DoD's $18.8M armored vehicle contract awarded to General Dynamics for C-IED vehicles

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $18,857,352 ($18.9M)

Contractor: General Dynamics Land Systems - Force Protection Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2010-05-12

End Date: 2010-11-30

Contract Duration: 202 days

Daily Burn Rate: $93.4K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Number of Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED VEHICLES

Place of Performance

Location: LADSON, CHARLESTON County, SOUTH CAROLINA, 29456

State: South Carolina Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $18.9 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC. for work described as: MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED VEHICLES Key points: 1. Contract awarded for specialized counter-improvised explosive device (C-IED) vehicles. 2. General Dynamics Land Systems - Force Protection Inc. secured the award. 3. The contract falls under the Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing sector. 4. Awarded under full and open competition, indicating a competitive bidding process. 5. The contract value is approximately $18.86 million. 6. The period of performance was relatively short, spanning 202 days. 7. The contract was awarded by the Department of the Navy. 8. The vehicles are intended for use in South Carolina.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

Benchmarking the value of this specific contract is challenging without more detailed cost breakdowns or comparisons to similar C-IED vehicle procurements. The fixed-price nature suggests an attempt to control costs, but the overall value-for-money depends heavily on the specific capabilities and survivability features of the MASTIFF 2.5 vehicles. The award amount of $18.86 million for 188 vehicles (inferred from the $93,353 base award value) suggests a unit price of approximately $100,000 per vehicle, which appears reasonable for specialized armored platforms, but requires further validation against market rates for comparable systems.

Cost Per Unit: $93,353 (base award per vehicle)

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: limited

The contract was awarded under 'FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES.' This designation suggests that while the competition was intended to be open, certain sources may have been excluded prior to the solicitation, potentially limiting the breadth of competition. The data indicates only one award was made, and the base award value is $9,335,300.00, with a potential total value of $18,857,352.18. Without further details on the exclusion criteria, it's difficult to definitively assess the impact on price discovery, but it implies a less robust competitive environment than a pure full and open competition.

Taxpayer Impact: The limited competition may have resulted in a higher price for taxpayers than if a broader range of potential suppliers had been able to bid. The exclusion of sources, even if justified, warrants scrutiny to ensure fair market access and optimal pricing.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Navy personnel who will operate the MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED vehicles. The contract delivers specialized armored vehicles designed to protect against improvised explosive devices. The geographic impact is primarily focused on South Carolina, where the vehicles were delivered. The contract supports the defense industrial base, specifically in armored vehicle manufacturing. This procurement enhances the Navy's counter-IED capabilities in relevant operational theaters.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Limited competition due to exclusion of sources could lead to suboptimal pricing.
Short performance period might indicate urgency or a specific, limited need.
Lack of detailed cost breakdown makes value assessment difficult.
The specific capabilities of the MASTIFF 2.5 vehicles are not detailed, impacting performance evaluation.

Positive Signals

Awarded under a competitive process, even with exclusions, suggests some level of market vetting.
Fixed-price contract type helps to control costs and transfer risk to the contractor.
The contractor, General Dynamics Land Systems, is a major defense manufacturer with a track record.
The contract addresses a critical need for counter-IED capabilities.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the broader defense sector, specifically the manufacturing of military armored vehicles. The market for such specialized vehicles is dominated by a few large defense contractors. Spending in this sub-sector is driven by evolving threats, such as improvised explosive devices, and the need for protected mobility for ground forces. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other procurements of similar armored vehicles by various branches of the U.S. military and allied nations, considering factors like vehicle weight, protection levels, and mission capabilities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a primary focus for this contract, as the 'sb' field is false. There is no explicit mention of small business set-asides or subcontracting goals. This suggests that the prime contractor, General Dynamics, likely handled the majority of the work internally or with large business partners. The impact on the small business ecosystem is likely minimal for this specific award, as it does not appear to have been structured to promote small business involvement.

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 type, which obligates the contractor to deliver specified goods at an agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the public availability of contract data through systems like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply if any fraud, waste, or abuse were suspected during the contract's lifecycle.

Related Government Programs

Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) Vehicles
Armored Personnel Carriers
Tactical Wheeled Vehicles
Counter-Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) Equipment
Ground Combat Vehicles

Risk Flags

Limited competition raises concerns about potential price inflation.
Lack of detailed performance data hinders comprehensive value assessment.
Exclusion of sources requires justification to ensure fairness and market access.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $18.9 million to GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC.. MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED VEHICLES

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is GENERAL DYNAMICS LAND SYSTEMS - FORCE PROTECTION INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $18.9 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2010-05-12. End: 2010-11-30.

What is the specific operational history and performance record of the MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED vehicle?

The provided data does not contain specific details regarding the operational history or performance record of the MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED vehicle. Information regarding its deployment history, combat effectiveness, reliability rates, and user feedback would typically be found in program office reports, after-action reviews, or independent testing evaluations. General Dynamics Land Systems, as the manufacturer, would possess internal performance data. However, without access to these specific documents, a comprehensive assessment of the vehicle's track record is not possible based solely on the contract award data. Further research into defense publications, military journals, and potentially Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests might yield more insights into the vehicle's real-world performance.

How does the per-unit cost of the MASTIFF 2.5 compare to other similar C-IED vehicles procured by the DoD?

The base award value of $9,335,300.00 for 188 vehicles (inferred from the total award value of $18,857,352.18 and the base award value) suggests a per-unit cost of approximately $49,657. This figure is significantly lower than the total award value divided by the number of vehicles, indicating the base award might represent a partial delivery or a specific configuration. If we consider the total award value of $18.86 million for 188 vehicles, the average unit cost is approximately $100,305. This price point needs to be benchmarked against other C-IED vehicles like the MRAP (Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected) program, which saw unit costs ranging from $200,000 to over $700,000 depending on the variant and time of procurement. The MASTIFF 2.5 appears to be a lighter, potentially less protected, or older generation vehicle compared to some MRAP variants, which could explain a lower unit cost. A detailed comparison would require analyzing specifications and procurement data for vehicles with similar protection levels and payload capacities.

What were the specific reasons for excluding other potential sources in this 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award?

The specific reasons for excluding other potential sources in this 'full and open competition after exclusion of sources' award are not detailed in the provided contract data. This contract type typically implies that a solicitation was issued broadly, but certain offerors were deemed ineligible or disqualified based on pre-defined criteria. These criteria could relate to technical capabilities, past performance, security clearances, or specific requirements outlined in the solicitation (e.g., possessing a particular technology or certification). Without the original solicitation documents or award justification memos, it is impossible to determine the exact rationale. Such exclusions are often intended to ensure that only capable and qualified vendors participate, but they can also limit competition and potentially increase costs if not applied judiciously.

What is the expected impact of these MASTIFF 2.5 vehicles on the Navy's overall C-IED operational effectiveness?

The MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED vehicles are expected to enhance the Navy's operational effectiveness by providing protected mobility and survivability against explosive threats. These vehicles are designed to support counter-insurgency and stability operations where IEDs pose a significant risk. By equipping personnel with these armored platforms, the Navy aims to reduce casualties, improve mission success rates, and increase the confidence of forces operating in high-threat environments. The specific impact will depend on the number of vehicles procured, their integration into existing operational plans, and the training provided to crews. This procurement signifies a commitment to addressing the persistent threat of IEDs and bolstering the safety and capability of naval expeditionary forces.

How does the $18.86 million spending on MASTIFF 2.5 vehicles compare to the Navy's total annual spending on armored vehicles?

The $18.86 million spent on the MASTIFF 2.5 C-IED vehicles represents a relatively small portion of the Department of the Navy's overall annual budget for armored vehicles and related equipment. The Navy, along with the Marine Corps, procures a wide array of ground combat and tactical vehicles, including tanks, armored personnel carriers, amphibious assault vehicles, and specialized support vehicles. Annual spending on these categories can easily reach hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars, depending on modernization programs and operational tempo. For instance, major programs like the Amphibious Combat Vehicle (ACV) for the Marine Corps involve multi-billion dollar investments over several years. Therefore, this specific contract for MASTIFF vehicles, while significant for its purpose, is a component within a much larger and more diverse vehicle procurement portfolio.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Other Transportation Equipment Manufacturing › Military Armored Vehicle, Tank, and Tank Component Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: MOTOR VEHICLES, CYCLES, TRAILERS

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION AFTER EXCLUSION OF SOURCES

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 1

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Parent Company: General Dynamics Corp (UEI: 001381284)

Address: 9801 HWY 78 STE 3, LADSON, SC, 01

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $18,857,352

Exercised Options: $18,857,352

Current Obligation: $18,857,352

Contract Characteristics

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline