Navy Awards $34.2M Engineering Services Contract to Camber Corp, Extended by HII Mission Technologies

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $34,223,778 ($34.2M)

Contractor: HII Mission Technologies Corp

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2006-06-19

End Date: 2011-06-18

Contract Duration: 1,825 days

Daily Burn Rate: $18.8K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200609!SS4311!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017805D4231 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20060619!20110618!609570742!609570742!609570742!N!CAMBER CORPORATION !635 DISCOVERY DR !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35806!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000050639!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !575 !ABRAMS UPGRADE !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!20090331!B! ! !A! !A!N!U!2!021!B! !Z!N!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !A!A!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! !1700!N00174!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: HUNTSVILLE, MADISON County, ALABAMA, 35806

State: Alabama Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $34.2 million to HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP for work described as: 200609!SS4311!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017805D4231 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20060619!20110618!609570742!609570742!609570742!N!CAMBER CORPORATION !635 DISCOVERY DR !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35806!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADI… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for Engineering Technical Services, specifically for the Abrams Upgrade program. 2. Initial award was $37,020,000 with a final value of $34,223,778.40. 3. The contract saw competition, with HII Mission Technologies Corp listed as an awardee. 4. This contract falls under the Engineering Services sector, with a PSC code of 541330.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The final contract value of $34.2M is slightly lower than the initial award of $37M, suggesting some cost efficiencies or scope adjustments. Benchmarking against similar engineering services contracts would provide further insight into its value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. This method generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The competitive nature of this award suggests taxpayers likely benefited from a fair market price for the engineering services rendered.

Public Impact

Supports the U.S. Navy's modernization efforts for critical military equipment like the Abrams tank. Provides specialized engineering expertise, contributing to national defense capabilities. The contract's duration of five years (2006-2011) indicates a sustained need for these services.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Contract duration of 5 years may indicate long-term reliance on a single vendor.
Potential for cost overruns given the initial award was higher than the final value.

Positive Signals

Awarded under full and open competition.
Services directly support military readiness and upgrades.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Engineering Services sector, which is crucial for defense procurement. Spending in this sector often involves complex technical requirements and significant investment in research and development.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate any specific set-asides for small businesses. Further analysis would be needed to determine if small businesses participated as subcontractors.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract was managed by the Department of the Navy, a component of the Department of Defense. Standard DoD oversight mechanisms would apply to ensure performance and accountability.

Related Government Programs

Engineering Services
Department of Defense Contracting
Department of the Navy Programs

Risk Flags

Contract duration of 5 years.
Initial award amount higher than final value.
No explicit mention of small business participation.
Specific technical details of 'Abrams Upgrade' are not detailed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $34.2 million to HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP. 200609!SS4311!1700!N00174!INDIAN HEAD DIVISION NAVAL SURFA!N0017805D4231 !A!N! !Y!FG01 ! !20060619!20110618!609570742!609570742!609570742!N!CAMBER CORPORATION !635 DISCOVERY DR !HUNTSVILLE !AL!35806!37000!089!01!HUNTSVILLE !MADISON !ALABAMA !+000000050639!N!N!000000000000!R425!ENGINEERING TECHNICAL SERVICES !S1 !SERVICES !575 !ABRAMS UPGRADE !541330!E! !5!B!M! !A!D!200

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is HII MISSION TECHNOLOGIES CORP.

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Defense (Department of the Navy).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $34.2 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2006-06-19. End: 2011-06-18.

What specific engineering services were provided under the Abrams Upgrade program, and how did they enhance the tank's capabilities?

The contract focused on engineering technical services for the Abrams Upgrade. While specific details are not provided, such services typically involve design, analysis, testing, and integration of new technologies to improve the Abrams tank's combat effectiveness, survivability, and maintainability. This could include upgrades to its fire control systems, armor, power plant, or networked communication capabilities.

Were there any significant cost variances or performance issues during the contract's execution that led to the final value being lower than the initial award?

The final contract value of $34.2M was lower than the initial award of $37M. This could be due to several factors, including optimized resource allocation, scope adjustments, or successful cost-saving measures implemented by the contractor. Without detailed performance reports, it's difficult to ascertain if specific issues led to this reduction, but it generally suggests efficient contract management or a revised scope of work.

How did the competition process for this contract ensure the best value was obtained for the taxpayer, given the specific technical requirements?

The contract was awarded under 'full and open competition,' which is designed to solicit bids from all responsible sources. This process allows multiple companies to compete, driving down prices and encouraging innovation. The Department of the Navy likely evaluated proposals based on a combination of technical merit and cost, ensuring that the chosen solution offered the best overall value and met the stringent requirements for military hardware upgrades.

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: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 21

Pricing Type: COST PLUS FIXED FEE (U)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: NEW Mountain Finance Sbic, LP (UEI: 052371981)

Address: 635 DISCOVERY DR, HUNTSVILLE, AL, 35806

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: N0017805D4231

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline