Marine Corps awarded $36.8M for operational training devices, with General Dynamics as the sole contractor

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $37,507,688 ($37.5M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2004-06-14

End Date: 2007-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,020 days

Daily Burn Rate: $36.8K/day

Competition Type: NOT COMPETED

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200410!009008!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C0002 !A!N! !N! ! !20040614!20061231!107153702!131266926!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS AMPHIBIOUS SY!991 ANNAPOLIS WAY !WOODBRIDGE !VA!22191!87312!153!51!WOODBRIDGE !PRINCE WILLIAM !VIRGINIA !+000011070000!N!N!000047451258!6930!OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !515 !AAAV !541512!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B!D!Y!A! !D!N!R!1!001!N!1G!Z!Y!Z! ! !N!C!N! ! ! !Z!Z!A!A!000!A!C!N! ! ! ! !1727!M48396!0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: WOODBRIDGE, PRINCE WILLIAM County, VIRGINIA, 22191

State: Virginia Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $37.5 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS, INC for work described as: 200410!009008!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C0002 !A!N! !N! ! !20040614!20061231!107153702!131266926!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS AMPHIBIOUS SY!991 ANNAPOLIS WAY !WOODBRIDGE !VA!22191!87312!153!51!WOODBRIDGE !PRIN… Key points: 1. Contract value of $36.8M for operational training devices. 2. Sole-source award to General Dynamics Amphibious Systems. 3. Contract duration of 1020 days, spanning from June 2004 to March 2007. 4. Primarily focused on combat vehicles and operational training. 5. Awarded by Marine Corps Systems Command. 6. Contract type is Cost Plus Award Fee.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract value of $36.8 million for operational training devices appears to be within a reasonable range for specialized defense equipment. However, without specific details on the nature of the training devices and their complexity, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. Benchmarking against similar, publicly available contracts for advanced training simulators or combat vehicle components would provide a clearer picture of whether the pricing reflects competitive market rates or a premium due to the sole-source nature of the award.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: sole-source

This contract was awarded on a sole-source basis, meaning there was no open competition. This typically occurs when a specific contractor possesses unique capabilities, proprietary technology, or is the only source capable of meeting the requirement. The lack of competition means that the government did not benefit from a bidding process that could have driven down prices or spurred innovation from multiple vendors.

Taxpayer Impact: Taxpayers may have paid a premium due to the absence of competitive bidding, as the contractor faced no direct pressure to offer the lowest possible price.

Public Impact

Marines will benefit from enhanced operational training capabilities. Services delivered include the provision of specialized training devices. Geographic impact is primarily within Marine Corps training facilities. Workforce implications include potential support and maintenance roles for the contractor.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Sole-source award limits competitive pricing and potential innovation.
Lack of transparency in the justification for sole-source procurement.
Potential for cost overruns in Cost Plus Award Fee contracts if not managed tightly.

Positive Signals

Addresses a specific need for operational training devices for combat vehicles.
Contract awarded to a known entity in the defense sector (General Dynamics).

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Defense sector, specifically related to training and simulation equipment for combat vehicles. The market for such specialized defense systems is often characterized by high barriers to entry, proprietary technology, and a limited number of qualified contractors. Spending in this area is driven by the need for realistic training environments to prepare military personnel for complex operational scenarios.

Small Business Impact

There is no indication that this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting requirements. As a sole-source award to a large prime contractor, the direct impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal, unless the prime contractor voluntarily engages small businesses for specific components or services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight would typically be provided by the Marine Corps Systems Command, with contract administration potentially handled by the Defense Contract Management Agency. Accountability measures would be tied to the performance metrics within the Cost Plus Award Fee structure. Transparency is limited due to the sole-source nature of the award.

Related Government Programs

Marine Corps Training and Simulation Programs
Combat Vehicle Development and Procurement
Defense Contractor Services

Risk Flags

Sole-source award limits competition.
Cost Plus Award Fee contract type requires careful oversight to manage costs.
Lack of detailed technical specifications in the provided data.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $37.5 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS, INC. 200410!009008!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C0002 !A!N! !N! ! !20040614!20061231!107153702!131266926!001381284!N!GENERAL DYNAMICS AMPHIBIOUS SY!991 ANNAPOLIS WAY !WOODBRIDGE !VA!22191!87312!153!51!WOODBRIDGE !PRINCE WILLIAM !VIRGINIA !+000011070000!N!N!000047451258!6930!OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES !A4A!COMBAT VEHICLES !515 !AAAV !541512!E! !3! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS, INC.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $37.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2004-06-14. End: 2007-03-31.

What specific types of operational training devices were procured under this contract?

The contract data indicates the procurement of 'OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES' under PSC code 6930. While the specific nature of these devices is not detailed in the provided data, they are associated with 'COMBAT VEHICLES' and the 'AAAV' (Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle) program. This suggests the devices were likely sophisticated simulators or training aids designed to replicate the operation, maintenance, or tactical employment of these vehicles, providing realistic training environments for Marine Corps personnel.

What is the track record of General Dynamics Amphibious Systems in delivering similar training devices?

General Dynamics is a major defense contractor with a long history of developing and producing complex military systems, including vehicles and associated training equipment. While specific details on their track record for 'OPERATIONAL TRAINING DEVICES' for the AAAV program are not in this dataset, the company's extensive experience in defense manufacturing suggests a capacity to deliver such specialized equipment. However, a deeper dive into past performance reviews, delivery history on similar contracts, and any past issues or successes would be necessary for a comprehensive assessment of their track record on this specific type of product.

How does the $36.8 million contract value compare to similar training device procurements?

Benchmarking the $36.8 million contract value for operational training devices is challenging without more specific details on the technology and scope. However, advanced military simulators, especially those for complex platforms like amphibious assault vehicles, can range from millions to tens of millions of dollars. Given this was a sole-source award for a specific platform, the price reflects the unique requirements and the contractor's specialized capabilities. A comparative analysis would require identifying contracts for similar fidelity simulators for other vehicle platforms or training systems procured through competitive means to establish a clearer market price.

What are the risks associated with a sole-source, Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract?

Sole-source contracts carry the inherent risk of reduced price competition, potentially leading to higher costs for the government. The absence of multiple bidders means the government cannot leverage market forces to secure the best possible price. A Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) contract structure, while incentivizing performance, also introduces risks. The 'cost-plus' element means the government reimburses the contractor for allowable costs, and the 'award fee' provides an incentive for exceeding certain performance targets. Risks include potential for cost overruns if performance targets are not well-defined or if contractor costs are not rigorously scrutinized. The government must establish clear, objective criteria for the award fee to ensure it truly reflects superior performance and does not become an entitlement.

What is the historical spending pattern for operational training devices by the Marine Corps?

Historical spending on operational training devices by the Marine Corps is likely substantial, given the branch's reliance on advanced technology and realistic training. This specific contract, awarded in 2004 for $36.8 million, represents a significant investment in training capabilities for combat vehicles. Analyzing broader historical spending trends would involve examining budgets for training systems, simulators, and related support over multiple fiscal years. This would reveal patterns of investment, shifts in technology focus (e.g., from physical mock-ups to virtual reality), and the overall importance placed on simulation-based training within the Marine Corps' operational readiness strategy.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Computer Systems Design and Related Services › Computer Systems Design Services

Product/Service Code: TRAINING AIDS AND DEVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: NOT COMPETED

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: COST PLUS AWARD FEE (R)

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp

Address: 991 ANNAPOLIS WAY, WOODBRIDGE, VA, 22191

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Timeline