust internal agency oversight. Agencies must have clear policies and training to ensure competitive sourcing is the default. Independent review boards or contracting officer representatives play a crucial role in scrutinizing justifications for non-competitive awards.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Motor Vehicle Manufacturing › Automobile Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

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: Government of the United States (UEI: 161906193)

Address: 1500 E BNNSTER RD RM-1109, KANSAS CITY, MO, 05

Business Categories: Category Business, Government, U.S. National Government, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $25,648,474

Exercised Options: $25,648,474

Current Obligation: $25,648,474

Timeline