Boeing awarded $28.1M for Little Mountain Test Facility operations and maintenance
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $28,108,764 ($28.1M)
Contractor: THE Boeing Company
Awarding Agency: Department of Defense
Start Date: 2024-02-22
End Date: 2025-07-31
Contract Duration: 525 days
Daily Burn Rate: $53.5K/day
Competition Type: NOT COMPETED
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE
Sector: Defense
Official Description: OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AT LITTLE MOUNTAIN TEST FACILITY
Place of Performance
Location: LAYTON, DAVIS County, UTAH, 84041
State: Utah Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Defense obligated $28.1 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AT LITTLE MOUNTAIN TEST FACILITY Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in critical test facility infrastructure. 2. Sole-source award raises questions about potential cost efficiencies and market alternatives. 3. Performance period extends over a year, indicating a need for sustained operational support. 4. The contract type (Cost Plus Award Fee) allows for performance-based incentives. 5. This award is situated within the broader context of defense engineering services. 6. Geographic concentration in Utah may have localized economic implications.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
Benchmarking the value of this contract is challenging due to its sole-source nature and specific operational focus. The Cost Plus Award Fee structure suggests a mechanism for controlling costs while incentivizing performance. Without comparable sole-source contracts for similar facilities, a definitive value-for-money assessment is difficult. However, the duration and scope imply a substantial need for these services.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: sole-source
This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning it was not competed among multiple vendors. This approach is typically used when only one vendor possesses the necessary capabilities or when urgency dictates. The lack of competition means that price discovery through market forces was not utilized, potentially leading to higher costs than if it had been competed.
Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may not have received the benefit of competitive pricing, as the government did not explore alternative offers.
Public Impact
The primary beneficiaries are the Department of the Air Force and its testing and evaluation missions. Services delivered include essential operations and maintenance for the Little Mountain Test Facility. The geographic impact is concentrated in Utah, where the facility is located. Workforce implications may include continued employment for personnel involved in facility operations and maintenance.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Sole-source award limits competitive pressure on pricing.
- Cost Plus Award Fee contracts can sometimes lead to cost overruns if not managed carefully.
- Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source award.
Positive Signals
- Boeing's established presence and expertise likely ensure continuity of essential operations.
- Award fee structure provides an incentive for high performance.
- Long-term contract duration suggests a stable operational environment.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, specifically supporting defense-related testing and evaluation infrastructure. The market for specialized facility operations and maintenance is often characterized by limited providers with unique expertise. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish without more specific details on the facility's capabilities and the scope of services required.
Small Business Impact
This contract does not appear to involve a small business set-aside. Given the sole-source nature and the likely specialized requirements of operating a test facility, subcontracting opportunities for small businesses may be limited unless Boeing proactively engages them for specific support services.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight for this contract would typically reside with the contracting officer and program management within the Department of the Air Force. Accountability measures are embedded in the Cost Plus Award Fee structure, which links a portion of the contractor's profit to performance metrics. Transparency regarding the justification for the sole-source award and performance evaluations would be key areas for oversight.
Related Government Programs
- Defense Test and Evaluation Facilities
- Air Force Operations and Maintenance Contracts
- Engineering Services for Government Facilities
Risk Flags
- Sole-source award may limit price competition.
- Cost Plus Award Fee requires diligent oversight to ensure value.
Tags
defense, air-force, engineering-services, operations-and-maintenance, sole-source, cost-plus-award-fee, boeing, utah, test-facility, critical-infrastructure
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Defense awarded $28.1 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AT LITTLE MOUNTAIN TEST FACILITY
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY.
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Air Force).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $28.1 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2024-02-22. End: 2025-07-31.
What is the historical spending pattern for operations and maintenance at the Little Mountain Test Facility?
Detailed historical spending data for the Little Mountain Test Facility is not readily available in the provided information. However, the current award of $28.1 million over approximately 17 months (February 2025 to July 2025) suggests a significant annual expenditure. To understand historical patterns, one would need to access previous contract awards for this specific facility, looking at contract types, durations, and total values. This would help determine if current spending is consistent with past investments or represents a notable increase or decrease. Without this historical context, it's difficult to assess if the current award is an anomaly or part of a long-term trend in facility support.
What specific engineering services are included in this contract?
The contract broadly covers 'OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE AT LITTLE MOUNTAIN TEST FACILITY' under the NAICS code 541330 (Engineering Services). While specific details are not itemized, this typically encompasses a range of activities crucial for the functioning of a test facility. These could include maintaining specialized equipment, managing infrastructure (buildings, utilities, grounds), ensuring safety and environmental compliance, providing technical support for testing operations, and potentially managing security. The 'Cost Plus Award Fee' (CPAF) contract type suggests that performance metrics related to the quality and efficiency of these services will be established and evaluated, with award fees tied to achieving or exceeding these targets.
What is the justification for awarding this contract on a sole-source basis to The Boeing Company?
The provided data indicates the contract was 'NOT COMPETED,' implying a sole-source award. The specific justification for this sole-source determination is not detailed in the summary. Typically, sole-source awards are justified under circumstances such as: only one responsible source being available, urgency of the requirement, or when the contract is a follow-on to a previously competed contract where the original contractor possesses unique knowledge or capabilities. For a facility like the Little Mountain Test Facility, it's plausible that Boeing possesses unique expertise, proprietary technology, or has an established operational presence that makes them the only viable option for uninterrupted service, especially if they were involved in the facility's development or prior operations.
How does the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) structure influence contractor performance and cost control?
The Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract type allows the contractor to recover all allowable costs plus a base fee, with the potential for an additional award fee based on performance against predetermined criteria. This structure incentivizes the contractor, The Boeing Company, to perform exceptionally well in operations and maintenance at the Little Mountain Test Facility. Performance metrics could include factors like system uptime, response times for maintenance issues, safety record, and efficiency in resource utilization. While CPAF aims to motivate high performance, it also requires robust government oversight to ensure that the award fee criteria are objective and that costs remain reasonable. The government must carefully define the award fee plan to align contractor incentives with mission objectives and taxpayer interests.
What are the potential risks associated with a sole-source contract for critical facility operations?
The primary risk associated with a sole-source contract is the lack of competitive pressure, which can lead to inflated prices and reduced incentive for innovation or efficiency. Without competing offers, the government may not be securing the best possible value. There's also a risk that the sole-source provider might become complacent or less responsive over time, knowing that alternatives are not being actively considered. Furthermore, if the sole-source provider faces financial difficulties or operational issues, the government has limited immediate recourse to switch providers without significant disruption. Ensuring robust contract management, clear performance standards, and regular price reasonableness checks are crucial to mitigate these risks.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Engineering Services
Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED
Solicitation Procedures: ONLY ONE SOURCE
Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 465 N MARSHALL WAY, LAYTON, UT, 84041
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $76,356,443
Exercised Options: $44,293,388
Current Obligation: $28,108,764
Contract Characteristics
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: FA820717D0001
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2024-02-22
Current End Date: 2025-07-31
Potential End Date: 2025-07-31 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2025-07-11
More Contracts from THE Boeing Company
- KC-X Modernization Program — $32.0B (Department of Defense)
- International Space Station — $22.4B (National Aeronautics and Space Administration)
- 200112!000108!9700!ZD60 !ballistic Missile Defense ORG. !HQ000601C0001 !A!N!*!N! !20001222!20080930!848025649!848025649!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !3370 E Miraloma AVE !anaheim !ca!92806!37000!089!01!huntsville !madison !alabama !+000383571022!n!n!000000000000!ad93!rdte/Other Defense-Adv Tech DEV !S1 !services !1caa!ballistic Missile Defense SYS !541710!*!*!3! ! ! !*!*!*!B!*!*!A! !A !U!R!2!001!B! !Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! — $18.8B (Department of Defense)
- USN P-8A FRP II Long Lead Material — $18.1B (Department of Defense)
- 200512!010860!2100!w56hzv!tacom - Warren !w56hzv05c0724 !A!N! !Y! ! !20050923!20141231!016544780!016544780!009256819!n!the Boeing Company !J S Mcdonnell Blvd !saint Louis !mo!63166!65000!510!29!st. Louis !ST. Louis (city) !missouri !+000219245691!n!n!000000000000!az15!rdte/Other Research&development-Eng/Manuf Devel !S1 !services !301 !FCS !541330!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !20200930!B! ! !A! !d!u!u!1!001!n!1a!z!y!z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !a!a!a!a!000!a!c!n! ! ! ! ! ! !0001! ! TAS::21 2040::TAS — $12.7B (Department of Defense)
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)