Boeing awarded $37.3M for E-6A aircraft components, with a 2800-day performance period

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $37,347,459 ($37.3M)

Contractor: THE Boeing Company

Awarding Agency: Department of Defense

Start Date: 2000-09-29

End Date: 2008-05-30

Contract Duration: 2,800 days

Daily Burn Rate: $13.3K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Defense

Official Description: 200012!1700!002071!AC514 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001900C0508 !A!*!* !20000929!20040929!039267141!009256819!009256819!N!81205!THE BOEING COMPANY !7755 E MARGINAL WAY !SEATTLE !WA!98124!55025!109!40!OKLAHOMA CITY AIR FO!OKLAHOMA !OKLAHOMA !0001!+000020834715!N!N!000000000000!1680!MSL AIRCRAFT ACCESSORIES AND COMPONENTS !A1C!OTHER AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT !2GHY!E-6A (TACAMO) !3721!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!A !N!J!2!002!B!* !A!N!A!* !* !N!C!*!A!A!A!A!A!A!* !*!N!A!C!N!*!*!*!*!*!

Place of Performance

Location: WICHITA, SEDGWICK County, KANSAS, 67210

State: Kansas Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Defense obligated $37.3 million to THE BOEING COMPANY for work described as: 200012!1700!002071!AC514 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001900C0508 !A!*!* !20000929!20040929!039267141!009256819!009256819!N!81205!THE BOEING COMPANY !7755 E MARGINAL WAY !SEATTLE !WA!98124!55025!109!40!OKLAHOMA CITY AIR FO!OKL… Key points: 1. Contract value represents a significant investment in specialized aircraft components. 2. The long performance period suggests a need for sustained supply and support. 3. Fixed-price contract type aims to control costs for the government. 4. The awardee, Boeing, is a major defense contractor with extensive experience. 5. The specific components are critical for the E-6A (TACAMO) aircraft's mission. 6. The contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating a broad search for qualified bidders.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $37.3 million for specialized aircraft components over nearly 8 years appears reasonable given the nature of the equipment and the long performance period. Benchmarking against similar sole-source or limited-competition contracts for highly specialized aerospace parts would be necessary for a more precise value assessment. However, the firm fixed-price structure suggests an effort to ensure cost predictability for the government.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, meaning all responsible sources were permitted to submit bids. The presence of multiple bidders, indicated by the 'no' field showing 2 bids, suggests a competitive environment. This level of competition is generally favorable for price discovery and can lead to more advantageous pricing for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition typically results in better pricing for taxpayers by fostering a market where contractors vie to offer the most competitive bids.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are the U.S. Navy and Air Force, who operate the E-6A (TACAMO) aircraft. The contract ensures the continued availability of essential aircraft accessories and components. The services delivered are critical for maintaining the operational readiness of the E-6A fleet. The geographic impact is primarily centered around the contractor's facilities and the operational bases for the E-6A aircraft. Workforce implications include skilled labor in aerospace manufacturing and component support.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if unforeseen technical challenges arise during the long performance period.
Risk of obsolescence for components over the extended duration of the contract.
Dependence on a single prime contractor for critical aircraft parts.

Positive Signals

Award to a reputable and experienced contractor (Boeing) with a proven track record.
Firm fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty for the government.
Long performance period indicates a strategic, long-term need being addressed.
Full and open competition suggests a robust procurement process.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the aerospace manufacturing sector, specifically focusing on aircraft parts and accessories. The market for such specialized components is often dominated by a few large, established aerospace firms due to high barriers to entry, including technical expertise, manufacturing capabilities, and regulatory compliance. The total value of $37.3 million is moderate for a long-term component supply contract within this sector.

Small Business Impact

The contract does not indicate any specific small business set-aside provisions. Given the nature of the specialized aircraft components and the prime contractor being The Boeing Company, it is likely that any small business involvement would be through subcontracting opportunities. The extent of small business participation would depend on Boeing's subcontracting plan and the availability of qualified small businesses for specific component needs.

Oversight & Accountability

The contract is managed by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), which provides contract administration services to ensure compliance with terms and conditions. Oversight mechanisms would include regular reporting from the contractor, performance reviews, and potentially site inspections. Transparency is facilitated through contract databases like FPDS. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse.

Related Government Programs

E-6B Mercury Aircraft Program
Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Procurement
Aerospace Component Manufacturing Contracts
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Aviation Support

Risk Flags

Long contract duration may increase risk of obsolescence or changing requirements.
Specialized nature of components could limit competition in future procurements.
Dependence on a single large contractor for critical parts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Defense awarded $37.3 million to THE BOEING COMPANY. 200012!1700!002071!AC514 !NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND !N0001900C0508 !A!*!* !20000929!20040929!039267141!009256819!009256819!N!81205!THE BOEING COMPANY !7755 E MARGINAL WAY !SEATTLE !WA!98124!55025!109!40!OKLAHOMA CITY AIR FO!OKLAHOMA !OKLAHOMA !0001!+000020834715!N!N!000000000000!1680!MSL AIRCRAFT ACCESSORIES AND COMPONENTS !A1C!OTHER AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT !2GHY!E-6A (TACAMO) !3721!3!*!*!*!B!A!*!A !N!J!

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is THE BOEING COMPANY.

Which agency awarded this contract?

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

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $37.3 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2000-09-29. End: 2008-05-30.

What is the historical spending trend for E-6A aircraft components from this contractor?

Analyzing historical spending for E-6A aircraft components from The Boeing Company requires access to detailed procurement data beyond this single award. However, the presence of this $37.3 million contract, spanning nearly eight years, suggests a sustained requirement for these specific parts. To understand the trend, one would need to examine prior contracts for similar components, identify any recurring needs, and assess if spending has been consistent, increasing, or decreasing over time. Factors such as aircraft fleet age, modernization programs, and operational tempo significantly influence spending patterns for component sustainment. Without broader historical data, it's difficult to establish a definitive trend, but this award indicates a significant, ongoing investment.

How does the per-unit cost of these aircraft components compare to market rates or similar government contracts?

Determining the precise per-unit cost and comparing it to market rates or similar government contracts is challenging without specific unit pricing details from the contract. The provided data aggregates the total contract value ($37.3 million) over a long duration (2800 days). To perform a benchmark, we would need to know the quantity of units being procured and their individual prices. If this information were available, we could compare it against industry price lists for similar components, or against prices paid by other government agencies for comparable parts. Given that this is a firm fixed-price contract awarded under full and open competition, it suggests that the pricing was deemed acceptable and competitive at the time of award. However, a detailed unit-level analysis would be required for a definitive value-for-money assessment.

What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the success of this contract?

While the specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for this contract are not explicitly detailed in the provided data, typical KPIs for aircraft component supply contracts include on-time delivery rates, defect rates (quality of components), adherence to specifications, and responsiveness to urgent requirements. For a long-term contract like this, performance metrics would likely be reviewed periodically, perhaps quarterly or annually, by the contracting officer's representative (COR). The firm fixed-price nature incentivizes the contractor to meet delivery schedules efficiently. Failure to meet these implicit or explicit KPIs could lead to contract modifications, penalties, or affect future contract awards. The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) would likely be involved in monitoring contractor performance.

What is the track record of The Boeing Company in fulfilling similar aircraft component contracts for the Department of Defense?

The Boeing Company has an extensive and well-established track record in fulfilling aircraft component contracts for the Department of Defense, spanning decades and encompassing a vast array of aircraft platforms. As one of the world's largest aerospace manufacturers, Boeing routinely handles complex, high-value contracts for both new aircraft production and sustainment of existing fleets. Their experience includes supplying critical systems, engines, airframes, and specialized components. While specific performance metrics for every contract are not publicly available, Boeing's continued success in securing large defense contracts, including this one for the E-6A, indicates a generally strong performance history. Any significant past performance issues would likely be documented in contractor performance assessment reporting systems (CPARS) and could impact future awards.

What are the potential risks associated with the long duration (2800 days) of this contract?

The 2800-day (approximately 7.7 years) duration of this contract presents several potential risks. Firstly, there's the risk of component obsolescence; technology and materials can evolve rapidly, potentially making the specified components outdated or difficult to support over such a long period. Secondly, economic fluctuations or changes in the contractor's business environment could impact their ability to sustain production or support over the contract's life. Thirdly, unforeseen technical challenges or design issues might emerge during the extended operational use of these components, requiring costly modifications or replacements. Finally, the government's strategic needs or the E-6A aircraft program itself could change, potentially reducing the requirement for these specific components before the contract term ends, leading to inefficiencies or termination costs.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Manufacturing › Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing › Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing

Product/Service Code: AEROSPACE CRAFT COMPONENTS AND ACCESSORIES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 2

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 7755 E MARGINAL WAY S, SEATTLE, WA, 98108

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Manufacturer of Goods, Not Designated a Small Business

Contract Characteristics

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: NO

Timeline