Marine Corps awards $86.8M contract for airborne radar equipment to TCOM, L.P

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $86,834,562 ($86.8M)

Contractor: Tcom, L.P.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2003-11-21

End Date: 2017-04-11

Contract Duration: 4,890 days

Daily Burn Rate: $17.8K/day

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200402!005339!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C2002 !A!N! !N! ! !20031121!20110420!074946559!074946559!074946559!N!TCOM LP !7115 THOMAS EDISON DR !COLUMBIA !MD!21046!20580!139!37!ELIZABETH CITY !PASQUOTANK !N CAROLINA!+000037995500!N!N!000000000000!5841!RADAR EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT !000 !* !334511!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !99990909!B! ! !N!Z!A!N!J!2!001!K! !Z!N!A! ! !N!B!N!N! ! !Z! !B!A!00 !A!B!Y!C! ! ! ! ! !0001! !

Place of Performance

Location: COLUMBIA, HOWARD County, MARYLAND, 21046

State: Maryland Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $86.8 million to TCOM, L.P. for work described as: 200402!005339!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C2002 !A!N! !N! ! !20031121!20110420!074946559!074946559!074946559!N!TCOM LP !7115 THOMAS EDISON DR !COLUMBIA !MD!21046!20580!139!37!ELIZABETH CITY !PASQ… Key points: 1. Contract awarded for specialized airborne radar systems, crucial for search and detection operations. 2. Significant investment in advanced sensor technology for the Marine Corps. 3. Long contract duration suggests a need for sustained support and potential future upgrades. 4. The award represents a substantial portion of spending within the 'Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing' NAICS code. 5. Contract type is Firm Fixed Price, which shifts cost risk to the contractor. 6. The contractor, TCOM, L.P., is a key supplier in this niche market.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $86.8 million for airborne radar equipment appears reasonable given the specialized nature of the systems and the long performance period. Benchmarking against similar contracts for advanced sensor systems is challenging due to the unique specifications often required for military applications. However, the firm fixed-price nature of the contract suggests that the government has negotiated a price that includes contractor profit and risk, aiming for value certainty. The absence of extensive modifications or change orders, if applicable, would further indicate good value.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: unknown

The competition level for this contract is not explicitly detailed in the provided data. It is classified as an 'unknown' competition type. Without information on whether this was a sole-source award, a limited competition, or a full and open competition, it's difficult to assess the extent of market engagement. The number of bidders, if any, and the rationale for the chosen procurement method are critical for understanding the pricing dynamics and potential for cost savings.

Taxpayer Impact: The lack of transparency regarding competition makes it difficult to ascertain the direct impact on taxpayers. A more competitive process typically leads to better pricing and innovation, benefiting the public purse.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Marine Corps, receiving advanced airborne radar systems to enhance operational capabilities. The contract delivers critical technology for search, detection, navigation, and guidance, improving situational awareness and mission effectiveness. The geographic impact is national, supporting military readiness, though specific deployment locations are not detailed. Workforce implications include specialized engineering, manufacturing, and technical support roles within the defense industry, potentially supporting jobs at TCOM, L.P. and its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the firm fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen technical challenges.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical radar systems could pose supply chain risks.
Limited visibility into the competitive landscape raises questions about whether the best possible price was secured.

Positive Signals

Firm fixed-price contract structure provides cost certainty for the government.
Long contract duration suggests a strategic commitment and potential for long-term system support.
The award to TCOM, L.P. indicates confidence in their specialized capabilities for airborne radar technology.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace and defense sector, specifically focusing on electronic systems and components. The market for airborne radar is highly specialized, characterized by significant R&D investment, stringent performance requirements, and a limited number of qualified manufacturers. Spending in this area is driven by evolving military needs for advanced surveillance, targeting, and navigation capabilities. Comparable spending benchmarks are difficult to establish precisely due to the unique specifications of military hardware, but significant government investment in sensor technology is a consistent trend.

Small Business Impact

The provided data does not indicate whether this contract included small business set-asides or subcontracting plans. Analysis of small business participation would require further investigation into the contract's specific clauses and the contractor's reporting. Without this information, it's unclear what impact, if any, this large award has on the small business defense contracting ecosystem.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the Department of the Navy's contracting and program management offices. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm fixed-price contract, which obligates TCOM, L.P. to deliver specified goods and services within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is often limited for defense contracts due to national security considerations, but contract awards and basic details are generally made public through federal procurement databases. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

Airborne Surveillance Systems
Electronic Warfare Systems
Naval Aviation Equipment
Defense Radar Technology
Marine Corps Aviation Support

Risk Flags

Potential for limited competition
Lack of detailed performance metrics in provided data
Long contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence or scope creep

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $86.8 million to TCOM, L.P.. 200402!005339!1700!F9999 !MARINE CORPS SYSTEMS COMMAND !M6785404C2002 !A!N! !N! ! !20031121!20110420!074946559!074946559!074946559!N!TCOM LP !7115 THOMAS EDISON DR !COLUMBIA !MD!21046!20580!139!37!ELIZABETH CITY !PASQUOTANK !N CAROLINA!+000037995500!N!N!000000000000!5841!RADAR EQUIPMENT, AIRBORNE !C9E!ALL OTHER SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT !000 !* !334511!E! !1! ! ! ! ! !999

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is TCOM, L.P..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $86.8 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2003-11-21. End: 2017-04-11.

What is the track record of TCOM, L.P. in delivering complex defense systems?

TCOM, L.P. has a history of providing specialized aerostat and airborne surveillance systems. While this specific contract is for radar equipment, their experience in airborne platforms suggests a foundational understanding of the operational environment. Further analysis would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any documented issues with previous contracts, and their overall financial stability. Information on their success with similar radar systems, if any, would be particularly relevant to assessing their capability to meet the Marine Corps' requirements effectively and on time.

How does the awarded price compare to similar airborne radar systems procured by the government?

Direct price comparison for specialized military hardware like airborne radar is challenging due to unique technical specifications, performance requirements, and varying quantities. The provided data does not include details on the specific capabilities of the radar systems procured, nor does it offer a breakdown of unit costs or the number of units. To benchmark effectively, one would need to identify contracts for radar systems with comparable functionalities, intended use (e.g., surveillance, targeting), and platform integration. Without such comparable data, assessing whether $86.8 million represents a competitive price is difficult, though the firm fixed-price nature suggests a negotiated ceiling.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the government?

Key risks for the government include potential technical performance issues if the radar systems do not meet stringent military specifications, leading to operational limitations. There's also a risk of contractor underperformance or financial instability, although the firm fixed-price structure mitigates direct cost overruns. Dependence on a single supplier for critical components could create supply chain vulnerabilities. Furthermore, if the procurement process lacked robust competition, there's a risk that the government did not secure the most cost-effective solution available in the market.

What is the expected effectiveness of these airborne radar systems for the Marine Corps?

The airborne radar systems are expected to significantly enhance the Marine Corps' situational awareness and operational effectiveness by providing advanced search, detection, navigation, and guidance capabilities. These systems are crucial for intelligence gathering, threat identification, and supporting ground forces. The long contract duration (over 13 years from award to end date) suggests a strategic investment aimed at providing sustained operational advantage and potentially incorporating future technological upgrades, indicating an expectation of high effectiveness and long-term utility.

What has been the historical spending trend for airborne radar equipment by the Department of the Navy?

Historical spending on airborne radar equipment by the Department of the Navy has likely fluctuated based on modernization programs, operational tempo, and evolving threats. While this specific contract represents a significant award, a comprehensive analysis would require examining spending patterns over several fiscal years. This would involve querying federal procurement databases for similar contracts awarded to various vendors for airborne radar systems, surveillance equipment, and related components. Understanding these trends helps contextualize the current award and forecast future budgetary needs in this category.

Are there any known issues or controversies related to TCOM, L.P. or this specific contract?

Based on the provided data, there are no immediate flags indicating known issues or controversies specifically tied to TCOM, L.P. or this contract award. The data includes basic contract details such as the award amount, dates, contractor information, and product description. A thorough investigation would involve searching public records, news archives, and government accountability reports for any past performance issues, disputes, or allegations of misconduct related to the contractor or the specific type of equipment being procured.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Navigational, Measuring, Electromedical, and Control Instruments Manufacturing › Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: COMM/DETECT/COHERENT RADIATION

Contractor Details

Address: 7115 THOMAS EDISON DR, COLUMBIA, MD, 21046

Business Categories: Category Business, Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline